Bad news, pyros: of the 200-odd major spammers who account for 90%+ of the world's spam, most are US-based. They are only routing their... um... product... through offshore servers to avoid detection. See the ROKSO list at SpamHaus.org.
Very simple. Tell your friends there's a meeting to form a computer club. Set time and place. Show up.
1) It wouldn't hurt to have the meeting where there are some computers.:) This can be at school or somebody's house. If it's at school you'll probably need permission of one of the Computer teachers -- shouldn't be too hard to get.
But on the other hand, the first meeting might also be just a brainstorming session, no computers required -- decide what you and the others want to have the club do, pick a teacher to target as advisor, maybe write up a simple proposal ("We think there should be a computer club because... and it will do X, Y, and Z... and it won't cost the school a penny" -- be sure to add that last point.:) )
2) Talk it up among your friends and have them do the same. If you want to retain some control, have the meeting with people you know; if you want a bigger club, paper the hallways with notices about the first meeting and try to avoid conflicts in time with (say) Chess Club meetings.:)
A Beowulf cluster of these has already been created. For evidence, see Star Trek (TOS) "Devil in the Dark" -- the silicon-based tunneling life form, aka the Pizza Monster. The silver ones look just like the eggs...
They're working for a famously obsessive scientist who just finished reaming them out about having to be sure of everything because they are choosing a planet to be utterly obliterated and reconstructed on the subatomic level.
and
Very very bad people here" IFF* on permanent repeat and designed to be unreachable/unmodifiable by Khan's crew.
Valid points, particularly the IFF. They've used those before. On the other hand, was Kirk expecting that the Federation would never hear from those people again on their own initiative?
But, like a said before, an orbit that elliptical would result in a planet being completely unable to support human life. Khan and his posse survived on Ceti Alpha 5 for decades post-explosion.
Khan and kin were genetically-engineered superbeings. With that, the technological assistance of the ship they landed in, and time to adapt, I have no problem thinking they could have survived. The race wouldn't have survived -- in fact they were dying out, and there was no upcoming generation (think: "Khan: Generations":) ) -- but Khan and crew were hanging on by their fingernails.
In the long term the planet could not have supported human life. But at the start of this time period, it was an Eden. Khan would have had plenty of resources built up, a comfortable life going, when the drakh hit the fan. The planet didn't suddenly become uninhabitable, either -- it would die over a period of time, shedding its heat and killing its ecosphere over months or years -- giving intelligent beings a chance to adapt.
Given the number of solar systems in the known galaxy, the number of starships visiting those solar systems, and the probability that an event like this is going to occur, I'd say fairly regularly.
Sorry, but you are exhibiting a confusion about the use of statistics. Just because it happens somewhere throughout the fleet on an occasional basis (hardly regularly, though! I think you overestimate the chances of this event; it's happened once [that we know of] in this solar system in the last 4 billion years), that doesn't mean it's ever going to happen to any one individual ship. And after those 50 visits per year, times umpty-ump years, with nothing happening, don't you think SOP might be altered to do the verification while the mission is going on, rather than waiting? That's a hell of a lot of wasted time keeping your expensive starships idle, even if you only have to hang out for a few minutes each. (Which, I may reiterate, doesn't actually happen when we've seen any starship arrive at a known destimation, only when they are charting new systems.)
Oh, come on now: they didn't do anything as low-tech as "count", either inwards or outwards. The computer had all the old orbital details of the original set of planets and said "6 should be about _here_"; they went "there" and found a planet (5's orbit being more elliptical, now extending out as far as 6's used to be, and they were unlucky enough to find 5 in a place that would be reasonable for 6) and didn't do any more checking.
Think about it. They zoom up to a solar system and bang, they're at the planet. How much time would they have to stop and stand there to watch which way the planets are going to calculate new orbits?
How often would they find any situation in which that would give them any surprises? Extremely rarely, right? Certainly not enough to justify the effort slowing down the start of their mission... although one of the automatic side operations might be to reverify all the orbits while they're there doing their business, just for accuracy's sake.
It does bug me that the planets would have to be practically twins for somebody not to notice a change in the mass, composition, number of moons, rings, etc., etc. A calamity like that might well change how many moons a planet had -- shake some loose or add some fragments. And forget about rings.
