Alas, more and more programmers DO have to program highly parallel environments. Since Seymour Cray's
untimely departure there are few advances in faster computers at the top end that don't have multiple CPUs in them.
So since we don't have faster processors (relatively) we will have more and more processors.
I do not advocate spending Billions on teaching how parallel programming works and how to use PVM and MPI effectively, but I do think it is time that it become a standard theme at the college level CS world. That means that the professors learn how it works and then have access to equipment that allows everyone to have the experience.
This continues to prove that there is little hope in the USA at the moment to fight the wireline carriers (the "baby bells" if you will). The Justice Departments inactivity in assuring that the FCC's open access rules are fairly applied will leave the US with a second-rate, anti-competitive, near third-world broadband data network with no hope of anything better to come.
The death of the 'new economy' broad band providers is likely to be a signal that the US's era of predominance in technology is slowly comeing to an end. Western Europe, though slower to get started, is still apt to come away a winner.
I hope the satalite based systems come on line, work smoothly and decide to make 'everyone' level prices. The wireline wars are over and the users all lost.
Is it just me or does it strike you too that NSF is very busy funding the next big iron but not funding initiatives to teach the masses how to program massively parallel systems?
Every cluster I know of (around 20 systems, 14 sites) is not for want of cycles, they need programmers to write the codes to eat the cycles. There are not enough small 'education' clusters to allow everyone the education & experience.
Even just $1m of that could be much better spent in education instead of feeding the 0.0001% of computer problems that currently need this class of hardware.
It's not as easy as sign on their site and wait for the big bad publishers to see the errors of their ways.
I publish and I hate the system. But the reality is there are no respected 'free' journals in the fields in which I publish. In order to get promoted and obtain tenure, I (and many like me) MUST publish.
So a campaign to write all of us published ones will go nowhere.
I'll note that I do publish my work in altered form in accessible places. It is easy to write a friendly version for public consumption and then write a deadly dull, dry journal article. Often the style (and price) of the journal makes the material pretty inaccessible to anyone who would actually use it.
Having done 400ish person conferences in the past, I'll note that 4 years is not an outragously long lead time in setting a conference up and making sure it works smoothly.
It would take an experienced staff of 3-4 working nearly full time to make it happen in just three months. That presumes that nothing like T1s are needed. I have no idea what Dublin's T1 install time is, but 10-12 weeks in the states is about par. It also presumes that the staff have worked with this conference facility before and know the people well enough that they don't resort to a contract this and a contract for that.
Conferences don't have to be a pain in the ass to run, but the industry has done everything possible to make sure they can squeze every bit of cash from the organizers that they can. Oh, you want air in the conference center? That will be XXX more.;-)
As someone with three racks around the house, I'll say my reasons are:
1) space: I have four systems that I never log into directly (firewall, web server, compute server and file/email server). It is more space efficient to have them in a rack in a corner I don't use. The noise and heat are somewhere else.
2) heat management: Rack mount cases are typically better for heat (and nearly everything else) than desktop cases.
3) dirt: Things in racks are typically cleaner. All the rack mount cases I own have filters which keep the insides WAY cleaner than the hairy mess your desktop case is certain to be.
4) ease of service/change: I can have any of my rack mounted systems out and open in well under 30 seconds. Because of 2 & 3, though, I usually don't have to do that.
5) Cable management: Rack mount hardware and switches makes keeping that rat's nest behind your computer much more manageable.
6) Centralized UPS: With just a couple of racks of stuff that need reliable power, I have two rack mount UPSes in the racks that matter and so there isn't Yet Another Box sitting around taking up space. This also means only a couple of upsd's and only a couple of sets of batteries that need to be replaced regularly.
7) my home is wired cat 5. Ditto wireless.
Lots of people have differing needs, wants and hence setups. Those few of us/.ers that actually make our livings in this weird industry do *use* our computers pretty close to 24/7... and at least in my case I have no problem investing in the hardware to make my life easier.
