At any rate, it sure seems like access to a critical top level DNS should be filtered to a big white list of mirror machines, which could then handle general purpose inquiries.
3.3.4 A 'hidden primary' server, which only allows access by the
authorized secondary root servers, MAY be used.
Besides which, a lot of the beefy top-level DNS servers are actually a bunch of identical servers behind some load balancing solution, so this makes a whole lot of sense.
Freenet currently uses DNS for nodes configured to do so (namely dynamic DNS types). But, with recent discussion on freenet-devl, either address resolution keys will be implemented (meaning DNS-like resolution in Freenet) or IP address discovery will be integrated into the announcement protocol, negating the need for DNS either way.
So, bottom line is: Freenet relies on DNS some of the time right now, but will not by the 0.5.1 release which is due shortly. In the case of DNS failure, however, the current infrastructure would still work -- heck, Freenet 0.3 would still work. (Sorta...)
The primary way M$ makes its money is through the M$ tax on new computer purchases.
Bzzt! Wrong.
Actually, client operating system licenses is the way they lose money the fastest. See this document (on Slashdot not long ago), page nine: client operating systems lost $800 million, servers lost $200 million, and productivity apps (Office, Visio, Project, Sharepoint) lost $400 million.
It has a handful of useful features (pipes, output redirection, etc.), but does them poorly
eeeh i think you are wrong: did support redirection (i am not too sure about pipes)
...which is precisely what I said...
multitaksing was also possible if you are smart enough to program it.. using the TSR (Terimane and Stay Resident) programs.. which was first used by print command and then by all the viruses:)
I've written some TSRs, but that's not multitasking per se. You could latch onto a timer interrupt (which is how most multitasking works nowadays), but DOS itself did not support this. In fact, if you were to do this, you would have to go to extra measures to hide your existence from DOS, so it's not really part of the operating system. Besides which, under *nix, I can start some long command, interrupt it, run a short command, and resume the long command again. Or, I can tell things to launch in the background. Or, I can tell program A to output into program B (pipes) which outputs into parameters for program C (via `xargs`) which sends to a file D but e-mails a report of all error messages it receives to an arbitrary address... and have all of that run in the background. Try that in DOS.
and it defianly did have a command history thingie.. by using DOSKEY.
DOSKEY shipped with DOS 5.0 but was not directly part of either the 'kernel' (if you can call it that) or the shell. Hence, I do not include it under the DOS umbrella.
I stand by my point that batch files suck. With *nix, I can wade through 4 GB of last week's log files looking for a line that matches a particular regular expression scattered across 36 separate machines without leaving my prompt. Shell scripting is even more powerful.
The DOS command line sucks. It has a handful of useful features (pipes, output redirection, etc.), but does them poorly, since it lacks multi-tasking. Furthermore, batch files suck. Quoting sucks, no command line history, horrible inconsistency on intrinsic commands versus separate executables, and so forth.
Guess what? The DOS command line is a stripped down, sodomized version of most *nix shells. If you liked DOS, install your favorite UNIX variant, and try out bash. (Feel free to use ksh or csh to your liking.) You get pipes that work in parallel, input and output redirection (plus separating stdout and stderr), wildcard expansion, tab completion, and a consistent quoting syntax. Also, very complicated pieces of software -- including./configure scripts and even a package management system -- can be done using shell scripts.
DOS is well and good, but it's a poor substitute for a Real Command Line (TM).
As others have said, support is close at hand with the community of both users and developers.
As the primary author behind an open-source school administrative package, I understand this situation, and I understand that if something breaks someone will need to know what's going on. That is why I have the support policy that I do -- if someone is using LISSARD (the aformentioned software), they can go through the normal channels (mailing lists, etc.) in case of a problem or they can talk to me directly by phone, even at home.
No, it's not a promise of 24x7 support. But, remember that you're not dealing with trained monkeys on the other end of an 800 number, but rather someone that no only knows what's going on but why it happens that way and knows the situation backwards and forwards. In the end, my open-source project has better support than any of the other commercial offerings, because a resolution is reached within minutes rather than hours or (in some cases) weeks.
One more thing: the support contract never needs renewing. I will help whoever is using my software, because I know what it's like to be totally ignored.