Instead of making ourselves look mature and putting out a decent game
Oh, you mean something like Doom? Massively mature. Incredibly. [crowd gives half-hearted "whoopee" backed by raspberries]
Stuff like this really shows the immaturity of some of the linux community.
For crying out loud. Is the word "fun" supposed to be the antithesis of "mature"? If they get a kick out of it, let 'em start small. Whatever it takes to get somebody using Linux, seeing how it works, is fine. Or think of it as something that the kids can play with when the adults aren't doing the actual hacking. Don't forget how popular FreeCell was -- that game alone made lots of people want to upgrade from Win 3.1.
I kept picturing the now crewless destroyer with its still perfectly functioning engines motoring around in a big circle out in the middle of the Pacific.
Hey... didn't you know the Navy wants its own version of the Air Force's Unmanned Aerial Vehicle?:)
The whole ship won't take 100 gees. Only the section near the blast. That section will tend to absorb the energy and less force will propagate outwards. I'd imagine that on a large ship, a 100G hit at one end might feel only like a Richter 5 or 6 earthquake at the other, maybe even less for something the size of an aircraft carrier. But if the computer is not actually punctured by shrapnel they want it to keep working.
I'll admit that at a 100 gee level, it does seem like there will be more significant problems than a computer failure.:) But if the computer is a single point of failure for major systems, you want to have it as protected as possible. And I don't know the tolerances of other objects nearby; maybe they are also fairly rugged.
100G's of shock and vibration... sounds damn extreme to me
Obviously you weren't on the ship when it got hit by a torpedo. I don't know about you, but if something like that happens to me, I don't want my billion dollar boat knocked out by one cheap shot, just 'cause the computers don't work any more.
The significance of this is as a milestone: by their own admission, MS can never again be considered the ONLY choice.
I'll admit I lean Linuxward. But I don't require that MS die, be ground to ashes, and be scattered across the moons of Pluto. All I want is a fair playing field, and genuine competition. No "I win because it's my ball." No "embrace, extend, take over." Just "Whoever has the best product for the job gets the contract, ready, set, GO!"
I submit that Linux has improved markedly during the years that they suddenly realized they were competing against Microsoft: we got richer desktops, a more complete SAMBA package, performance improvements in networking and SMP, etc., etc., as a direct result of trying to catch up with the front lines of competition. Way to go, folks! [insert applause.wav here] Three cheers. Because now there is competition, and MS now has to pay attention to what Linux is doing in return.
To me that is the ultimate compliment. It means Linux has achieved its most significant goal: MS can't just do whatever it wants in the future. They also have to react to what the rest of the world thinks. MS and Linux can't help but both benefit from this kind of competitiveness. And the real winners will be the computer-using public.
Some things are worth taking a stand on. Microsoft will never get my credit card number in any way, shape, or form.
If that's a manifesto, so be it. But after the stupid, insulting things they've pulled in this antitrust trial, their arguments about how "national security" would be set at risk if their source code were exposed, and their very clear intention to eventually dominate everything having to do with computers, I see no reason to support them.
A prior post mentioned Robert Cringley's articles; I found them less enlightening than one of the things he linked to, a FAQ on Palladium and TCPA that clearly and logically explains the positive and negative effects of the system. An excellent resource to point your underinformed purchasing manager or congresscritter to.
I wouldn't think so. No shared nothin', at least not all the way across the enterprise. Replicated. Propagated. Parellelized. Copied to hell and gone.
Two reasons: performance and redundancy. You could conceivably buy a disk array that would handle the load... but why would you want to? Cost a fortune. Get you nothing that one file server / datastore per dozen/hundred machines wouldn't, and duplicating the data's a lot more likely to not have a single point of failure. Think of the bandwidth that'd have to be going to and from that disk store -- keeping in mind that that number's significantly greater than the bandwidth going in and out from the external interface of the site itself. Also don't neglect the amount of bandwidth use instigated by the webcrawling they have to do. Scary numbers if you try to put them down one pipe... any one pipe.
Watchword of the industry these days: "disk is cheap."
Do you realize that for the past two months (or however long she's been missing) it's been on the news almost every day in Milwaukee?
I am not from Milwaukee. I have never heard of Alexis Patterson.
