TCP uses a very simple one's complement kind of integrity test. If an intermediate router decides to foul up a packet it can and the problem will not be detected.
Even in Stevens you can find a table which has number of errored packets detected AFTER all the CRC (ethernet) in between.
In summary, yes an MD5 or other file-level checksum IS required to verify sanity of download.
According to whom?
And there's your answer.
Q.E.D.
WTF??!! Are you trying to say there are no quantifiable differences in benefits?
Quantifiable, as opposed to opinions. The few I can think of - C for bare metal, perl if you want to parse and spit reports, SQL if you want to deal with databases.
I can't believe you think that all OS's and all languages are the same in performance. That's just dumb.
India - Kerala and West Bengal. West Bengal has the longest serving elected communist govt. in the world. Kerala has the highest literacy rate in India - 98%.
Both have had very good land reforms and have made more progress on social issues than other states. The land reforms were necessitated by the fact that the British left behind a totally unsustainable feudal landlord system. Other states where such land reforms have not taken place still have severe conflicts between the farmers, and those who own the land.
Go check out the Nokia 1100 - it does what you want. The extras are a dust-proof keypad and a LED that can be used as a flashlight.
I don't work with Nokia, just that there are phones of the kind you want - you may have to sacrifice your precious CDMA (if you're on Verizon/Sprint). I believe ATT even gives them free with a new contract - price in India is around Rs 3K ~ $80.
It's just that if you start querying AFTER you store it on disk, the I/O makes it much more slower. So what you do is pick up some of the information from the flowing data, and some other system behind yours saves the data.
Every time you get some thing interesting, you save that on disk too - but separately, into a much smaller db. This way state is also saved, and since state is going to be much smaller than the data, there will be no speed issues.
Now the clever thing to do would be to link this flowing-state dbms (FSDBMS) to a standard rdbms working from the disk. Then you could verify the information from the FSDBMS, and ensure that things aren't screwed up. Also, based on patterns seen by the rdbms with long term data, new queries could be generated on the FSDBMS, allowing it to generate results from the data on the wire.
Sounds like it would have applications primarily where response time is at a premium, and long history is not such a large component of the information.
So in the case of military info, where a HumVee could be in trouble (a situ someone else has mentioned), the FSDBMS would raise the alarm, and some other process would then follow up and ensure that the alarm was taken care of.(The data itself would be backed up for future analysis, such as whether the query was correctly handled).
Dynamic queries in such a situ could be - get the id of the closest Apache reporting in, or closest loaded bomber en-route to some other target. Then the alarm handling program would re-route the bomber/apache to the humvee for support. While querying the disk database may be time intensive, the FSDBMS would have delivered a sub-optimal FAST solution.
So imagine the FSDBMS as a filter, giving different bits of information to different people. With the option that you could change the filter on the fly. And the filter could be complex, based on previous history etc., just like a DB query.
While this is good for pure OS plays, for companies like MySQL this is dangerous. Imagine someone adding code that uses one of these patents to the OS version of MySQL. Instant fork - MySQL.com can't give this code non-OS to their customers, as they do currently. So only IBM can use these patents both in OS and non-OS code.
I guess on the whole this is not very different from the current situation, except that these patents just became much more of a tempting target for implementation by OS coders. And could be a point of friction between the companies developers and just another OS coder.
I've been working with AID (aidindia.org) for 5 days so far. It's been a crazy time - the amount of stuff coming in and going out has been incredible. Primary problem being that stuff comes in small lots, but has to go out in big lots, with first priority going to whatever is the immediate need on the field.
If anyone is still interested in donating, I'd suggest they look up aidindia.org and the daily reports filed by the field volunteers.
1) Take a BIG bag of tactical nukes. The briefcase kind. Low-yield (5kT), low area of devastation. This should be quite easy given the number of nukes held by the US/Russia/China et al.
Get to the asteroid. This should also be pretty easy, its orbital period is pretty close to ours. So not much delta-v required. And I guess it passes us a little more than once a year.
Since this guy has a smaller orbital period than ours, it would be easiest I guess, to decrease the period sufficently to miss the Earth. The impact energy is 1.5GT (from the NASA website).
