now all that's required to slip past security is a bit of social hacking of this profiling software. as security personell become more and more reliant on the software, the human intuitiveness is out of the picture. a terrorist would only have to figure out the 'pattern' for the software and do the opposite and voila.. you're thru.
so much for individualism -- "being different" in america. you better be a carbon copy of the next white guy or there's something wrong with you. that ain't too far off.
"barrier to entry" is bad. but everything has exceptions. i believe clustering is one of 'em. if you don't have the tech-savy that is needed to install/configure a cluster (beowoulf, mosix et. al) should you even be clustering? it would be interesting to know what the mac cluster installers/admins know about the nature of the cluster they work with vs. a beowulf admin. i'm compiling a mosix patched kernel as i'm typing this. i had to go thru a length to educate myself about how mosix works to get to this point. that's how i knew mosix was a better option for me than, say, beowulf. just being able slap something together hardly means that we can use it effectively. you have to understand the nature of the beast. seems like with the MACs, one would hardly have to know the nature of the beast to put one together. then what? "uh... i got this cluster together by clicking thru some questions.. uh... i'm told they work together. uh... but i could already access other computers with a standalone mac.. they were already working together.." On the other end of things.. "uh... you can't share a file? let me build a cluster for you... that ought to do it..." don't get me wrong. i'm all for ease of use. i highly appreciate the automated installer for mosix. but if ease of use means not having to know the nature of the beast it could be detrimental in the long run.
for example, if beowulf were extreamly easy to install and mosix were not then maybe i'd opt for beowulf without knowing that my current situation calls for mosix.. i hope you get the idea.
i want a baewolf cluster of these... now i actually have a valid reason (since i'm a computer professional and all) to go buy me some legos. me 1 : wife 0. thank god. oh wait, that's a different christ.
...will produce no two chips that are the same. 'Each one will be customized for a particular function,'...
i.e. "we can't seem to be able to control and replicate the production process exactly so the process is a random chain of events resulting in products that never act the same. don't worry we'll find a use for each one of these puppies that rolls off of our production line."
they will have a penis!! my god!! think of the possibilities... 80% of the world is accessible with something with legs... but with one of those penises.. a 100% will be accessible...
at the risk of getting my karma burned... mod this up!! one of the things i've found on slashdot is that it doesn't pay to offer up a different viewpoint. i have no complaints about rejected stories that i submited since they were crappy to begin with. on the other hand, i've noticed that when others post some pretty clever things but not necessarily affirming the/. mentality, they've been modded down.
MS is evil!! -- my cheap shot at karmafying myself...
yeah something like that except that the 'grammer' script would be output by some switch eg. --kaptain (in the most rudementry form because that means that the gui has to run the program once with the switch on to generate the gui and then once to run the program.) another approach could be to link directly to a function call or some such to a standard predefined function getGuiGrammer() or some such within the executable binary. that would allow for the more important agenda that i had in mind. to illustrate, if you had something like that for aspell, wouldn't it be nice to be able to 'pipe' all your spell checking from your app to aspell but in GUI? the important agenda and my initial thought was that Unix has had it's power in pipes. but as we strive towards a GUI oriented OS, we're starting to lose that power unless we somehow transport that CLI pipe concept to GUI. this 'probe-and-generate-gui-by-generic-gui-meta-app' would allow us to be able to link to other apps GUI at runtime. thus giving the effects of GUI-piping. linux gui is nice. but we've completely lost the power in linux -- pipes. just been brainstorming on how one would metaporize pipes in GUI.
i've been thinking about this for a while and i'm not sure if it fits the bill for your question about windowing systems but here it goes anyways...
after working nmap and then with nmapfe, i had the idea where you would write your tool as a native CLI base program but one which provided hooks for a gui over it. nmapfe simply, as far as i can understand, does this by using the GUI to construct the command and then when hit 'enter' running a system call. this approach could be further extended by providing some hooks into the native CLI program whereby a generic GUI tool could probe the tool to see what screens to present to the user.
for example, in the document-view setting, have the view class just generate some form of xml (glade-ish) so that this generic-runtime-gui-builder can query this command line too to build the gui for it. this is all so that each and every tool would have a commandline and a GUI in a very consistant fashion. also, most of the time, the huge GUI programs are just replicating the code for the GUI. this all could be in one generic GUI-runtime-builder.
i know this is all convoluted. i'm still trying to work it out in my head.
i did go as far as creating a 'browser' where you'd run this generic-window which then pulled the interface requested by the app into the main window using glade. just that bit is quite simple. but i'm still working on the rest of it...
i've used XML:fo with pretty good results. checkout xml.apache.org and checkout the section on FOP. it's excellent for formatting text documents. you write the xml and then a stylesheet for the targeted format (pdf, html among several others.) i've even used it for quite complex (tables within tables etc.. with explicit control over page breaks...)
what it's good for:
1. content independent formatting (but you knew that as soon as i mentioned xml)
2. several popular target formats. PDFs, SVG, html...
