companies like cambridge publishers do free subscription magazines, which the readers are HAPPY to receive for free on the basis that a) it contains stuff they might be interested in b) if they fill in the survey correctly they might be advertised at with stuff that they WANT to buy.
it's an audited process, so there is a stacking big paper trail [in CPL] with a stacking big database where nothing can get thrown away for something like well over six years.... my question is, therefore, to these "scientific magazines", so what??
so change your business model to one similar to that of cambridge publishers. contact the auditors for "free subscription" magazines, make your mag free, get an audited status, end of problem.
standard filesystems are NOT databases
on
Database File System
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
standard filesystems only have ONE index - a hierarchical one that contains a certain amount of real-time-updated indexing (such as the timestamps on a directory)
but it is NOT a relational database: you CANNOT easily create or use an alternative index to your files.
that's what all the fuss is about.
some people mentioned here that they already organise their files. great. fantastic.
HOW LONG DID IT TAKE YOU?
and how long would it take to reorganise?
with a relational database, all your indexes are updated AUTOMATICALLY.
therefore, doing searches on a relational database filesystem (find me all music files with dates between last week and last month: SELECT * from files WHERE files.type = "music" and files.date NOW() - 7days
you _can't_ do that sort of thing on a traditional filesystem.
sure, you can emulate it by creating symbolic links all over the place, but what happens when a file is deleted or moved? you need to manage / relocate the symbolic links...
nah.
databases.
fantastic idea.
now can we have them as a kernel module, pleeease?
i do not allow incoming firewall traffic to skype... yet i can call other people who also have incoming firewall traffic blocked.
so you must be incorrect.
looking at their web site you will find that they _do_ say that they in fact route traffic via other people's computers, and if you dig further, you will find that their license agreement requires that you ACCEPT that other people will end up using your bandwidth.
they also mention that traffic is encrypted (most likely using a key exchanged via diffie-helmann if they have any sense), so it doesn't mean people can sniff your conversations.
the principle of skype's [pieyer-teuuuw-pieeeyer] connectivity is this:
1) make a random outgoing connection to 50 or more other machines (not behind firewalls)
2) route incoming traffic BACK down one of those random connections
3) during a call, check whether one of the other random connections has better connectivity, and if so, switch to it.
this is the sort of functionality that needs to be available in open source VPN software.
reason: SIP is pathetic in comparison to Skype. 98% of users don't give a flying fuck about NAT and firewalls (or updates. or anti-virus software. or anti-spam software).
also it's literally impossible for telecoms to cut Skype's VoIP traffic out of the internet to disrupt them from taking money from AT&T, France Telecom, BT etc. by contrast, blocking the SIP port "oops it's so hard to keep good VoIP software running these days"
i particularly like the way that on the register, an advert for intel's xeon processor came up on a page describing how great the new dual-processor amd chip is.
18 Nov 2003: A preview release of Oracle's XForms processor PlugIn for Internet Explorer is now available. The XForms Processor is a plug to Internet Explorer 6 on Win2000/WinXP. A User's Guide, Datasheet and several samples are provided with the preview release install.
ah ha, no, now it's much worse than those bad-old-days.
now it's the days-of-geeks-having-fun-doing-what-they-like that are IN.
i'm not entirely sure which is worse, but i will say this: ASF-like charters are INFINTELY more important [advocating mutual respect, and evicting people who offend]
witness the number of flame-warts that have caused good people to have to leave projects...
21. A system according to clam 20, wherein the digitally-encoded time information comprises information recorded according to an EXIF standard.
so microsoft has a patent clam on fresh sea products?
http://opengroup.org/dce
on
IT, Be Free!
·
· Score: 1
hooray.
now finally there is a reason to harass gary gerchak (ggerchak@us.ibm.com) into getting off his arse in stalling the release of dce 1.2.2 under the LGPL license.
gary gerchak is the ibm opengroup committee member.
ibm is the ONLY original copyright holder that has NOT agreed to dual-license dce 1.2.2 under the LGPL.
the network-reverse-engineering process results in finding security holes in microsoft products.
as a responsible individual, even before i went to work for Internet Security Systems i was reporting bugs directly AND IN CONFIDENCE to microsoft to give them a chance to fix them - in some cases i gave them well over two years to fix the problems.
it's really easy to find problems in microsoft products.