One more point. Rack mount stuff doesn't get technologically obsolete (mostly). The racks I'm using I purchased used and date from the 1970's. My AT cases are circa 1985 (with new guts of course). So this is pretty much a 'do it once' and not worry about it. I do hope that ATX lasts a really long time as a result...
This is the end of Alpha. If you don't believe that, you've missed Processor Economics 101. Intel will not sink BILLIONS into an also-ran CPU. Nope, out come the software emulators and quickly, perhaps very quickly, Alpha is over.
Next SPARC will die. It has to because the economics for it just are not there. Sun is creeping further and further behind in the bang/$ curve and they simply don't have the money required to go to the next level.
The raw facts are it costs nearly unbelievable amounts of money to roll out a CPU in today's market. (Xylinx gets bigger devices and things might change, BTW.) Compaq nor Sun have the pockets needed to roll out the basic technology that runs the industry.
Technological wizardary not withstanding, Alpha and Sparc are doomed.
-- Multics
P.S. CISC, RISC, WISK, who cares? Economics and business relationships control what is adopted and by who. I wish it were not so, but wishing doens't make it so. It is silly even to discuss it, since these two CPUs are dead from purely economic reasons.
I used USDA pictures circa 1962 which were flown using former WWII photo recon cameras (and still in B-something or other aircraft no doubt). The negatives (negative print film) were roughly 10x10 because the film was 12" wide. All in IR. The last sets I used were taken around 1982.
Much as your strips were taken, 20-30% overlap, great stereo, flown around 5k' above the surface. We, alas, had to manually fix the roll and yaw... a major pain in the rear. Doing it with 35mm would be even harder manually, but by computer, a major win.
Sad they've switched totally to satelites. It would be a cake job to overfly with GPS stamps on every frame now. When some fool knocks down the satelites, there will be a mad scramble to re-build the older infrastructure.
Having spent much of the last 10 years working with USGS and Tiger data, I'll take USGS data up till the Tiger 2000 data sets. They all orginated from air photos, PERIOD. If you'd worked with the Tiger sets from the 1980 and (less) from the 1990 sets, you'd have found that they were extremely variable based on who reduced the photos into maps. There was apparently no quality control at the Census when the original Tiger base maps were turned in by the contractors.
Indiana 1980 Tiger data, for example, was extremely close to unuseable. Road segments didn't interconnect, rivers were not continuous, in fact all the linear features were a frigging mess. Then the orthographic projection corrections were done so poorly that there were rips and with a little looking you could actually see in the Tiger data what the path that the aircraft used.
So USGS till 2000. 2000 at least initially looks to be in significantly better condition.
I know there were similar problems in upstate New York and in the Pacific Northwest.
The responses to this article just are freaking me out. HOW MANY SLASHDOTTERS DOES IT TAKE TO KNOW SOMETHING? ABOUT 50 POSTS BEFORE THERE IS A QUALITY ONE.
Now that I have that said...
At one point or another your property (the few of you that actually own property in the USA) was probably imaged this week. Your land is probably imaged 30 or 40 times a year (especially right now where there is maximum sun and sun angles are very high). That 30-40 doesn't count being spied on the NRO or the Russians (or whomever else). Most of the pictures are so low-res that they get what they need for time-sensitive maps (crops, diseases, erosion, land types, etc) that short of you doing something outrageously odd, you'll not be bothered.
How do you think that your precious GPS navigator got its maps? It wasn't from a State Road Inventories since they are not accurate enough. It was from being overflown.
Ever see big Xs, +s or Ls painted on the pavement? Well those are there so the overflight photos can be tied to known geographic locations and the photos can be tied together to build a mosaic.
What makes this story vaguely more intresting is that it is about satelite photos, not traditional air photos. Further the USGS took the photos but the USDA got to use them.