3. completely ASCII so you can check it in and out of CVSs all day long.
3. platform independent. java -- standard rules apply.
What it's not good for (in my opinion anyways)
1. doing 'auto-documentation' ie. getting the documentation straight out from the source files. but you can overcome that with some other script that ends up with the xml input for FOP.
2. problems with HUGE input files. it runs slow and without the -mx and -ms switches for java-runtime it almost always chokes with large files.
all in all tho, with a good xml editor (and emacs is as good as any;) ) FOP just can't be beat. recent versions even do bookmarks in PDFs. that's been very handy. several target formats with just a different switch and a stylesheet?!! quite impressive. check it out. it's very worth the try.
For a corporation, whose primary goal is to make money, what are the motives for going open source/FS? A number of companies seem to be using it for PR purposes rather than as a way to make money. How are you planning on bringing in more revenue by going open source and not just use it as a 'loss leader'? Or, since Sun is a hardware company, are you planning on using it primarily as a 'loss leader' for more hardware sale ala IBM?
it's not terribly different only just slightly. When i hit a link on slashdot asking me to go vote for something, i'm not being paid by slashdot in any shape or form. thus there is no obligation on my part to comply with that request. whatever my reactions are are solely mine. on the other hand, when your employer asks you to 'stop what you're doing for a minute and go do this...', you have been asked to do something for which you are being paid for (you are on company time).
Therefore, we could conclude that people were paid to vote on MSs behalf. Whereas when we click on a link on slashdot, unless you're CmdrTaco or CowboyNeal etc.. you're not being paid to do so and are under no obligation. not terribly different, but slightly enough to make a huge difference. Asking someone to vote one way or the other vs. paying someone to do so. slightly different.
when you run nslookup, you get this -- "Note: nslookup is deprecated and may be removed from future releases.
Consider using the `dig' or `host' programs instead. Run nslookup with
the `-sil[ent]' option to prevent this message from appearing." so kudos to the author of the book for using dig instead of nslookup. as far as the details of the output; that's exactly the problem. techies like us want to know each and every symbol that 's output. general folks just want to know a specific piece of info. and i think that the book rightly skips on those details. if that book were to document every option/symbol that's output by dig, and by extension, how to configure your DNS server so that dig displays something different when that server is queried; and then how to compile the server so that those options never even get compiled in -- soon you got yourself a 'recompiling UNIX from scratch' book. you gotta start somewhere. don't bash the book for leaving out some details.
win XP != win 1.0 so your comparisons to linux 1.0 is quite lame. if you are telling me that winXP is infact a new windows alltogether, what does that say about forking? unlike linux 1.0, windowsXP is, say, windows 6.0 (NT4.0, win2000 (5.0), XP(6.0)). compare that to a more recent kernel and the comparison makes more sense.
Second, win2000 does crash. My wife crashed it last night with just a single instance of realplayer running. Granted it didn't 'blue screen' but accepting no input and just plain freezing is not quite the advancement in stability you talk about. I will concede that MS has done better with 2000 and I assume with XP as well. But guess what? So has linux. Linux bashers used it 1-2 years ago and they still cry 'no-user-friendly-apps'. Guess what? Linux has evolved faster than anything out there including windows. You talked about Netscape and Mozilla... Ever tried Galeon? Konqueror (in it's new incarnation) ? Just as windows has evolved to be more 'stable' (as you say), Linux has just gotten better. Try evolution..., galeon..., staroffice...
And yes I dual boot to win2000. Actually, I have it on my laptop. The last time I used it was quite a while ago. Why? well, I can't get a lot of features in IE that i get in galeon. Tabbed-view. Bookmark-management..