this fucking dipshit patent shit scares people away from interoperating and consequently finding problems.
they use OTHER PEOPLE's computers to route phone calls. not only to initiate them (to bypass firewalls) but also to make them (hence the dramatic increase in quality).
they use the entire skype network as a distributed system to foil attacks and stupidity.
any product that does not do this cannot expect to succeed: they will be too vulnerable to a) people who think a NAT is something that bites you b) telecoms regulation c) traditional telcos with a lot of money to lose.
everybody has been bitching about the latest EU DMCA -clone law.
what people haven't noticed about it [the DMCA-clone] is that it is "without prejudice" to certain key sections of the 91/EC/250 directive.
in other words, certain rights such as fixing bugs by reverse engineering the code are PROTECTED UNDER EU LAW EVEN IF THOSE BUGS ARE LOCKED BY A "SECURITY MECHANISM".
it is also interesting to note that no mention is made in the EU DMCA-clone directive on the _effectiveness_ of the security measures required - yes _required_ - to be placed into technological devices to protect copyright material.
in other words, i could write some fucking dipshit brain-dead "security" measure such as XORing 0xA5 over the top of the data (yes, that's actually what MAPI does) and then sue the fuck out of people for "breaking" it.
there are APIs that NOT EVEN MICROSOFT EMPLOYEES ARE ALLOWED TO SEE.
a lot of the MSDN APIs are "redirection" APIs to multiple components that are considered "internal".
mostly because the code behind them is BXPA export restricted (hence windows XP began life as windows NT 5.0 with all the kerberos stuff stripped out).
but mostly because _if_ a microsoft programmer decided to use one of the "internal" APIs then it would become "official" and MS would have to backwards-compatible support it for the next fifteen years.
or more.
but things are changing: xp SP2 is going to _break_ a lot of backwards compatibility in the name of security (at last).
without the EU entirely understanding what it means, the court has asked for "software codes" to be released. what i _intended_ them to ask for - specifically - was for all of microsoft's internal RFCs to be made public, plus all of their IDL files, and any other internal documentation (such as it is in some cases!!) relating to "interfaces".
i cannot _quite_ understand how microsoft's lawyer believes, unless they are admitting that by releasing details of "interfaces" that somehow extra viruses will be written to target them, that "damage will be done to other software development companies".
250 to 400 mile range.... with a battery weighing in at 700kg and costing you USD 20,000 to 30,000 ALONE.
the only reason the batteries are available at reasonable cost is because the entire vehicle will be heavily subsidised: if you're after heavy duty NiMH batteries you're actually better off purchasing a subsidised vehicle and throwing the vehicle away.
nickel is an extremely rare material. aluminium makes up 8% of the earth's crust.
a partenan aluminium battery array of ONLY 60 KILOGRAMS claims to propel a vehicle a distance of 400 miles.
*lol*. depends on who's right of course:)... but seriously, strictly speaking, both parties should be alerted to the problem: then at least one of them will fix it.
you install linux, and window breaks. why are you hammering on linux developers' doors? go bitch at microsoft to fix the problem: you now have a genuine reason to waste that money that they forced out of computer manufacturers.
y'know, i really don't see what all the fuss is about. there's a very simple protocol, an implementation of which is on advogato.org, called trust metrics.
when combined with digital signatures, and when you can choose the centre of the web of trust, you get a powerful mechanism to vet spam.
an automated or semi-automated declaration "i trust this person not to send spam" is the basis of the web.
Slashdot Mirror
yerrs, i _know_ how NAT works.
and users don't give a stuff about NAT.
the technique you describe appears to rely on NAT being present.
and firewall rules accepting incoming connections.
i think.
i'll have to look more closely at it.
takes care of the multi-.so problem... by installing each package AND ITS DEPENDENCIES in a per-package subdirectory.
mad as xxxx and staggeringly heavy on disk space but it takes the problem away.
use debian's apt and its graphical friends if you're that way inclined.
are pee emm is just so pathetic it's unreal, and are pee emm makes up the majority of linux installers (redhat 40%, suse, mandrake).
this is _so_ not a problem for debian system i can't understand why people still bitch about it.
plus it's also possible to import the entire rpm tree (plus the dependencies) into apt if you absolutely must, because apt understands rpms.
companies like cambridge publishers do free subscription magazines, which the readers are HAPPY to receive for free on the basis that a) it contains stuff they might be interested in b) if they fill in the survey correctly they might be advertised at with stuff that they WANT to buy.
