Rateless Internet (slashdotted)
on
Replacing TCP?
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Their website of the so called "experts" is down, it's slashdotted! (ironic?)
Here is a summary of their technology copied from their website:
Rateless Internet
The Problem
Rateless Internet is an Internet transport protocol implemented over UDP, meant as a better replacement of TCP. TCP's legacy design carries a number of inefficiencies, the most prominent of which is its inability to utilize most modern links' bandwidth. This problem stems from the fact that TCP calculates the congestion of the channel based on its round-trip time. The round-trim time, however, reflects not only the congestion level, but also the physical length of the connection. This is precisely why TCP is inherently unable to reach optimal speeds on long high-bandwidth connections.
A secondary, but just as impairing, property of TCP is its inability to tolerate even small amounts (1% - 3%) of packet loss. This additionally forces TCP to work at safe and relatively low transmission speeds with under 1% loss rates. Nevertheless, our extended real-life measurements show that highest throughput is generally achieved at speeds with anywhere between 3% and 5% loss.
The Solution
By using our core coding technology we were able to design a reliable Internet transmission protocol which can circumvent both of the fore-mentioned deficiencies of TCP, while still remaining TCP-friendly. By using encoded, rather than plain, transmission we are able to send at speeds with any packet loss level. Rateless coding is used in conjunction with our Universal Congestion Control algorithm, which allows Rateless Internet to remain friendly to TCP and other congestion-aware protocols.
Universal Congestion Control is an algorithm for transmission speed control. It is based on a simple and clean idea. Speed is varied in a wave-like fashion. The top of the wave achieves near-optimal throughput, while the bottom is low enough to let coexisting protocols like TCP smoothly receive a fair share of bandwidth. The time lengths of the peaks and troughs can be adjusted parametrically to achieve customized levels of fairness between Rateless Internet and TCP.
The Rateless Internet transport is now available through our Rateless Socket product in the form of a C/C++ socket library. Rateless Internet is ideal for Internet-based applications, running on the network edges, that require high bandwidth in a heterogenous environment. It was specifically built with peer-to-peer and live multimedia content delivery applications in mind.
I think
removing it would be the best thing for Slackware as it's become a
maintainance nightmare (unlike nearly every other./configure'ed source,
GNOME doesn't build into packages easily with DESTDIR).
This was Patricks' argument for dropping GNOME. Instead of dropping GNOME support, why not communicate with the GNOME community to resolve the issues? This is really a minor technial issue, and I'm sure things can easily be done to make including GNOME as easy as KDE.
Anyway, I'm sure Slackware will never drop GNOME support. People will stop using the distribution in a second!
This is probably why having a single "dicator" maintaining a distribution is a bad idea: He has very little contact with the community. It's not possible for other's to get involved with the development process either. It would be a trivial task to make someone else maintain the GNOME sources in Slackware.
I like Slackware, running slack 10 now, but this makes me change my mind.
The website seems to be Slashdotted, however, I've been following Linuxgames.com for a while. It's fine that the source code itself has been released to the public, but there's almost always some kind of "catch" which prevents the game from being successfull after the new release:
Game data is not released under GPL. This is obvisly a mayor flaw, and will render the game unplayable. This includes Doom, Quake 1, 2 etc.
The licence is too restricted. This includes Civ:CTP, where the license will not allow you to fork your own project. Therefore noone is willing to do anything with the new code.
The release of the code happens too late, so the game isn't "interesting" any more. (Eg. Wolf 3d)
Still, by all means, more GPL'ed games is a good thing!
Yes, even the article sais the Max pictures are a hoax. Yet another article posted on Slashdot without any credibility - the editors should have checked the story better before posting it.
Why vim is better than joe (and obviously emacs)
on
JOE Hits 3.0
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Let me just recap the well known reasons why vim is better then joe:
vim is upward compatible to vi. So if you master vim you can edit with vi. vi is on every unix box, even on the most "naked" ones. In addition, vi runs on practically any terminal and any connection, even when logged in from half around the world through several "hops". (I'm typing this on an old Ampex terminal (vt 100 like) via a 9600 Baud connection.)
# vim works like you think. Many commands are "mnemonic". In a recent post, Randy has put it quite nicely:
As I said earlier, vi works like I think. I think "replace this word with that one;" "delete this line;" "yank this paragraph and put it down there;" "move there and insert a word;" "format this paragraph." Vi provides commands that map to how I think. Some of the time I'm just typing in text without editing it, but normally I'm editing text. I tend to write something, then go back and make it perfect. I prefer to copy something that is already there and then modify it to be what I need. This expresses very well what I believe has been a major design goal of vi!