You are right, Linux proponents can't always use "it's more stable" arguement to the same affect as before. But Linux is still a lot more stable. Windows is just catching up. And on the flip side, Windows-proponents can't use the "It's non use-friendly" arguement anymore. In fact, everytime i boot to windows, i feel boxed-in with the lack of tools and options that i boot right back to linux. you should give a recent distribution a try. you'll be surprized.
i came home for lunch one day and turned on the tube while eating. there was some cartoon on. and guess what it was about? piracy. they had a kid doing napster-isk networking to download some tunes. a couple of his friends see him doing it. they think it's wrong. turn him in to his parents blah blah... well, when i have a kid i know one thing they're not watching. unless they download it to their computer of course;)
I don't mean to say that stealing is right. in fact, apart from absent mindedly walking out with a pair of earrings -- with which i wanted to surprize my wife at the checkout lane, i've never stolen anything in my life.
but having thought thru this napster-sharing thing a bit i'm finding it hard to call it stealing. stealing means that one person (the stealer) robs someone else (the stealee) of possesion and/or the use of the item stolen. that just isn't the case. the only thing stolen from anyone is the 'scarcity' created by the record companies. by napstarizing, people are robbing the record companies and the record companies alone from their ownership of the 'scarcity'.
However, it seems to me, that by affording these companies legal protection for them to create this fabricated 'scarcity' seems very far removed from the free-market that we claim to have established.
Although i fail to see the 'intellectual' part of the equation in the belly dancing of the likes of britney spears let's for a minute assume there is this 'intellectual property' they've been hammering me with. how is anyone destroying it? by sharing, we're spreading it (and in britney spears' case, god help us). i don't see any destruction. and like i said before, the only thing being stolen or destroyed is the faked 'scarcity'.
The fabricated scarcity has no part in our free-market. It might have to do with lobbying, soft-monies and various other 'buzzwords' that otherwise mean bribes. but definately not free-market. so in essence napstarizing is actually in defense of 'free-market'. and no i'm not talking about 'free' as in 'free-beer' market. 'free' as in 'supply and demand unfettered establishing a fair price' market (among other things). And hence i fail to see how i need to 'educate' my kids (once i have 'em) they way MPAA and RIAA thinks i should educate them. And you can bet your hiney (not the beer, the posterior) that they won't be watching the propaganda cartoons. But of course i'm preaching to the choir here.
i've failed my classes, but i'm doing more than decent in the real world. doesn't that say something abou the classes? i mean there were 2 junior and senior level classes that just taught VC++. and i dont' mean the algorithms or C++. i mean the IDE. sure makes you wanna think if the profs and the department get some sort of a kickback
There's no need to for the megapop media orgy that the old-style companies provided
I've been a fan of 'pop' music for the longest time. note the 'been'. One thing that i can tell you for sure is that when an 'artist' says they're doing it for the 'love of it' or to 'keep it real' they're really talking about money. no one does it for the love of it. The media orgy wasn't there to promote an artist. it was there to *tell* you - jon and jane doe - who you should be listening to. In essence giving that artist a small monopoly. Think poison, motely crue in the 80s to N'sync, backstreet boys... Pick a record company, divvy up the market into certain demo segments, i bet you that they rarely have a 'competing' artist within their own company. It's not about artists or art or any of that mumbo jumbo. it's about acts. huge difference. now, if an 'artist' wants to believe that they will be 'chosen' word of mouth doesn't seem too promising.
i've been doing 'cool' things on linux. i get paid for it. especially since no one else seems to be able to do it. they're starting to catch up tho. everyone seems to be learning a bit here and a bit there with the CLI. the 'cool' stuff i used to to ain't cool anymore. if only people got used to this oversimplified UI, i could probably figure out where the files actually go so that when some dumb fuck loses their file i know exactly what to do on the command like to the tune of find / -name xyz and charge $$$ by the minute and become cool all over again.
ok, ok, you can script that in but... as the fp guy suggested, as cheap as the harddrives are, why not just do a raid-5 type setup. the only 'real' investment would be the raid controller. but then so would a serious tape drive or a dvdrw drive etc. as i see it, with raid-5, you get redundency on the fly. you can select other raid configurations if you want. but i think a raid setup is far better than just plain mirroring. i mean, you've gotta do some interval to do the mirroring, + you've gotta comeup with some rules to only do updates... why bother? just do raid and forget. yeah you need additional harddrives but they're cheap. and they're relatively fool proof. you get instant mirroring so if it were to fail midday (presuming you do backups at nights) you don't lose a day's worth of data.
we need that slashdot poll back.. the one about the superpowers. now we can really get the 'spiderman', 'batman' and other animal/insect/what-have-you crossed with our genes to turn us into superheros..
now i know what powered garry shandling's dongle in 'what planet are you from'. powers the thingy at a constant yet short-life-spans. generates heat... no explanation needed there. at 40Khz.. explains the humming!
