one, yes, Johnny uses the net.. he has a stupid talk radio show and people are always asking him if he has read something another on the net and most the time he has. two, he was specifically talking about Australia.. he was saying that the divide between the haves and the have nots of infotech must be eliminated if Australia is to move forward. Howard has always been a "we are the smart country" type. It gives him an excuse to fuck over farmers and miners.
Well, sitting at my PC and listening to the news I just heard our humble leader (and quite scary) John Howard say that the government is trying to ensure that every Australian has access to the Internet within the next five years (or something). Pretty amuzing claim.. sorta like the "no child shall be living in poverty".
man.. The most interesting part of that article was the 20 seconds it took me to figure out a username and pass that worked. If NYT put a restriction that you can't have your username as your password I'd be screwed.
and proud of it, because it is the nerd who truely understands how remarkable this really is and his (invaribly) reflection shows a form of respect that many would do well to understand. The teenybopper who thinks the Internet is all about chatting to their mates from school using AIM and downloading mp3's just simply puts it down to magic. Somehow it works and that's all that matters and, even if he were curious, may never truely understand it enough to shape these highly technical concepts into a visualization of real world experience. And yet, when the same slack jawed porn surfer sees an artist's rendition of electrons spinning on the event horizon of a black hole or "the computers in the movies" they stare bewildered and amazed.
well yes, actually when I first got on the net I was astounded. I had never really played with network cards and I'd only seen LAN's from a distance. When someone tried to explain the concept to me they got stumped on the word "connections", ie. the cables connecting distant computers, and they explained it as a bunch of modems. Seriously, this is how the Internet was explained to me in 1992: Imagine you have a whole lot of BBS's around the country and you give to each of them another telephone line and modem and connect them all together. Then I asked how they could get more than one person's messages across the one phone line (you have to remember that I had a Commodore 64 with a 1200/75 baud modem and the guy was trying to explain the school unix system to me) and they turned to HS/Link, a transfer program that actually allowed you to upload and download files AND talk to the sysop, all at the same time. The concept of the packet was introduced to me, the idea of routing but never any mention of how the data got from one LAN to another. So when I finally managed to get onto the net (I had dailup access to a BSD box on a service called BrisBug) I was astounded at the number of people I could talk to at the same time on IRC. I eventually got a shell on a box in the states (SunOS) and learnt how to code in C, and eventually I did learn what frame relay was. I never really got over the whole thing though. That I was actually talking to a computer halfway around the world. With every keystroke on my C64 I was initiating computation on a half dozen routers, drilling down the TCP/IP stack on the destination machine, hitting the shell and bouncing all the way back and it appeared to be no slower than typing on a BBS (at 1200/75 it really does appear that way). Even today my mind congers up images of packets screaming through tubes in a duality of physical connections and conceptual ACK/NACK maintained TCP connections and I can't help but look on with awe.
it's like some beautiful dream. Would someone care to comment on the politics of this? Why in the last year we've gone from modem to cable to dsl and now they're actually working on the backbone? Who the hell is behind this? Maybe we should send them flowers or something.
hmm.. last time I checked there wasn't that many pci slots in my pc, and aint there some major IRQ sharing sux arse type reasons that this would be worthless?
Two years ago I did the embedded programming on a firewall PCI card. They had a proprietory TCP/IP stack (though I'm sure it was based on some BSD code) which they wanted ip forwarding and packet filtering from. It was a REALLY easy job. I essentially cross compiled the code and used the example code that came with the ethernet chips (there was two, which BTW, if you don't have on that card, it aint a firewall) with 10/100 UTP ports, one for the Internet side of the firewall and the other to plug into your hub. I think they eventually abandoned the product as stupid and developed it into a sealed box firewall about the size of a matchbook. Last time I talked to them they still hadn't shipped.
And the Tomahawk has delivered such payloads. During the Monica Lewinsky scandal Clinton launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at targets that were apparently controlled by Osama bin Laden. Included in the barrage of explosives were a number of anti-personal warheads that on impact explode thousands of spiked cow pods. Automated massacre.
better yet.. why not just fight the war in software. A world wide simulator with tanks, planes and infintry. Then at the end of each week we can send out a list of the people who were killed in battle.