USDA has been overflying on crop validations since at least the 1960s (perhaps as far back as the mid-1940s). How do you think the estimates of crop production get produced? Overflights by Billy-Bob in his Piper with a classic B/W Kodak IR film (roughly 10"x10" negatives, BTW) do most of the heavy lifting then some poor photogramitrist measures whatever was of interest and poof, yet another thematic map.
You folks need some sense of how the world works. Most of this has been happening since long before you were born.
I perhaps am a minority of one, but I thought the 'attitudinal' coverage from Suck (in particular) was flawed, often incorrect, and frequently on the edge of liable.
Let's look at Feed's article on IBM: The Final Solutions Company for example. Here are some of the things that were wrong with that article (I am, BTW, not a lover of IBM, I just like fair-play):
The author of the book was highly biased, having been fired by IBM.
The title of the article was inflamitory, to put it nicely.
The whole spin towards "war is good for profits".
A lack of perspective about all of WW II.
Revisionism.
And finally, and quietly, the lawsuit that was filed against IBM (a PR stunt if there ever was one) was withdrawn.
Does 'journalism' that is that badly screwed up need to continue to see the light of day?
It's too bad Katz didn't just say, "most magazines fail and these two fit that mold".
Instead there must be grand, over-arching understanding of 'phases of the net'.
NOT
Suck sucked. Get over it.
-- Multics.
P.S. Salon sucks too. What insanity is it to post things like "the us spies too much". Flawed analysis will get you closed faster than anything but missing advertisement dollars.
I'll face it all right. These guys (the weather channel) are being consumed by the MS borg. They've drifted further and further from the w3 spec because of MS embrace and extend.
Do you really want to only be able to run MS Internet Explorer? The reason standards exist is so that no one firm can be a monopoly in a marketplace.
I want market choices. "Catering to the biggest group of users" isn't choice. It is stupidity, not to mention against ADA.
Of course, in the mean time an estimated 350 million people were killed or starved to death.
Ever ponder what would have happened if IBM had not been a monopoly for 20 years early in the computer industry? Where would we be now?
I'll bet a lot further down the road.
Those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. Most/.ers are not wise enough to learn any history.
Answer. Their Chairman views everything as a very high-stakes competion. It is how he is wired.
As a result the entire company is built off of the, "If they are not for us, they are against us" philosophy.
Get a clue folks. The richest person in the world by a wide margin dislikes "Open Software". He is unrestrained by any single national government and will do whatever it takes to make sure "Open Software" goes exactly no-where.
No amount of whining on/. is going to change that. You want "Open" to win? Get off your asses and write some totally killer Applications and relase them under a license that will keep MS from theaving the entire thing. All it took were four applications from MS to own the desktop. There are enough brains here to write four *new* applications that will pull the desktop back.
With W in office, their legal troubles will fade away. It certainly didn't hurt that the first-level judge was at least unwise about his comments. If applications had been peeled off of Windows the world would be a different place. The probability of that happening is about 0.0001 now.
They are talking up Linux to make sure everyone thinks that they are all worried about an O/S with no significant applications that anyone cares about. They are worried like my grandfather (who is 92) is worried that 10 nymphomanics are going to attack him every Sunday.
They will finish their take-over of the web, but getting Steve "kingdom builder" Case to throw away Netscape. Already places like Weather Channel are difficult to use in Netscape and that trend will accelerate violently this year. (And yes, macromedia flash is part of WC's problems)
So what if XP is a failure. They'll change the license for Win2k to a time-based one and poof the monopoly is complete. These guys are classic Monopolists and as soon as they can lock everyone one into their party (they are very very close now), innovation will nearly stop. No monopolist will invest in his marketplace when he has absolute control and a reliable income stream. That is what XP is about. The terminal technology while MS goes off and attempts to dominate all the other software marketplaces. Ever consider what it would take in terms of cash for them to buy Palm and Handspring and just close them?...