No... really? See the extensive feature list that the OpenBeOS kernel has. Here's something to notice if you're aiming for the desktop world: Linux has USB support, FireWire support, SCSI support, support for most sound cards/video cards (often accelerated), and -- how revolutionary! -- TCP/IP networking.
Have fun with OpenBeOS. I'll be using my alpha-bleneded anti-aliased 1600x1200 desktop.
If they are happy with Linux and still wish to use Windows for the odd game then take a look at VMWare
VMware? For gaming?
<uncontrollable laughter>
Have you actually used VMware for gaming? I have a dual P3 1.0 GHz with 1 GB of RAM and a GeForce 4 Ti 4400. SubSpace/Continuum, an old-school two-dimensional space shooter (easily gets 60 FPS on a Pentium II), peaked at 24 FPS on the above box under Windows 2000 inside VMware under Linux. And that's running at 640x480x8 with sound disabled. No way are you going to play Doom 3 inside VMware.
Or, if the ebuild still doesn't provide enough customization, I can just manually remove a config option (say, --enable-xsl) and "emerge mozilla" to get exactly what I want.
The problem with the IDE market is that everyone and their grandma uses IDE disks, so it doesn't matter which drive is more reliable; people buy whatever is cheap, and manufacturers have no economic reason to invest in making their drives last longer than 2-4 years.
If you want reliability, grab a nice high-end 10,000 RPM SCSI disk. Actually, pretty much any SCSI disk will do -- I've got a set of Seagate 'cudas that have been spinning for eight years and are still spinning as I write this. I also picked up a dual-133 IBM box at an auction a few years ago that's also running SCSI. It's a great little file server, and as far as I know it still has the original hard drives (from back in the day when dual-133 was cool).
Remember: the server market is designed for reliability. Grab an HPaq Proliant or some other box designed for the datacenter. Yes, they're far more expensive than workstation models with similar specifications, but they aren't going to break any time soon.
You get what you pay for.
Re:Latest trend: sliding thingies
on
Zaurus 5600 Announced
·
· Score: 4, Informative
The Zaurus includes a "software" keyboard (actually, several different types) if you so prefer.
See page 34 of the Zaurus SL-5500 user guide (sharp-usa.com is now offline, hence the Google translation).
"What Unix distributions do you run on your own systems?" Dave provides a very geeky answer--his Apple PowerBook G4 is running Mac OS X (with Darwin as its core, of course), along with a PC running Windows 2000, Linux Mandrake 8.1, and a web server running Red Hat Linux 7.2--a varied assortment that shows Dave puts the author in authority.
Since when does Windows 2000 count as a Unix distribution, and how does running an assortment of operating systems make him an authority?
Yes; most symmetric ciphers are faster than pubkey ciphers. Public key encryption is used only in key exchange for most protocols, SSL included.
Then again, if you're going to hook up countless tiny antennas to a big fat DSP, there's no reason you couldn't use public key crypto in realtime. But, symmetric cryptography is easier computationally and just as secure, hence the reason most engineers choose to swap keys and change cryptosystems as soon as possible.
Everyone knows the main problem with Wi-Fi: Security. It's relatively easy for intruders to sniff packets out of the air and even connect to the wireless net. While most wireless companies have responded by trying to beef up the encryption, smart people a long time ago developed a device called a "network cable". This means no energy leaking through walls, and no extra precautions necessary to block it from exiting through windows. The cables can be laid so that several networks can be co-located in the same physical space.
It's been done, okay? If you're going to carefully aim IR antennas and put up filters on windows, just lay some Cat-5 already. It's cheaper, faster, and more secure.
True, but when Linux freezes it's usually my fault and I am well aware of the fact that I'm might make it freeze. (Then again, I've gotten Windows 2000 to give me a STOP error with a Mozilla nightly and 30,000 nested HTML tables, so maybe I'm just special.)
But, as you pointed out, it's rarely catastropic enough to stop the system logger or sshd from running.
6Mb binary registry file
A 6 MB registry file? Under Windows 2000? I did a clean install last weekend, installed a service pack and a few drivers, and found it was already 8 MB. Lucky.;-)
Read the article; it's not on SCSI bus. It's a PCI card with an external power supply that acts like a regular hard drive and persists data between boots.