... my question is, therefore, to these "scientific magazines", so what??
it's an audited process, so there is a stacking big paper trail [in CPL] with a stacking big database where nothing can get thrown away for something like well over six years.
so change your business model to one similar to that of cambridge publishers. contact the auditors for "free subscription" magazines, make your mag free, get an audited status, end of problem.
standard filesystems only have ONE index - a hierarchical one that contains a certain amount of real-time-updated indexing (such as the timestamps on a directory)
but it is NOT a relational database: you CANNOT easily create or use an alternative index to your files.
that's what all the fuss is about.
some people mentioned here that they already organise their files. great. fantastic.
HOW LONG DID IT TAKE YOU?
and how long would it take to reorganise?
with a relational database, all your indexes are updated AUTOMATICALLY.
therefore, doing searches on a relational database filesystem (find me all music files with dates between last week and last month: SELECT * from files WHERE files.type = "music" and files.date NOW() - 7days
you _can't_ do that sort of thing on a traditional filesystem.
sure, you can emulate it by creating symbolic links all over the place, but what happens when a file is deleted or moved? you need to manage / relocate the symbolic links...
nah.
databases.
fantastic idea.
now can we have them as a kernel module, pleeease?
well that cannot be the case.
i do not allow incoming firewall traffic to skype... yet i can call other people who also have incoming firewall traffic blocked.
so you must be incorrect.
looking at their web site you will find that they _do_ say that they in fact route traffic via other people's computers, and if you dig further, you will find that their license agreement requires that you ACCEPT that other people will end up using your bandwidth.
they also mention that traffic is encrypted (most likely using a key exchanged via diffie-helmann if they have any sense), so it doesn't mean people can sniff your conversations.
the principle of skype's [pieyer-teuuuw-pieeeyer] connectivity is this:
1) make a random outgoing connection to 50 or more other machines (not behind firewalls)
2) route incoming traffic BACK down one of those random connections
3) during a call, check whether one of the other random connections has better connectivity, and if so, switch to it.
this is the sort of functionality that needs to be available in open source VPN software.
reason: SIP is pathetic in comparison to Skype.
98% of users don't give a flying fuck about NAT and firewalls (or updates. or anti-virus software. or anti-spam software).
also it's literally impossible for telecoms to cut Skype's VoIP traffic out of the internet to disrupt them from taking money from AT&T, France Telecom, BT etc. by contrast, blocking the SIP port "oops it's so hard to keep good VoIP software running these days"
i particularly like the way that on the register, an advert for intel's xeon processor came up on a page describing how great the new dual-processor amd chip is.
someone else cannot assume that a licensee of copyright work can just... relicense that code under an alternative license.
.... or proprietary code.
end of story.
otherwise we would have microsoft relicensing the BSD TCP/IP stack as shareware
1) sell your existing machine to an unsuspecting fellow nerd.
2) buy a smaller machine (e.g. an acer travelmate c100 or its successor the c110 they're only about $1000) or look on ebuyer.com
3) invest in a rucksack briefcase.
then, get into the habit of either carrying your machine around with you evveerrryywhhheeere.
after a while you will not notice that you constantly have a small lightweight computer on your back, and after a while nor will anyone else.
do not be put off by strange looks: style your life around the confidence of being a nerd.
if it helps i can find out where you can get "ubergeek" t-shirts.
18 Nov 2003: A preview release of Oracle's XForms processor PlugIn for Internet Explorer is now available. The XForms Processor is a plug to Internet Explorer 6 on Win2000/WinXP. A User's Guide, Datasheet and several samples are provided with the preview release install.
ah ha, no, now it's much worse than those bad-old-days.
now it's the days-of-geeks-having-fun-doing-what-they-like that are IN.
i'm not entirely sure which is worse, but i will say this: ASF-like charters are INFINTELY more important [advocating mutual respect, and evicting people who offend]
witness the number of flame-warts that have caused good people to have to leave projects...