# Now for the modal/modeless controversy. If you really think about it, it boils down to the following: it's a matter of how you define "modal"/"modeless"; in other words: if vim is modal, so is emacs - if emacs is modeless, so is vim. The reason: in emacs you are by default in "insert" mode; you have to type "ctrl-m..." to issue an editor command; so "ctrl-m" is actually a switch to command mode). In vim, you are by default in command mode; when in insert mode, you type and then some command, and then i to get into insert mode again. While programming, you are at least half of the time in command mode (if you are an Emacs user you might not be aware of that because nobody calls it like like that). The difference between Vim and Emacs is that most most Vim commands are mnemonic and need much less modifier keys, such as Ctrl, Alt, etc.
# I believe that modal editors are more efficient for programming (and similar tasks, like writing latex). This is because I find myself much more often editing text which is already there, rather than producing new text which hasn't been there before. This goes well with the observation, which someone reported in the comp.editors news group about joint strain. I almost get joint strain myself when I see emacs users holding down the ctrl or alt key all the time with their pinky or thumb;-)...
# I'm not sure what the reason is, but I've never seen emacs users who actually used all those feature which emacs-the-editor offers. (At the office, I'm surrounded by emacs and nedit users;-) I mean features like marks, tags, jumping up/down paragraph-wise, jumping to the beginning/end of a function, searching identifiers in all include files, etc.... I suspect, this is because it's simply just too difficult to remember all those ctrl-alt chords.:) [no offense intended!]
# Speed: CPU-wise, vim is still by far more efficient than joe. Try running joe on an SGI Indy! Or on a PC/286!
Normal AC power is at around 120 volts and 70hz here in the USA, so I put in a frequency multiplier and upped it to 105hz and 160 volts AC. Now, all my lights are brighter, TV is faster to react in the menu, and I've pre-emptively overclocked all my appliances!
Move to Europe, we have overclocked to 240 Volts. USA is sooo old fashioned!
Since when is Coding HTML for food stressful? I can think of a whole lot of other industries which are way more stressful, such as being a _real_ programmer.
India is now the economy in the world which grows the fastest. They take the jobs of hard working americans, because they are so many and can afford to live in caves. Still, most people around here envy the indians. So do I.
you probably have a gift for insight.... if you had all day, you could try a zillion different combinations and eventually figure it out. But with insight, you'd experience the usual clueless confusion, until--voilà--the fog clears and you get the clue, which suddenly seems obvious.
I'm sick of people thinking that they are so fscking "special". I don't necessarily accept the idea that someone has a very special way to solve very complex problems - the principles of the way we think is universal for all people.
Come on, please give us at least _one_ interesting story that is not an obvious April-fools day joke. This Google-story has been reported with links already several times on/.
I'll take a story on a new kernel, even a BSD article. Anyhing!
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, it's "free". See the license
Here is a summary of their technology copied from their website:
Rateless Internet The Problem
Rateless Internet is an Internet transport protocol implemented over UDP, meant as a better replacement of TCP. TCP's legacy design carries a number of inefficiencies, the most prominent of which is its inability to utilize most modern links' bandwidth. This problem stems from the fact that TCP calculates the congestion of the channel based on its round-trip time. The round-trim time, however, reflects not only the congestion level, but also the physical length of the connection. This is precisely why TCP is inherently unable to reach optimal speeds on long high-bandwidth connections.
A secondary, but just as impairing, property of TCP is its inability to tolerate even small amounts (1% - 3%) of packet loss. This additionally forces TCP to work at safe and relatively low transmission speeds with under 1% loss rates. Nevertheless, our extended real-life measurements show that highest throughput is generally achieved at speeds with anywhere between 3% and 5% loss.
The Solution
By using our core coding technology we were able to design a reliable Internet transmission protocol which can circumvent both of the fore-mentioned deficiencies of TCP, while still remaining TCP-friendly. By using encoded, rather than plain, transmission we are able to send at speeds with any packet loss level. Rateless coding is used in conjunction with our Universal Congestion Control algorithm, which allows Rateless Internet to remain friendly to TCP and other congestion-aware protocols.
Universal Congestion Control is an algorithm for transmission speed control. It is based on a simple and clean idea. Speed is varied in a wave-like fashion. The top of the wave achieves near-optimal throughput, while the bottom is low enough to let coexisting protocols like TCP smoothly receive a fair share of bandwidth. The time lengths of the peaks and troughs can be adjusted parametrically to achieve customized levels of fairness between Rateless Internet and TCP.
The Rateless Internet transport is now available through our Rateless Socket product in the form of a C/C++ socket library. Rateless Internet is ideal for Internet-based applications, running on the network edges, that require high bandwidth in a heterogenous environment. It was specifically built with peer-to-peer and live multimedia content delivery applications in mind.
This was Patricks' argument for dropping GNOME. Instead of dropping GNOME support, why not communicate with the GNOME community to resolve the issues? This is really a minor technial issue, and I'm sure things can easily be done to make including GNOME as easy as KDE.
Anyway, I'm sure Slackware will never drop GNOME support. People will stop using the distribution in a second!