Slashdot Mirror
so much for individualism -- "being different" in america. you better be a carbon copy of the next white guy or there's something wrong with you. that ain't too far off.
for example, if beowulf were extreamly easy to install and mosix were not then maybe i'd opt for beowulf without knowing that my current situation calls for mosix.. i hope you get the idea.
i want a baewolf cluster of these... now i actually have a valid reason (since i'm a computer professional and all) to go buy me some legos. me 1 : wife 0. thank god. oh wait, that's a different christ.
what's with intel's names? celery.. err.. celeron, now YAMhill... where's the beef?
i.e. "we can't seem to be able to control and replicate the production process exactly so the process is a random chain of events resulting in products that never act the same. don't worry we'll find a use for each one of these puppies that rolls off of our production line."
set the mbox == /dev/null and you're set.
they will have a penis!! my god!! think of the possibilities... 80% of the world is accessible with something with legs... but with one of those penises.. a 100% will be accessible...
MS is evil!! -- my cheap shot at karmafying myself...
yeah something like that except that the 'grammer' script would be output by some switch eg. --kaptain (in the most rudementry form because that means that the gui has to run the program once with the switch on to generate the gui and then once to run the program.) another approach could be to link directly to a function call or some such to a standard predefined function getGuiGrammer() or some such within the executable binary. that would allow for the more important agenda that i had in mind. to illustrate, if you had something like that for aspell, wouldn't it be nice to be able to 'pipe' all your spell checking from your app to aspell but in GUI? the important agenda and my initial thought was that Unix has had it's power in pipes. but as we strive towards a GUI oriented OS, we're starting to lose that power unless we somehow transport that CLI pipe concept to GUI. this 'probe-and-generate-gui-by-generic-gui-meta-app' would allow us to be able to link to other apps GUI at runtime. thus giving the effects of GUI-piping. linux gui is nice. but we've completely lost the power in linux -- pipes. just been brainstorming on how one would metaporize pipes in GUI.
after working nmap and then with nmapfe, i had the idea where you would write your tool as a native CLI base program but one which provided hooks for a gui over it. nmapfe simply, as far as i can understand, does this by using the GUI to construct the command and then when hit 'enter' running a system call. this approach could be further extended by providing some hooks into the native CLI program whereby a generic GUI tool could probe the tool to see what screens to present to the user.
for example, in the document-view setting, have the view class just generate some form of xml (glade-ish) so that this generic-runtime-gui-builder can query this command line too to build the gui for it. this is all so that each and every tool would have a commandline and a GUI in a very consistant fashion. also, most of the time, the huge GUI programs are just replicating the code for the GUI. this all could be in one generic GUI-runtime-builder.
i know this is all convoluted. i'm still trying to work it out in my head.
i did go as far as creating a 'browser' where you'd run this generic-window which then pulled the interface requested by the app into the main window using glade. just that bit is quite simple. but i'm still working on the rest of it...
what it's good for:
1. content independent formatting (but you knew that as soon as i mentioned xml)
2. several popular target formats. PDFs, SVG, html...
3. completely ASCII so you can check it in and out of CVSs all day long.
3. platform independent. java -- standard rules apply.
What it's not good for (in my opinion anyways)
1. doing 'auto-documentation' ie. getting the documentation straight out from the source files. but you can overcome that with some other script that ends up with the xml input for FOP.
2. problems with HUGE input files. it runs slow and without the -mx and -ms switches for java-runtime it almost always chokes with large files.
all in all tho, with a good xml editor (and emacs is as good as any ;) ) FOP just can't be beat. recent versions even do bookmarks in PDFs. that's been very handy. several target formats with just a different switch and a stylesheet?!! quite impressive. check it out. it's very worth the try.
For a corporation, whose primary goal is to make money, what are the motives for going open source/FS? A number of companies seem to be using it for PR purposes rather than as a way to make money. How are you planning on bringing in more revenue by going open source and not just use it as a 'loss leader'? Or, since Sun is a hardware company, are you planning on using it primarily as a 'loss leader' for more hardware sale ala IBM?
Therefore, we could conclude that people were paid to vote on MSs behalf. Whereas when we click on a link on slashdot, unless you're CmdrTaco or CowboyNeal etc.. you're not being paid to do so and are under no obligation. not terribly different, but slightly enough to make a huge difference. Asking someone to vote one way or the other vs. paying someone to do so. slightly different.
when you run nslookup, you get this -- "Note: nslookup is deprecated and may be removed from future releases. Consider using the `dig' or `host' programs instead. Run nslookup with the `-sil[ent]' option to prevent this message from appearing." so kudos to the author of the book for using dig instead of nslookup. as far as the details of the output; that's exactly the problem. techies like us want to know each and every symbol that 's output. general folks just want to know a specific piece of info. and i think that the book rightly skips on those details. if that book were to document every option/symbol that's output by dig, and by extension, how to configure your DNS server so that dig displays something different when that server is queried; and then how to compile the server so that those options never even get compiled in -- soon you got yourself a 'recompiling UNIX from scratch' book. you gotta start somewhere. don't bash the book for leaving out some details.