21. A system according to clam 20, wherein the digitally-encoded time information comprises information recorded according to an EXIF standard.
so microsoft has a patent clam on fresh sea products?
hooray.
now finally there is a reason to harass gary gerchak (ggerchak@us.ibm.com) into getting off his arse in stalling the release of dce 1.2.2 under the LGPL license.
gary gerchak is the ibm opengroup committee member.
ibm is the ONLY original copyright holder that has NOT agreed to dual-license dce 1.2.2 under the LGPL.
the network-reverse-engineering process results in finding security holes in microsoft products.
as a responsible individual, even before i went to work for Internet Security Systems i was reporting bugs directly AND IN CONFIDENCE to microsoft to give them a chance to fix them - in some cases i gave them well over two years to fix the problems.
it's really easy to find problems in microsoft products.
this fucking dipshit patent shit scares people away from interoperating and consequently finding problems.
Skype have been incredibly smart.
they use OTHER PEOPLE's computers to route phone calls. not only to initiate them (to bypass firewalls) but also to make them (hence the dramatic increase in quality).
they use the entire skype network as a distributed system to foil attacks and stupidity.
any product that does not do this cannot expect to succeed: they will be too vulnerable to a) people who think a NAT is something that bites you b) telecoms regulation c) traditional telcos with a lot of money to lose.
everybody has been bitching about the latest EU DMCA -clone law.
what people haven't noticed about it [the DMCA-clone] is that it is "without prejudice" to certain key sections of the 91/EC/250 directive.
in other words, certain rights such as fixing bugs by reverse engineering the code are PROTECTED UNDER EU LAW EVEN IF THOSE BUGS ARE LOCKED BY A "SECURITY MECHANISM".
it is also interesting to note that no mention is made in the EU DMCA-clone directive on the _effectiveness_ of the security measures required - yes _required_ - to be placed into technological devices to protect copyright material.
in other words, i could write some fucking dipshit brain-dead "security" measure such as XORing 0xA5 over the top of the data (yes, that's actually what MAPI does) and then sue the fuck out of people for "breaking" it.
the MSDN is _so_ irrelevant.
there are APIs that NOT EVEN MICROSOFT EMPLOYEES ARE ALLOWED TO SEE.
a lot of the MSDN APIs are "redirection" APIs to multiple components that are considered "internal".
mostly because the code behind them is BXPA export restricted (hence windows XP began life as windows NT 5.0 with all the kerberos stuff stripped out).
but mostly because _if_ a microsoft programmer decided to use one of the "internal" APIs then it would become "official" and MS would have to backwards-compatible support it for the next fifteen years.
or more.
but things are changing: xp SP2 is going to _break_ a lot of backwards compatibility in the name of security (at last).
nobody is moving fast enough...
without the EU entirely understanding what it means, the court has asked for "software codes" to be released. what i _intended_ them to ask for - specifically - was for all of microsoft's internal RFCs to be made public, plus all of their IDL files, and any other internal documentation (such as it is in some cases!!) relating to "interfaces".
i cannot _quite_ understand how microsoft's lawyer believes, unless they are admitting that by releasing details of "interfaces" that somehow extra viruses will be written to target them, that "damage will be done to other software development companies".
15 years. fuck me. is that all?
250 to 400 mile range.... with a battery weighing in at 700kg and costing you USD 20,000 to 30,000 ALONE.
the only reason the batteries are available at reasonable cost is because the entire vehicle will be heavily subsidised: if you're after heavy duty NiMH batteries you're actually better off purchasing a subsidised vehicle and throwing the vehicle away.
nickel is an extremely rare material. aluminium makes up 8% of the earth's crust.
a partenan aluminium battery array of ONLY 60 KILOGRAMS claims to propel a vehicle a distance of 400 miles.
now THAT's viable.
only when partenan cells are available will any kind of EV be viable. http://www.europositron.com
*lol*. depends on who's right of course :) ... but seriously, strictly speaking, both parties should be alerted to the problem: then at least one of them will fix it.
you install linux, and window breaks. why are you hammering on linux developers' doors? go bitch at microsoft to fix the problem: you now have a genuine reason to waste that money that they forced out of computer manufacturers.
y'know, i really don't see what all the fuss is about. there's a very simple protocol, an implementation of which is on advogato.org, called trust metrics.
when combined with digital signatures, and when you can choose the centre of the web of trust, you get a powerful mechanism to vet spam.
an automated or semi-automated declaration "i trust this person not to send spam" is the basis of the web.