Major Assumption - if we knock off say 0.001 of the maximum velocity, then we can ensure that the orbit misses us completely. This means that we need to give the asteroid 1.5GT*0.001 = 1.5MT of energy.
If each tactical nuke has 5kT and is exploded about 600m from the center of the asteroid, the energy imparted to the asteroid would be around 4.4% of the total energy (solid angle subtended by the asteroid, on total radiated output). This means that each nuke would impart 0.2kT to the body. Now this will hopefully be small enough that the asteroid doesn't fracture.
Now we need to explode 7500 of these tactical nukes in the same orientation w.r.t the asteroid to get the desired effect. Assuming we can do one explosion a day, gives us just enough time to do this. Hopefully, we could use a larger bomb, or need to give less of a delta-E.
Using an engine of some sort? The asteroid has kinetic energy of nearly 6.6e18J (mv^2/2 using Vimpact and mass from http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html). Again 0.001 of this would be 6.6e15J of delta-E we have to provide.
With one of the largest nuclear thrusters ever developed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Thermal_Rock et) we could generate 4000MW of power for 12mins. Assuming that current tech. allows us to generate 400MW indefinitely, we would need to fire this for 6.6e15/.4e9 = 190 days.
Of course, I'm probably massively screwing up the required energy to deflect the asteroid. But a factor of 10 either way would be acceptable.
So the second approach looks feasible. Minor exercises for the reader - get the nuke rocket there, fix it on, and make sure the thrust is on at the correct times.
But hey, I'm sure we can get Bruce Willis to take on the job:-D. And we have ~ 23 years to do it...
I have an opposing view on reducing population growth.
It seems to me that most of the periods of human progress align with periods of population growth - finding new places, making new discoveries, creating new art, etc. Would we be screwing the whole human race by insisting on 'sustainable' levels of population?
Perhaps with an un-sustainable (on Earth) increase in population, we would be forced to search for alternate accomodation. I'm not so sure we'd do that with a stable, 'happy' population. We'd probably be more interested in increasing our short-term happiness...
Disclaimer: Some of this is influenced by Asimov, et al.
The party that is going to come to power (Congress), is the one that started the reforms in the first place.
You must remember that unlike most of the US's better friends, India is a democracy, and therefore must follow the wishes of the people.
Shortly after the results were declared, once everyone found out the Congress was going to come back to power, the stock market went back to its previous level.
Definitely the reforms will not roll back. They might slow down for a while to let the rural areas catch up. Or priority might be given to the development in rural areas.
And this, Gentleman, is one of the most famous American Innovations of the early 21st century. Nowhere else in the world could they have come up with such a marvelous invention to keep frat boys drunk, in a car, or in a house.
(see next story on how outsourcing be a big deal, as it will not affect american innovation)
Getting "Linux triumphs again,..., by stepping into niches where smaller, less feature-filled operating systems are needed." modded up as insightful was pretty damn good.
Getting "Providing websurfing and wordprocessing capabilities with Linux is pretty damn good and more than one would expect from an OS developed in the OSS manner." modded up was even better.
While it doesn't show the number of new messages, it does keep popping up in the dock, and the icon gets a green tick mark, if there is a new email. I love it!!
Errr, nice try. Compare the 12" to ANY other 12" by IBM, Dell, HP, or Toshiba, not to a desktop.
Let me know when they have a graphics card, as good as, if not better than the Powerbook, or the iBook. Most of them have the crummy Intel card, with perhaps 16MB on-board.
The 12" is the best in class, in terms of portability, and there are people who ar ready to pay a price for portability, as opposed to performance.
If every ticket cost $100, no plane would fly anywhere ever
Tell that to Southwest and JetBlue. They rationalised their price structure, and seem to be making the only profits in the industry.
Pharmaceuticals are the same way - if you want to make one you have to commit about $500 million - mostly in development costs - not pure research costs.
Tell that to Reddy Labs. in India - they've developed drugs with less than $10 million for one.
The times are changing, and the old companies need to keep up.