The only thing that will stop this mess is Bill quitting and he can't just about as any human can't taking in O2. I wonder if he is at all happy... I'll bet not.
So kids, we're in deep trouble. "Open" people have failed to provide things people want enough to switch away from Windows on the desktop. If "Open" doesn't own the desktop, it is likely that "Open" doesn't own anything.
The problem is that/. didn't own the comment in question. They (until now) claimed that they were the vehicle for all messages to be transfered, but has no control over the content. By removing this content, they now take responsibility for the content of the entire site.
They are no longer trying to use the common carrier arguement and by removing the content are proving that they are not a common carrier. Defending that position later will effectively be impossible after this example.
The poster was the one who was responsible for the content./. should have allowed the litigation, documented that they could or could not have back traced the AC posting (I didn't see it, but I presume it was an AC), then allowed the Church of Scientology (which I believe to be Evil) to attack the poster.
Now every thug who doesn't like something here has a preccedent that when faced with certain legal bills,/. will rollover and play a spineless, ethic-less dead.
One final note. Because copyright holders have to defend their works ownership, lest it fall into the public domain, The Church had to start this in order to maintain their current position.
The point, further, is they did the economics. We were not worth the us$500k++ it was going to take to get the case law that they were a common carrier established.
So what this means is Andover decided that they didn't want to fight for the case law. Probably because of the expense. Yes it would have been expensive (easily $500k+++), but someone has to do it in order for BBSes to hold their common carrier arguement. I would have contributed to a defend/. fund because EVIL is winning otherwise.
Perhaps it is time for the/.ers to march with their mice and find a discussion system that is willing to put their money where their mouth is.
Please post as followups to this note possible alternatives that are not $ connected to Andover/VA Linux.
The New York Times Obit can be found here. Of course this will expire way to quickly because the NYT is only the newspaper of record for the current week.
It doesn't help that they use as a 'credible source' Rich DeMillo. Dr DeMillo doesn't play well with others (ask the people at GA Tech or PU where he is unwelcome to return other than to visit) and his resume (at the HP web site -- search for his name) is that of one who takes his toys and plays elsewhere when he doesn't get his way.
He lacks the credentials to give a good or bad stamp on this scheme.
How he ended up at HP is anyone's guess, but I'll bet he's not there very long before Fiona gets a clue and gives him his walking papers.
I'll upgrade to something stupid and new IF everyone will pass the validator and
Bobby. Until then they can go join the MS class action lawsuit against the evil "Open Software".
Too bad, of course, that they don't spend the time and effort using these 'low cost-high tech' folks on creating and enforcing building codes in earthquake hazard regions.
Instead they'll just kill a zillion of them in unreinforced masonry buildings. The first world banned such construction in hazard areas over 50 years ago.
I'm all for space (don't make me out to be a crazy 1960s US liberal), but a country needs to be out of the third-world mindset before it has delivery mechanisims for nuclear weapons. Life in the third world is just way too cheap. That cheapness combined with a means of mass destruction is not a good recipe for any life on the planet.
Slashdot Mirror
So since we don't have faster processors (relatively) we will have more and more processors.
I do not advocate spending Billions on teaching how parallel programming works and how to use PVM and MPI effectively, but I do think it is time that it become a standard theme at the college level CS world. That means that the professors learn how it works and then have access to equipment that allows everyone to have the experience.
-- Multics
The death of the 'new economy' broad band providers is likely to be a signal that the US's era of predominance in technology is slowly comeing to an end. Western Europe, though slower to get started, is still apt to come away a winner.
I hope the satalite based systems come on line, work smoothly and decide to make 'everyone' level prices. The wireline wars are over and the users all lost.
-- Multics.
Every cluster I know of (around 20 systems, 14 sites) is not for want of cycles, they need programmers to write the codes to eat the cycles. There are not enough small 'education' clusters to allow everyone the education & experience.