A DRAM "drive" suffers the fundemental problem that if the "external" power source is lost, you lose everything on the drive.
This raises the question as to why they didn't integrate a rechargable battery, sort of like an internal UPS, that would take system power when available and then give just enough juice to keep the RAM powered for, say, 24 hours of downtime. Such a drive would only really be useful in a high-performance server anyway, which is likely not to have 24 hours without power.
A RAID 0 stripe across 2 ATA drives could give you this same performance for about 1/4 the price without the power issue.
Yes, but then you have other issues -- heat, noise, and moving parts. Hard drives are far more prone to hardware failure than RAM is.
Right; this isn't exactly "way out there" kind of technology as "Of the Future" would imply. I know of a high-performance web server that's being deployed in less than a week that uses one of these.
That is, unless all the root servers mysteriously die one day. That would make surfing for your pr0n a thing of near impossibility.
Actually, some systems (most notably Freenet ) are designed to withstand massive amounts of infrastructure failure. Freenet does not require DNS to work; if IP routing is still happening, Freenet will continue to function. There have been experiments with FNP (Freenet Native Protocol) over private fiber, point-to-point serial links, and even amateur radio, allowing worldwide communication despite all of the Tier 1 ISPs closing their doors.
In short, Freenet would let you get your pr0n -- electronically and anonymously -- even if the entire Internet imploded.
Slashdot Mirror
Freenet currently uses DNS for nodes configured to do so (namely dynamic DNS types). But, with recent discussion on freenet-devl, either address resolution keys will be implemented (meaning DNS-like resolution in Freenet) or IP address discovery will be integrated into the announcement protocol, negating the need for DNS either way.
So, bottom line is: Freenet relies on DNS some of the time right now, but will not by the 0.5.1 release which is due shortly. In the case of DNS failure, however, the current infrastructure would still work -- heck, Freenet 0.3 would still work. (Sorta...)
Actually, client operating system licenses is the way they lose money the fastest. See this document (on Slashdot not long ago), page nine: client operating systems lost $800 million, servers lost $200 million, and productivity apps (Office, Visio, Project, Sharepoint) lost $400 million.
I've written some TSRs, but that's not multitasking per se. You could latch onto a timer interrupt (which is how most multitasking works nowadays), but DOS itself did not support this. In fact, if you were to do this, you would have to go to extra measures to hide your existence from DOS, so it's not really part of the operating system. Besides which, under *nix, I can start some long command, interrupt it, run a short command, and resume the long command again. Or, I can tell things to launch in the background. Or, I can tell program A to output into program B (pipes) which outputs into parameters for program C (via `xargs`) which sends to a file D but e-mails a report of all error messages it receives to an arbitrary address... and have all of that run in the background. Try that in DOS.
DOSKEY shipped with DOS 5.0 but was not directly part of either the 'kernel' (if you can call it that) or the shell. Hence, I do not include it under the DOS umbrella.
I stand by my point that batch files suck. With *nix, I can wade through 4 GB of last week's log files looking for a line that matches a particular regular expression scattered across 36 separate machines without leaving my prompt. Shell scripting is even more powerful.
Yes, but can you see what you typed two lines ago?
(Without wating 40 or so of your precious 640 KB on a TSR like 'doskey', that is.)
The DOS command line sucks. It has a handful of useful features (pipes, output redirection, etc.), but does them poorly, since it lacks multi-tasking. Furthermore, batch files suck. Quoting sucks, no command line history, horrible inconsistency on intrinsic commands versus separate executables, and so forth.
./configure scripts and even a package management system -- can be done using shell scripts.
Guess what? The DOS command line is a stripped down, sodomized version of most *nix shells. If you liked DOS, install your favorite UNIX variant, and try out bash. (Feel free to use ksh or csh to your liking.) You get pipes that work in parallel, input and output redirection (plus separating stdout and stderr), wildcard expansion, tab completion, and a consistent quoting syntax. Also, very complicated pieces of software -- including
DOS is well and good, but it's a poor substitute for a Real Command Line (TM).
As others have said, support is close at hand with the community of both users and developers.