If I understand the last sentence correctly, you seem to be suggesting that $1000 can provide a basic standard of living in America.
I probably didn't think that one through. That $400 billion would be much better spent on creating new technology and innovation to increase American productivity, and increase the number of American jobs and/or pay of the jobs. I didn't mean a $1K handout to every american.
And nothing about offshoring American jobs promotes that.
America promotes its culture, and American companies enjoy the greater profit due to outsourcing. American workers are forced to find new more efficient methods to earn money and new industries to make money from.
There is a lot of change in the "other" culture - the amounts being pumped in are small from an American context, but substantial in, say, India. This money almost completely trickles down to the rest of the population. The booming economy also multiplies this effect.
Also, although the offshoring of these jobs is not good for those offshored, it does provide cheaper services and products for the rest of the population, thereby improving the economy. After all, tech spending is a cost item in every other company!
Was there any benefit when Nokia, Nortel, Sony, Toshiba, etc., decided to off-shore their development to the US?
Do you honestly believe that you can take any one of the USA's 270 million people and train them to become a "knowledge worker", or get them to work for NASA? What about the rest of the people?
That's a great question! There are a large number of people who will be required in support position. Probably doing things that we can't imagine right now. I'm sure that a policy like that of western europe or even Canada, will provide a basic standard of living to all Americans. Imagine the amount of money spent on defense - $400 billion a year = $1000 per capita.
The world economy is in such a position that with very little effort, almost everyone can be fed, clothed, and given shelter. Water is a different issue, and so is power. But definitely these problems are not insurmountable. America is in the awesome position of being able to produce the basic necessities for the rest of the world - politics is of course the major problem stopping this.
The whole world needs to transform from a subsistence culture to a knowledge culture. This is the story of 18th century france, with the haves as the whole western world, and the have nots as the rest of the world. Unless there is a burst in efficiency causing everyone to have enough for living, there is going to be a lot of trouble ahead. Free trade is one piece of the puzzle. The massive concentration of wealth in the hands of a few is another.
This seems to be primarily a debate on other countries with massive populations finally being able to claim an equal proportion of the worlds resources.
America has a large share of the world's land with a much smaller proportion of the population. The benefits of this agriculture, natural resources, are the first order advantages enjoyed by the US. The mechanism of free-enterprise, and the risk-taking mentality in the have created second-order benefits which the US is enjoying today. Also, the vast separation from the rest of the world, kept the US industries standing after WWII, allowing th US to supply the rest of the world.
Now the massive population in the rest of the world has finally become a market that is worth serving, and is clamoring for resources proportional to their numbers. The US having used an enormously large proportion of the world's resources so far, is going to find itself using a smaller and smaller proportion of these resources and going back to the first-order advantages.
India and China, with their huge populations, will be able to do any service jobs that don't require actual physical presence at a much cheaper cost. The only platform on which americans can compete is their incredible efficiency, learnt over many decades. However, IT provides much of this efficiency, and can quite easily be transported anywhere in the world.
As trade between the rest of the world increases, trade between the US and the rest of the world will become proportionally smaller - except in key IP areas, where the US still enjoys a large knowledge monopoly, and agriculture, where the US has the advantage of area.
This is different from the previous scares (Japan, China etc.) as it represents for the first time, the benefits of a countries huge population, as opposed to the benefits of a small population.
The US should try to compete by growing R&D, getting and keeping knowledge workers, using NASA etc., as a springboard to newer techs, which the developing nations can only dream of.
Sorry for the long ramble... I hope some of the comments will be able to get some clarity from this..
The US makes most of its money through exports right? Export of debt, and export of brands. Also, as the leading cultural exporter, you have the best and brightest of every country aspiring to come here.
So do what you do best - get the best people from every other country in the world, give them a good environment, where risk-taking is encouraged. Let them start companies where Americans and others are employed.
Too bad, with Bush and the present govt., the USA seems to have become quite forbidding for the good foreigners.
In your culture, yes it sucks to be different, it sucks to be 'intelligent'.
In most other cultures, you'll find that academically gifted children are treated like gods. Social or athletic skills etc are barely on the radar. The only question is whether you are intelligent. After that, you can do whatever you want.