Even just $1m of that could be much better spent in education instead of feeding the 0.0001% of computer problems that currently need this class of hardware.
-- Multics
I publish and I hate the system. But the reality is there are no respected 'free' journals in the fields in which I publish. In order to get promoted and obtain tenure, I (and many like me) MUST publish.
So a campaign to write all of us published ones will go nowhere.
I'll note that I do publish my work in altered form in accessible places. It is easy to write a friendly version for public consumption and then write a deadly dull, dry journal article. Often the style (and price) of the journal makes the material pretty inaccessible to anyone who would actually use it.
-- Multics
It would take an experienced staff of 3-4 working nearly full time to make it happen in just three months. That presumes that nothing like T1s are needed. I have no idea what Dublin's T1 install time is, but 10-12 weeks in the states is about par. It also presumes that the staff have worked with this conference facility before and know the people well enough that they don't resort to a contract this and a contract for that.
Conferences don't have to be a pain in the ass to run, but the industry has done everything possible to make sure they can squeze every bit of cash from the organizers that they can. Oh, you want air in the conference center? That will be XXX more. ;-)
-- Multics
1) space: I have four systems that I never log into directly (firewall, web server, compute server and file/email server). It is more space efficient to have them in a rack in a corner I don't use. The noise and heat are somewhere else.
2) heat management: Rack mount cases are typically better for heat (and nearly everything else) than desktop cases.
3) dirt: Things in racks are typically cleaner. All the rack mount cases I own have filters which keep the insides WAY cleaner than the hairy mess your desktop case is certain to be.
4) ease of service/change: I can have any of my rack mounted systems out and open in well under 30 seconds. Because of 2 & 3, though, I usually don't have to do that.
5) Cable management: Rack mount hardware and switches makes keeping that rat's nest behind your computer much more manageable.
6) Centralized UPS: With just a couple of racks of stuff that need reliable power, I have two rack mount UPSes in the racks that matter and so there isn't Yet Another Box sitting around taking up space. This also means only a couple of upsd's and only a couple of sets of batteries that need to be replaced regularly.
7) my home is wired cat 5. Ditto wireless.
Lots of people have differing needs, wants and hence setups. Those few of us /.ers that actually make our livings in this weird industry do *use* our computers pretty close to 24/7... and at least in my case I have no problem investing in the hardware to make my life easier.
One more point. Rack mount stuff doesn't get technologically obsolete (mostly). The racks I'm using I purchased used and date from the 1970's. My AT cases are circa 1985 (with new guts of course). So this is pretty much a 'do it once' and not worry about it. I do hope that ATX lasts a really long time as a result...
-- Multics
Next SPARC will die. It has to because the economics for it just are not there. Sun is creeping further and further behind in the bang/$ curve and they simply don't have the money required to go to the next level.
The raw facts are it costs nearly unbelievable amounts of money to roll out a CPU in today's market. (Xylinx gets bigger devices and things might change, BTW.) Compaq nor Sun have the pockets needed to roll out the basic technology that runs the industry.
Technological wizardary not withstanding, Alpha and Sparc are doomed.
-- Multics
P.S. CISC, RISC, WISK, who cares? Economics and business relationships control what is adopted and by who. I wish it were not so, but wishing doens't make it so. It is silly even to discuss it, since these two CPUs are dead from purely economic reasons.
I used USDA pictures circa 1962 which were flown using former WWII photo recon cameras (and still in B-something or other aircraft no doubt). The negatives (negative print film) were roughly 10x10 because the film was 12" wide. All in IR. The last sets I used were taken around 1982.
Much as your strips were taken, 20-30% overlap, great stereo, flown around 5k' above the surface. We, alas, had to manually fix the roll and yaw... a major pain in the rear. Doing it with 35mm would be even harder manually, but by computer, a major win.
Sad they've switched totally to satelites. It would be a cake job to overfly with GPS stamps on every frame now. When some fool knocks down the satelites, there will be a mad scramble to re-build the older infrastructure.