As the primary author behind an open-source school administrative package, I understand this situation, and I understand that if something breaks someone will need to know what's going on. That is why I have the support policy that I do -- if someone is using LISSARD (the aformentioned software), they can go through the normal channels (mailing lists, etc.) in case of a problem or they can talk to me directly by phone, even at home.
No, it's not a promise of 24x7 support. But, remember that you're not dealing with trained monkeys on the other end of an 800 number, but rather someone that no only knows what's going on but why it happens that way and knows the situation backwards and forwards. In the end, my open-source project has better support than any of the other commercial offerings, because a resolution is reached within minutes rather than hours or (in some cases) weeks.
One more thing: the support contract never needs renewing. I will help whoever is using my software, because I know what it's like to be totally ignored.
Have fun with OpenBeOS. I'll be using my alpha-bleneded anti-aliased 1600x1200 desktop.
<uncontrollable laughter>
Have you actually used VMware for gaming? I have a dual P3 1.0 GHz with 1 GB of RAM and a GeForce 4 Ti 4400. SubSpace/Continuum, an old-school two-dimensional space shooter (easily gets 60 FPS on a Pentium II), peaked at 24 FPS on the above box under Windows 2000 inside VMware under Linux. And that's running at 640x480x8 with sound disabled. No way are you going to play Doom 3 inside VMware.
The problem with the IDE market is that everyone and their grandma uses IDE disks, so it doesn't matter which drive is more reliable; people buy whatever is cheap, and manufacturers have no economic reason to invest in making their drives last longer than 2-4 years.
If you want reliability, grab a nice high-end 10,000 RPM SCSI disk. Actually, pretty much any SCSI disk will do -- I've got a set of Seagate 'cudas that have been spinning for eight years and are still spinning as I write this. I also picked up a dual-133 IBM box at an auction a few years ago that's also running SCSI. It's a great little file server, and as far as I know it still has the original hard drives (from back in the day when dual-133 was cool).
Remember: the server market is designed for reliability. Grab an HPaq Proliant or some other box designed for the datacenter. Yes, they're far more expensive than workstation models with similar specifications, but they aren't going to break any time soon.
You get what you pay for.
The Zaurus includes a "software" keyboard (actually, several different types) if you so prefer.
See page 34 of the Zaurus SL-5500 user guide (sharp-usa.com is now offline, hence the Google translation).
If the 5600 is the same size as the 5500, then it's likely 240x320, but then I can't explain the second part...
Yes; most symmetric ciphers are faster than pubkey ciphers. Public key encryption is used only in key exchange for most protocols, SSL included.
Then again, if you're going to hook up countless tiny antennas to a big fat DSP, there's no reason you couldn't use public key crypto in realtime. But, symmetric cryptography is easier computationally and just as secure, hence the reason most engineers choose to swap keys and change cryptosystems as soon as possible.
Everyone knows the main problem with Wi-Fi: Security. It's relatively easy for intruders to sniff packets out of the air and even connect to the wireless net. While most wireless companies have responded by trying to beef up the encryption, smart people a long time ago developed a device called a "network cable". This means no energy leaking through walls, and no extra precautions necessary to block it from exiting through windows. The cables can be laid so that several networks can be co-located in the same physical space.
It's been done, okay? If you're going to carefully aim IR antennas and put up filters on windows, just lay some Cat-5 already. It's cheaper, faster, and more secure.
But, as you pointed out, it's rarely catastropic enough to stop the system logger or sshd from running.
A 6 MB registry file? Under Windows 2000? I did a clean install last weekend, installed a service pack and a few drivers, and found it was already 8 MB. Lucky.
Read the article; it's not on SCSI bus. It's a PCI card with an external power supply that acts like a regular hard drive and persists data between boots.
Yes, but then you have other issues -- heat, noise, and moving parts. Hard drives are far more prone to hardware failure than RAM is.
Right; this isn't exactly "way out there" kind of technology as "Of the Future" would imply. I know of a high-performance web server that's being deployed in less than a week that uses one of these.
The official website lists the capacity as 4 GB.
In short, Freenet would let you get your pr0n -- electronically and anonymously -- even if the entire Internet imploded.
Does anyone know which shuttle's engines will be tested?