Sure, it isn't a 'balanced' upbringing, but most of those people seem to have turned out into well-adjusted adults anyway.
Change your culture, the nerds Vs jocks thing has been taken way too far.
Slashdot Mirror
TCP uses a very simple one's complement kind of integrity test. If an intermediate router decides to foul up a packet it can and the problem will not be detected.
Even in Stevens you can find a table which has number of errored packets detected AFTER all the CRC (ethernet) in between.
In summary, yes an MD5 or other file-level checksum IS required to verify sanity of download.
Errr., why do you think the oil companies are having it bad now? They're making more profits than ever before. Rising oil prices are good for them.
You fail the geek test ;-)
Aaaah...
/joke
That's what the catfish *want* you to think...
Where's a tin-foil hat when you need one?
India - Kerala and West Bengal. West Bengal has the longest serving elected communist govt. in the world. Kerala has the highest literacy rate in India - 98%.
Both have had very good land reforms and have made more progress on social issues than other states. The land reforms were necessitated by the fact that the British left behind a totally unsustainable feudal landlord system. Other states where such land reforms have not taken place still have severe conflicts between the farmers, and those who own the land.
Go check out the Nokia 1100 - it does what you want. The extras are a dust-proof keypad and a LED that can be used as a flashlight.
I don't work with Nokia, just that there are phones of the kind you want - you may have to sacrifice your precious CDMA (if you're on Verizon/Sprint). I believe ATT even gives them free with a new contract - price in India is around Rs 3K ~ $80.
It's just that if you start querying AFTER you store it on disk, the I/O makes it much more slower. So what you do is pick up some of the information from the flowing data, and some other system behind yours saves the data.
Every time you get some thing interesting, you save that on disk too - but separately, into a much smaller db. This way state is also saved, and since state is going to be much smaller than the data, there will be no speed issues.
Now the clever thing to do would be to link this flowing-state dbms (FSDBMS) to a standard rdbms working from the disk. Then you could verify the information from the FSDBMS, and ensure that things aren't screwed up. Also, based on patterns seen by the rdbms with long term data, new queries could be generated on the FSDBMS, allowing it to generate results from the data on the wire.
Sounds like it would have applications primarily where response time is at a premium, and long history is not such a large component of the information.
So in the case of military info, where a HumVee could be in trouble (a situ someone else has mentioned), the FSDBMS would raise the alarm, and some other process would then follow up and ensure that the alarm was taken care of.(The data itself would be backed up for future analysis, such as whether the query was correctly handled).
Dynamic queries in such a situ could be - get the id of the closest Apache reporting in, or closest loaded bomber en-route to some other target. Then the alarm handling program would re-route the bomber/apache to the humvee for support. While querying the disk database may be time intensive, the FSDBMS would have delivered a sub-optimal FAST solution.
So imagine the FSDBMS as a filter, giving different bits of information to different people. With the option that you could change the filter on the fly. And the filter could be complex, based on previous history etc., just like a DB query.
While this is good for pure OS plays, for companies like MySQL this is dangerous. Imagine someone adding code that uses one of these patents to the OS version of MySQL. Instant fork - MySQL.com can't give this code non-OS to their customers, as they do currently. So only IBM can use these patents both in OS and non-OS code.
I guess on the whole this is not very different from the current situation, except that these patents just became much more of a tempting target for implementation by OS coders. And could be a point of friction between the companies developers and just another OS coder.
I've been working with AID (aidindia.org) for 5 days so far. It's been a crazy time - the amount of stuff coming in and going out has been incredible. Primary problem being that stuff comes in small lots, but has to go out in big lots, with first priority going to whatever is the immediate need on the field.
If anyone is still interested in donating, I'd suggest they look up aidindia.org and the daily reports filed by the field volunteers.
1) Take a BIG bag of tactical nukes. The briefcase kind. Low-yield (5kT), low area of devastation. This should be quite easy given the number of nukes held by the US/Russia/China et al.
k et) we could generate 4000MW of power for 12mins. Assuming that current tech. allows us to generate 400MW indefinitely, we would need to fire this for 6.6e15/.4e9 = 190 days.