Thanks again for the update!
former photo analyst,
-- Multics
Having spent much of the last 10 years working with USGS and Tiger data, I'll take USGS data up till the Tiger 2000 data sets. They all orginated from air photos, PERIOD. If you'd worked with the Tiger sets from the 1980 and (less) from the 1990 sets, you'd have found that they were extremely variable based on who reduced the photos into maps. There was apparently no quality control at the Census when the original Tiger base maps were turned in by the contractors.
Indiana 1980 Tiger data, for example, was extremely close to unuseable. Road segments didn't interconnect, rivers were not continuous, in fact all the linear features were a frigging mess. Then the orthographic projection corrections were done so poorly that there were rips and with a little looking you could actually see in the Tiger data what the path that the aircraft used.
So USGS till 2000. 2000 at least initially looks to be in significantly better condition.
I know there were similar problems in upstate New York and in the Pacific Northwest.
-- Multics
Now that I have that said...
At one point or another your property (the few of you that actually own property in the USA) was probably imaged this week. Your land is probably imaged 30 or 40 times a year (especially right now where there is maximum sun and sun angles are very high). That 30-40 doesn't count being spied on the NRO or the Russians (or whomever else). Most of the pictures are so low-res that they get what they need for time-sensitive maps (crops, diseases, erosion, land types, etc) that short of you doing something outrageously odd, you'll not be bothered.
How do you think that your precious GPS navigator got its maps? It wasn't from a State Road Inventories since they are not accurate enough. It was from being overflown.
Ever see big Xs, +s or Ls painted on the pavement? Well those are there so the overflight photos can be tied to known geographic locations and the photos can be tied together to build a mosaic.
What makes this story vaguely more intresting is that it is about satelite photos, not traditional air photos. Further the USGS took the photos but the USDA got to use them.
USDA has been overflying on crop validations since at least the 1960s (perhaps as far back as the mid-1940s). How do you think the estimates of crop production get produced? Overflights by Billy-Bob in his Piper with a classic B/W Kodak IR film (roughly 10"x10" negatives, BTW) do most of the heavy lifting then some poor photogramitrist measures whatever was of interest and poof, yet another thematic map.
You folks need some sense of how the world works. Most of this has been happening since long before you were born.
-- Multics
See also:
GEOG 415-001: Air Photo Interpretation
Air Photo Interpretation
And for you EUers, Air Photo Services.
P.S. About crop insurance... go read the USDA web site before you spout about it -- no bailouts there, oh clueless ones.
The author of the book was highly biased, having been fired by IBM.
The title of the article was inflamitory, to put it nicely.
The whole spin towards "war is good for profits".
A lack of perspective about all of WW II.
Revisionism.
And finally, and quietly, the lawsuit that was filed against IBM (a PR stunt if there ever was one) was withdrawn.
Does 'journalism' that is that badly screwed up need to continue to see the light of day?
It's too bad Katz didn't just say, "most magazines fail and these two fit that mold". Instead there must be grand, over-arching understanding of 'phases of the net'.
NOT
Suck sucked. Get over it.
-- Multics.
P.S. Salon sucks too. What insanity is it to post things like "the us spies too much". Flawed analysis will get you closed faster than anything but missing advertisement dollars.
The NYT article is located here: article.
Do you really want to only be able to run MS Internet Explorer? The reason standards exist is so that no one firm can be a monopoly in a marketplace.
I want market choices. "Catering to the biggest group of users" isn't choice. It is stupidity, not to mention against ADA.
-- Multics
Ever ponder what would have happened if IBM had not been a monopoly for 20 years early in the computer industry? Where would we be now? I'll bet a lot further down the road.
Those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. Most /.ers are not wise enough to learn any history.
-- Multics
Get a clue folks. The richest person in the world by a wide margin dislikes "Open Software". He is unrestrained by any single national government and will do whatever it takes to make sure "Open Software" goes exactly no-where.