This is probably why having a single "dicator" maintaining a distribution is a bad idea: He has very little contact with the community. It's not possible for other's to get involved with the development process either. It would be a trivial task to make someone else maintain the GNOME sources in Slackware.
I like Slackware, running slack 10 now, but this makes me change my mind.
100 gigabits per square inch capacity for magnetic media
What makes the transfer rate limit for magnetic media 100 gigabit/inch? Why this specific number? Does anyone know?
Game data is not released under GPL. This is obvisly a mayor flaw, and will render the game unplayable. This includes Doom, Quake 1, 2 etc.
The licence is too restricted. This includes Civ :CTP, where the license will not allow you to fork your own project. Therefore noone is willing to do anything with the new code.
The release of the code happens too late, so the game isn't "interesting" any more. (Eg. Wolf 3d)
Still, by all means, more GPL'ed games is a good thing!
Yes, even the article sais the Max pictures are a hoax. Yet another article posted on Slashdot without any credibility - the editors should have checked the story better before posting it.
RSS isn't a game. The best Linux game is Freeciv.. Period.
Will the real Joe please stand up?
vim is upward compatible to vi.
So if you master vim you can edit with vi. vi is on every unix box, even on the most "naked" ones.
In addition, vi runs on practically any terminal and any connection, even when logged in from half around the world through several "hops". (I'm typing this on an old Ampex terminal (vt 100 like) via a 9600 Baud connection.)
# vim works like you think.
Many commands are "mnemonic". In a recent post, Randy has put it quite nicely:
As I said earlier, vi works like I think. I think "replace this word with that one;" "delete this line;" "yank this paragraph and put it down there;" "move there and insert a word;" "format this paragraph." Vi provides commands that map to how I think. Some of the time I'm just typing in text without editing it, but normally I'm editing text. I tend to write something, then go back and make it perfect. I prefer to copy something that is already there and then modify it to be what I need. This expresses very well what I believe has been a major design goal of vi!
# Now for the modal/modeless controversy.
If you really think about it, it boils down to the following: it's a matter of how you define "modal"/"modeless"; in other words: if vim is modal, so is emacs - if emacs is modeless, so is vim.
The reason: in emacs you are by default in "insert" mode; you have to type "ctrl-m
While programming, you are at least half of the time in command mode (if you are an Emacs user you might not be aware of that because nobody calls it like like that). The difference between Vim and Emacs is that most most Vim commands are mnemonic and need much less modifier keys, such as Ctrl, Alt, etc.
# I believe that modal editors are more efficient for programming (and similar tasks, like writing latex).
This is because I find myself much more often editing text which is already there, rather than producing new text which hasn't been there before.
This goes well with the observation, which someone reported in the comp.editors news group about joint strain. I almost get joint strain myself when I see emacs users holding down the ctrl or alt key all the time with their pinky or thumb
# I'm not sure what the reason is, but I've never seen emacs users who actually used all those feature which emacs-the-editor offers. (At the office, I'm surrounded by emacs and nedit users
I suspect, this is because it's simply just too difficult to remember all those ctrl-alt chords.
# Speed: CPU-wise, vim is still by far more efficient than joe.
Try running joe on an SGI Indy! Or on a PC/286!
Normal AC power is at around 120 volts and 70hz here in the USA, so I put in a frequency multiplier and upped it to 105hz and 160 volts AC. Now, all my lights are brighter, TV is faster to react in the menu, and I've pre-emptively overclocked all my appliances!
Move to Europe, we have overclocked to 240 Volts. USA is sooo old fashioned!
Since when is Coding HTML for food stressful? I can think of a whole lot of other industries which are way more stressful, such as being a _real_ programmer.
And the URL.
Here's another article about BayStar Confirms Microsoft Connection to SCO Investment.
Evil M$.
Everything has a limit, even data transfer. Moore's law just means that someone will think of some other way to solve the problem faster and better.
This is one less reason to make fun of aol users :)
Actually, since most Indians are iliterate, they vote by selecting the icon of your party from a list.
Much like your average Slashdot poll.
India is now the economy in the world which grows the fastest. They take the jobs of hard working americans, because they are so many and can afford to live in caves. Still, most people around here envy the indians. So do I.
Good luck with the ladies.
Here's more info in AmigaOS4, features, screenshots, etc. Looking forward to this!
Why not let Bush and his "shock and awe" army enforce the GPL? :)
you probably have a gift for insight. ... if you had all day, you could try a zillion different combinations and eventually figure it out. But with insight, you'd experience the usual clueless confusion, until--voilà--the fog clears and you get the clue, which suddenly seems obvious.
I'm sick of people thinking that they are so fscking "special". I don't necessarily accept the idea that someone has a very special way to solve very complex problems - the principles of the way we think is universal for all people.
Now, where's my publication in SIGGRAPH 04?
-Bow for the Gimp!
I'll take a story on a new kernel, even a BSD article. Anyhing!
What about CowboyNeal, CmdrTaco, micael and the girls?
I really laughed out loud from this one :)