:-D. And we have ~ 23 years to do it...
Get to the asteroid. This should also be pretty easy, its orbital period is pretty close to ours. So not much delta-v required. And I guess it passes us a little more than once a year.
Since this guy has a smaller orbital period than ours, it would be easiest I guess, to decrease the period sufficently to miss the Earth. The impact energy is 1.5GT (from the NASA website).
Major Assumption - if we knock off say 0.001 of the maximum velocity, then we can ensure that the orbit misses us completely. This means that we need to give the asteroid 1.5GT*0.001 = 1.5MT of energy.
If each tactical nuke has 5kT and is exploded about 600m from the center of the asteroid, the energy imparted to the asteroid would be around 4.4% of the total energy (solid angle subtended by the asteroid, on total radiated output). This means that each nuke would impart 0.2kT to the body. Now this will hopefully be small enough that the asteroid doesn't fracture.
Now we need to explode 7500 of these tactical nukes in the same orientation w.r.t the asteroid to get the desired effect. Assuming we can do one explosion a day, gives us just enough time to do this. Hopefully, we could use a larger bomb, or need to give less of a delta-E.
Using an engine of some sort?
The asteroid has kinetic energy of nearly 6.6e18J (mv^2/2 using Vimpact and mass from http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html). Again 0.001 of this would be 6.6e15J of delta-E we have to provide.
With one of the largest nuclear thrusters ever developed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Thermal_Roc
Of course, I'm probably massively screwing up the required energy to deflect the asteroid. But a factor of 10 either way would be acceptable.
So the second approach looks feasible. Minor exercises for the reader - get the nuke rocket there, fix it on, and make sure the thrust is on at the correct times.
But hey, I'm sure we can get Bruce Willis to take on the job
I have an opposing view on reducing population growth.
It seems to me that most of the periods of human progress align with periods of population growth - finding new places, making new discoveries, creating new art, etc. Would we be screwing the whole human race by insisting on 'sustainable' levels of population?
Perhaps with an un-sustainable (on Earth) increase in population, we would be forced to search for alternate accomodation. I'm not so sure we'd do that with a stable, 'happy' population. We'd probably be more interested in increasing our short-term happiness...
Disclaimer: Some of this is influenced by Asimov, et al.
The party that is going to come to power (Congress), is the one that started the reforms in the first place.
You must remember that unlike most of the US's better friends, India is a democracy, and therefore must follow the wishes of the people.
Shortly after the results were declared, once everyone found out the Congress was going to come back to power, the stock market went back to its previous level.
Definitely the reforms will not roll back. They might slow down for a while to let the rural areas catch up. Or priority might be given to the development in rural areas.
At least IMHO.
And this, Gentleman, is one of the most famous American Innovations of the early 21st century. Nowhere else in the world could they have come up with such a marvelous invention to keep frat boys drunk, in a car, or in a house.
(see next story on how outsourcing be a big deal, as it will not affect american innovation)
Getting "Linux triumphs again, ..., by stepping into niches where smaller, less feature-filled operating systems are needed." modded up as insightful was pretty damn good.
Getting "Providing websurfing and wordprocessing capabilities with Linux is pretty damn good and more than one would expect from an OS developed in the OSS manner." modded up was even better.
It's a good thing not too many people bit.
While it doesn't show the number of new messages, it does keep popping up in the dock, and the icon gets a green tick mark, if there is a new email. I love it!!
Errr, nice try. Compare the 12" to ANY other 12" by IBM, Dell, HP, or Toshiba, not to a desktop.
Let me know when they have a graphics card, as good as, if not better than the Powerbook, or the iBook. Most of them have the crummy Intel card, with perhaps 16MB on-board.
The 12" is the best in class, in terms of portability, and there are people who ar ready to pay a price for portability, as opposed to performance.
The battery on the powerbook is hotswappable - close the book, let it go to sleep, turnit over, swap the batteries.
open the book, and you are ready to go!!
The times are changing, and the old companies need to keep up.
As Zaphod Beeblebrox IV said - "Life is wasted on the living."