No amount of whining on /. is going to change that. You want "Open" to win? Get off your asses and write some totally killer Applications and relase them under a license that will keep MS from theaving the entire thing. All it took were four applications from MS to own the desktop. There are enough brains here to write four *new* applications that will pull the desktop back.
-- Multics
With W in office, their legal troubles will fade away. It certainly didn't hurt that the first-level judge was at least unwise about his comments. If applications had been peeled off of Windows the world would be a different place. The probability of that happening is about 0.0001 now.
They are talking up Linux to make sure everyone thinks that they are all worried about an O/S with no significant applications that anyone cares about. They are worried like my grandfather (who is 92) is worried that 10 nymphomanics are going to attack him every Sunday.
They will finish their take-over of the web, but getting Steve "kingdom builder" Case to throw away Netscape. Already places like Weather Channel are difficult to use in Netscape and that trend will accelerate violently this year. (And yes, macromedia flash is part of WC's problems)
So what if XP is a failure. They'll change the license for Win2k to a time-based one and poof the monopoly is complete. These guys are classic Monopolists and as soon as they can lock everyone one into their party (they are very very close now), innovation will nearly stop. No monopolist will invest in his marketplace when he has absolute control and a reliable income stream. That is what XP is about. The terminal technology while MS goes off and attempts to dominate all the other software marketplaces. Ever consider what it would take in terms of cash for them to buy Palm and Handspring and just close them?...
The only thing that will stop this mess is Bill quitting and he can't just about as any human can't taking in O2. I wonder if he is at all happy... I'll bet not.
So kids, we're in deep trouble. "Open" people have failed to provide things people want enough to switch away from Windows on the desktop. If "Open" doesn't own the desktop, it is likely that "Open" doesn't own anything.
--Multics
The 'typical' intersection camera replaces those crazy loops in the pavement. See: This Autoscope pdf or visit the autoscope site.
There are uses for video that don't mean that you are spying on your fellow person -- /. being /., that will of course be ignored.
-- Multics
-- Multics
The poster was the one who was responsible for the content. /. should have allowed the litigation, documented that they could or could not have back traced the AC posting (I didn't see it, but I presume it was an AC), then allowed the Church of Scientology (which I believe to be Evil) to attack the poster.
Now every thug who doesn't like something here has a preccedent that when faced with certain legal bills, /. will rollover and play a spineless, ethic-less dead.
One final note. Because copyright holders have to defend their works ownership, lest it fall into the public domain, The Church had to start this in order to maintain their current position.
The point, further, is they did the economics. We were not worth the us$500k++ it was going to take to get the case law that they were a common carrier established.
-- Multics
Perhaps it is time for the /.ers to march with their mice and find a discussion system that is willing to put their money where their mouth is.
Please post as followups to this note possible alternatives that are not $ connected to Andover/VA Linux.
As a side benefit, we can be rid of Katz too.
--Multics
I pulled the age from the Bell Labs obit who obviously computed it incorrectly.
--Multics
The New York Times Obit can be found here. Of course this will expire way to quickly because the NYT is only the newspaper of record for the current week.
He lacks the credentials to give a good or bad stamp on this scheme.
How he ended up at HP is anyone's guess, but I'll bet he's not there very long before Fiona gets a clue and gives him his walking papers.
I'll upgrade to something stupid and new IF everyone will pass the validator and Bobby. Until then they can go join the MS class action lawsuit against the evil "Open Software".
Instead they'll just kill a zillion of them in unreinforced masonry buildings. The first world banned such construction in hazard areas over 50 years ago.
I'm all for space (don't make me out to be a crazy 1960s US liberal), but a country needs to be out of the third-world mindset before it has delivery mechanisims for nuclear weapons. Life in the third world is just way too cheap. That cheapness combined with a means of mass destruction is not a good recipe for any life on the planet.
--Multics