Second, win2000 does crash. My wife crashed it last night with just a single instance of realplayer running. Granted it didn't 'blue screen' but accepting no input and just plain freezing is not quite the advancement in stability you talk about. I will concede that MS has done better with 2000 and I assume with XP as well. But guess what? So has linux. Linux bashers used it 1-2 years ago and they still cry 'no-user-friendly-apps'. Guess what? Linux has evolved faster than anything out there including windows. You talked about Netscape and Mozilla... Ever tried Galeon? Konqueror (in it's new incarnation) ? Just as windows has evolved to be more 'stable' (as you say), Linux has just gotten better. Try evolution..., galeon..., staroffice...
And yes I dual boot to win2000. Actually, I have it on my laptop. The last time I used it was quite a while ago. Why? well, I can't get a lot of features in IE that i get in galeon. Tabbed-view. Bookmark-management..
You are right, Linux proponents can't always use "it's more stable" arguement to the same affect as before. But Linux is still a lot more stable. Windows is just catching up. And on the flip side, Windows-proponents can't use the "It's non use-friendly" arguement anymore. In fact, everytime i boot to windows, i feel boxed-in with the lack of tools and options that i boot right back to linux. you should give a recent distribution a try. you'll be surprized.
I don't mean to say that stealing is right. in fact, apart from absent mindedly walking out with a pair of earrings -- with which i wanted to surprize my wife at the checkout lane, i've never stolen anything in my life.
but having thought thru this napster-sharing thing a bit i'm finding it hard to call it stealing. stealing means that one person (the stealer) robs someone else (the stealee) of possesion and/or the use of the item stolen. that just isn't the case. the only thing stolen from anyone is the 'scarcity' created by the record companies. by napstarizing, people are robbing the record companies and the record companies alone from their ownership of the 'scarcity'.
However, it seems to me, that by affording these companies legal protection for them to create this fabricated 'scarcity' seems very far removed from the free-market that we claim to have established.
Although i fail to see the 'intellectual' part of the equation in the belly dancing of the likes of britney spears let's for a minute assume there is this 'intellectual property' they've been hammering me with. how is anyone destroying it? by sharing, we're spreading it (and in britney spears' case, god help us). i don't see any destruction. and like i said before, the only thing being stolen or destroyed is the faked 'scarcity'.
The fabricated scarcity has no part in our free-market. It might have to do with lobbying, soft-monies and various other 'buzzwords' that otherwise mean bribes. but definately not free-market. so in essence napstarizing is actually in defense of 'free-market'. and no i'm not talking about 'free' as in 'free-beer' market. 'free' as in 'supply and demand unfettered establishing a fair price' market (among other things). And hence i fail to see how i need to 'educate' my kids (once i have 'em) they way MPAA and RIAA thinks i should educate them. And you can bet your hiney (not the beer, the posterior) that they won't be watching the propaganda cartoons. But of course i'm preaching to the choir here.
i've failed my classes, but i'm doing more than decent in the real world. doesn't that say something abou the classes? i mean there were 2 junior and senior level classes that just taught VC++. and i dont' mean the algorithms or C++. i mean the IDE. sure makes you wanna think if the profs and the department get some sort of a kickback
I've been a fan of 'pop' music for the longest time. note the 'been'. One thing that i can tell you for sure is that when an 'artist' says they're doing it for the 'love of it' or to 'keep it real' they're really talking about money. no one does it for the love of it. The media orgy wasn't there to promote an artist. it was there to *tell* you - jon and jane doe - who you should be listening to. In essence giving that artist a small monopoly. Think poison, motely crue in the 80s to N'sync, backstreet boys... Pick a record company, divvy up the market into certain demo segments, i bet you that they rarely have a 'competing' artist within their own company. It's not about artists or art or any of that mumbo jumbo. it's about acts. huge difference. now, if an 'artist' wants to believe that they will be 'chosen' word of mouth doesn't seem too promising.
expr does the job for me just fine ;)
my $0.01. 2 cents is 2 expensive in this economy.
don't the scientists need a 'permission' to link to the brain?
i wanna be tick.
great. now i'm going to be required to pay *direct visible* taxes to MS
talk about influence of science-fiction on real-world-tech.