I probably didn't think that one through. That $400 billion would be much better spent on creating new technology and innovation to increase American productivity, and increase the number of American jobs and/or pay of the jobs. I didn't mean a $1K handout to every american.
America promotes its culture, and American companies enjoy the greater profit due to outsourcing. American workers are forced to find new more efficient methods to earn money and new industries to make money from.
There is a lot of change in the "other" culture - the amounts being pumped in are small from an American context, but substantial in, say, India. This money almost completely trickles down to the rest of the population. The booming economy also multiplies this effect.
Also, although the offshoring of these jobs is not good for those offshored, it does provide cheaper services and products for the rest of the population, thereby improving the economy. After all, tech spending is a cost item in every other company!
Was there any benefit when Nokia, Nortel, Sony, Toshiba, etc., decided to off-shore their development to the US?
That's a great question! There are a large number of people who will be required in support position. Probably doing things that we can't imagine right now. I'm sure that a policy like that of western europe or even Canada, will provide a basic standard of living to all Americans. Imagine the amount of money spent on defense - $400 billion a year = $1000 per capita.
The world economy is in such a position that with very little effort, almost everyone can be fed, clothed, and given shelter. Water is a different issue, and so is power. But definitely these problems are not insurmountable. America is in the awesome position of being able to produce the basic necessities for the rest of the world - politics is of course the major problem stopping this.
The whole world needs to transform from a subsistence culture to a knowledge culture. This is the story of 18th century france, with the haves as the whole western world, and the have nots as the rest of the world. Unless there is a burst in efficiency causing everyone to have enough for living, there is going to be a lot of trouble ahead. Free trade is one piece of the puzzle. The massive concentration of wealth in the hands of a few is another.
This seems to be primarily a debate on other countries with massive populations finally being able to claim an equal proportion of the worlds resources.
America has a large share of the world's land with a much smaller proportion of the population. The benefits of this agriculture, natural resources, are the first order advantages enjoyed by the US. The mechanism of free-enterprise, and the risk-taking mentality in the have created second-order benefits which the US is enjoying today. Also, the vast separation from the rest of the world, kept the US industries standing after WWII, allowing th US to supply the rest of the world.
Now the massive population in the rest of the world has finally become a market that is worth serving, and is clamoring for resources proportional to their numbers. The US having used an enormously large proportion of the world's resources so far, is going to find itself using a smaller and smaller proportion of these resources and going back to the first-order advantages.
India and China, with their huge populations, will be able to do any service jobs that don't require actual physical presence at a much cheaper cost. The only platform on which americans can compete is their incredible efficiency, learnt over many decades. However, IT provides much of this efficiency, and can quite easily be transported anywhere in the world.
As trade between the rest of the world increases, trade between the US and the rest of the world will become proportionally smaller - except in key IP areas, where the US still enjoys a large knowledge monopoly, and agriculture, where the US has the advantage of area.
This is different from the previous scares (Japan, China etc.) as it represents for the first time, the benefits of a countries huge population, as opposed to the benefits of a small population.
The US should try to compete by growing R&D, getting and keeping knowledge workers, using NASA etc., as a springboard to newer techs, which the developing nations can only dream of.
Sorry for the long ramble... I hope some of the comments will be able to get some clarity from this..
The US makes most of its money through exports right? Export of debt, and export of brands. Also, as the leading cultural exporter, you have the best and brightest of every country aspiring to come here.
So do what you do best - get the best people from every other country in the world, give them a good environment, where risk-taking is encouraged. Let them start companies where Americans and others are employed.
Too bad, with Bush and the present govt., the USA seems to have become quite forbidding for the good foreigners.
In your culture, yes it sucks to be different, it sucks to be 'intelligent'.
In most other cultures, you'll find that academically gifted children are treated like gods. Social or athletic skills etc are barely on the radar. The only question is whether you are intelligent. After that, you can do whatever you want.
Sure, it isn't a 'balanced' upbringing, but most of those people seem to have turned out into well-adjusted adults anyway.
Change your culture, the nerds Vs jocks thing has been taken way too far.