Attention Citizen. Your avatar was killed in active duty on the 21st of June, 2026. Please report for decintergration at your nearest recycling plant.
hmm.. now if you have very good surveillance of the battle field (can we say satelight, ground camera's, radar, etc, etc) you could fly a bomber with no one way commands. Hell, if you can make a cruise missile that has a remote detonator, why can't you have an automated plane to do dogfights. Personally I'd just like to see a war plane controlled by a pilot on the ground in a simulator. Although I think a more interesting idea is a Battle Droid controlled with a halflife like interface from a remote location. Now that is war.
I have often wondered why we so stubbornly worked so hard to make the system survive. My own take on it is that we were young and wanted to make a dent in the psyche of the industry which in those bad old days was incredibly shortsighted. And I think we did.
What one person finds essential free speech someone else will always find offensive. Persecuted and paranoid individuals will always find something sick and disgusting about what you love. Kiddie porn is one case where almost everyone agrees that it is offensive. If you want to see what "offensive" means, take a look at this review of the Truman Show (actually the viewer responses). The site is full of them. Chip away at your freedoms and soon you will have none in the face of people like this.
m/s = meters per second.. it always has, it always will.. they're called s.i. units.. that "standard international" something that Americians no nothing about.. tune into the 20th century and then maybe you can join us all in the 21st.
it takes so much to move from smalltalk to LISP. hmm.. I send a message with one paramater to this object and it returns an object that expects a message with one paramater.. wow.. that's like currying.. heh! That's like a lambda function. In the end it's all the same.. a language is a language is a language.
yer.. but an artifical intermediate language is just as bad as a native assembler. What would be best I think is if you used some intermediate language like C-- (very good WSL) and whenever you did a compilation on a specific archetecture you store the computation in the object.
Slashdot Mirror
one, yes, Johnny uses the net.. he has a stupid talk radio show and people are always asking him if he has read something another on the net and most the time he has. two, he was specifically talking about Australia.. he was saying that the divide between the haves and the have nots of infotech must be eliminated if Australia is to move forward. Howard has always been a "we are the smart country" type. It gives him an excuse to fuck over farmers and miners.
Well, sitting at my PC and listening to the news I just heard our humble leader (and quite scary) John Howard say that the government is trying to ensure that every Australian has access to the Internet within the next five years (or something). Pretty amuzing claim.. sorta like the "no child shall be living in poverty".
don't forget mars, the moon and venus too.
man.. The most interesting part of that article was the 20 seconds it took me to figure out a username and pass that worked. If NYT put a restriction that you can't have your username as your password I'd be screwed.
over the web?
and proud of it, because it is the nerd who truely understands how remarkable this really is and his (invaribly) reflection shows a form of respect that many would do well to understand. The teenybopper who thinks the Internet is all about chatting to their mates from school using AIM and downloading mp3's just simply puts it down to magic. Somehow it works and that's all that matters and, even if he were curious, may never truely understand it enough to shape these highly technical concepts into a visualization of real world experience. And yet, when the same slack jawed porn surfer sees an artist's rendition of electrons spinning on the event horizon of a black hole or "the computers in the movies" they stare bewildered and amazed.
well yes, actually when I first got on the net I was astounded. I had never really played with network cards and I'd only seen LAN's from a distance. When someone tried to explain the concept to me they got stumped on the word "connections", ie. the cables connecting distant computers, and they explained it as a bunch of modems. Seriously, this is how the Internet was explained to me in 1992: Imagine you have a whole lot of BBS's around the country and you give to each of them another telephone line and modem and connect them all together. Then I asked how they could get more than one person's messages across the one phone line (you have to remember that I had a Commodore 64 with a 1200/75 baud modem and the guy was trying to explain the school unix system to me) and they turned to HS/Link, a transfer program that actually allowed you to upload and download files AND talk to the sysop, all at the same time. The concept of the packet was introduced to me, the idea of routing but never any mention of how the data got from one LAN to another. So when I finally managed to get onto the net (I had dailup access to a BSD box on a service called BrisBug) I was astounded at the number of people I could talk to at the same time on IRC. I eventually got a shell on a box in the states (SunOS) and learnt how to code in C, and eventually I did learn what frame relay was. I never really got over the whole thing though. That I was actually talking to a computer halfway around the world. With every keystroke on my C64 I was initiating computation on a half dozen routers, drilling down the TCP/IP stack on the destination machine, hitting the shell and bouncing all the way back and it appeared to be no slower than typing on a BBS (at 1200/75 it really does appear that way). Even today my mind congers up images of packets screaming through tubes in a duality of physical connections and conceptual ACK/NACK maintained TCP connections and I can't help but look on with awe.
it's like some beautiful dream. Would someone care to comment on the politics of this? Why in the last year we've gone from modem to cable to dsl and now they're actually working on the backbone? Who the hell is behind this? Maybe we should send them flowers or something.
hmm.. last time I checked there wasn't that many pci slots in my pc, and aint there some major IRQ sharing sux arse type reasons that this would be worthless?
Two years ago I did the embedded programming on a firewall PCI card. They had a proprietory TCP/IP stack (though I'm sure it was based on some BSD code) which they wanted ip forwarding and packet filtering from. It was a REALLY easy job. I essentially cross compiled the code and used the example code that came with the ethernet chips (there was two, which BTW, if you don't have on that card, it aint a firewall) with 10/100 UTP ports, one for the Internet side of the firewall and the other to plug into your hub. I think they eventually abandoned the product as stupid and developed it into a sealed box firewall about the size of a matchbook. Last time I talked to them they still hadn't shipped.
errr.. no shit
wow.. can we say robocop.. just found this over at navy.mil.
And the Tomahawk has delivered such payloads. During the Monica Lewinsky scandal Clinton launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at targets that were apparently controlled by Osama bin Laden. Included in the barrage of explosives were a number of anti-personal warheads that on impact explode thousands of spiked cow pods. Automated massacre.
better yet.. why not just fight the war in software. A world wide simulator with tanks, planes and infintry. Then at the end of each week we can send out a list of the people who were killed in battle.
Attention Citizen. Your avatar was killed in active duty on the 21st of June, 2026. Please report for decintergration at your nearest recycling plant.
"Damn it.."
hmm.. now if you have very good surveillance of the battle field (can we say satelight, ground camera's, radar, etc, etc) you could fly a bomber with no one way commands. Hell, if you can make a cruise missile that has a remote detonator, why can't you have an automated plane to do dogfights. Personally I'd just like to see a war plane controlled by a pilot on the ground in a simulator. Although I think a more interesting idea is a Battle Droid controlled with a halflife like interface from a remote location. Now that is war.
Personally I'm hoping for next Tuesday to be the dooms day for Windows.
I have often wondered why we so stubbornly worked so hard to make the system survive. My own take on it is that we were young and wanted to make a dent in the psyche of the industry which in those bad old days was incredibly shortsighted. And I think we did.
Heh.
build a gameboy cart!
and yet 99% of your countrymen still think a meter is a messure of planetary mass.
a gross generalization on slashdot? Never. My mum knows what m/s means and she knows fuck all about physics, and that's the norm here (.au btw).
Authority is bad mmmm 'k.
What one person finds essential free speech someone else will always find offensive. Persecuted and paranoid individuals will always find something sick and disgusting about what you love. Kiddie porn is one case where almost everyone agrees that it is offensive. If you want to see what "offensive" means, take a look at this review of the Truman Show (actually the viewer responses). The site is full of them. Chip away at your freedoms and soon you will have none in the face of people like this.
m/s = meters per second.. it always has, it always will.. they're called s.i. units.. that "standard international" something that Americians no nothing about.. tune into the 20th century and then maybe you can join us all in the 21st.
it takes so much to move from smalltalk to LISP. hmm.. I send a message with one paramater to this object and it returns an object that expects a message with one paramater.. wow.. that's like currying.. heh! That's like a lambda function. In the end it's all the same.. a language is a language is a language.
yer.. but an artifical intermediate language is just as bad as a native assembler. What would be best I think is if you used some intermediate language like C-- (very good WSL) and whenever you did a compilation on a specific archetecture you store the computation in the object.