I am also not from Salt Lake City. Nonetheless, I have heard of Elizabeth Smart.
I don't agree with everything Mr Katz says. (Actually, that's an understatement.) But if you think the amounts of media coverage these cases are getting are similar, you are insane.
Re:Shoud we care about desktop linux?
on
Is Linux Dead?
·
· Score: 1
You seem to be ignoring the fact that if an e-mail says
"You need to allow BritneySpearsNaked.exe to run as root (just enter your password) to see the movie!" that many users will do it. Linux's no-virus feature relies on the users being intelligent, which many normal users aren't.
Go on. Send that.exe to a bunch of Linux users. See how many have the facilities to run it as-is.:)
Then watch how many of them try to find some way to pick apart the.exe so they can safely see the movie.:)
Skew the respondent audience by making it a web survey
Spin the questions and couch them in terms with multiple interpretations... and call it a valid representation. Check the so-called survey results... there is just short of zero (and I'm being generous) information about how this study was conducted.
I have downloaded copyrighted software and not paid for it. Was it illegal? No -- it was "free for personal use" (e.g. WebWasher.) You know how guilty I feel about that? Not at all -- until now. Now, I feel terrible, because I helped the BSA fudge better numbers by fitting into that 57%.
Slashdot Mirror
Bad news, pyros: of the 200-odd major spammers who account for 90%+ of the world's spam, most are US-based. They are only routing their... um... product... through offshore servers to avoid detection. See the ROKSO list at SpamHaus.org.
1) It wouldn't hurt to have the meeting where there are some computers. :) This can be at school or somebody's house. If it's at school you'll probably need permission of one of the Computer teachers -- shouldn't be too hard to get.
But on the other hand, the first meeting might also be just a brainstorming session, no computers required -- decide what you and the others want to have the club do, pick a teacher to target as advisor, maybe write up a simple proposal ("We think there should be a computer club because... and it will do X, Y, and Z... and it won't cost the school a penny" -- be sure to add that last point. :) )
2) Talk it up among your friends and have them do the same. If you want to retain some control, have the meeting with people you know; if you want a bigger club, paper the hallways with notices about the first meeting and try to avoid conflicts in time with (say) Chess Club meetings. :)
Just Do It isn't such a bad slogan.
...and if it works, I might retire. :)
Low self-esteem? Learn some self-defense. A little athleticism and a little self-confidence will do wonderful things.
A Beowulf cluster of these has already been created. For evidence, see Star Trek (TOS) "Devil in the Dark" -- the silicon-based tunneling life form, aka the Pizza Monster. The silver ones look just like the eggs...
In the long term the planet could not have supported human life. But at the start of this time period, it was an Eden. Khan would have had plenty of resources built up, a comfortable life going, when the drakh hit the fan. The planet didn't suddenly become uninhabitable, either -- it would die over a period of time, shedding its heat and killing its ecosphere over months or years -- giving intelligent beings a chance to adapt.
Sorry, but you are exhibiting a confusion about the use of statistics. Just because it happens somewhere throughout the fleet on an occasional basis (hardly regularly, though! I think you overestimate the chances of this event; it's happened once [that we know of] in this solar system in the last 4 billion years), that doesn't mean it's ever going to happen to any one individual ship. And after those 50 visits per year, times umpty-ump years, with nothing happening, don't you think SOP might be altered to do the verification while the mission is going on, rather than waiting? That's a hell of a lot of wasted time keeping your expensive starships idle, even if you only have to hang out for a few minutes each. (Which, I may reiterate, doesn't actually happen when we've seen any starship arrive at a known destimation, only when they are charting new systems.)Think about it. They zoom up to a solar system and bang, they're at the planet. How much time would they have to stop and stand there to watch which way the planets are going to calculate new orbits?
How often would they find any situation in which that would give them any surprises? Extremely rarely, right? Certainly not enough to justify the effort slowing down the start of their mission... although one of the automatic side operations might be to reverify all the orbits while they're there doing their business, just for accuracy's sake.
It does bug me that the planets would have to be practically twins for somebody not to notice a change in the mass, composition, number of moons, rings, etc., etc. A calamity like that might well change how many moons a planet had -- shake some loose or add some fragments. And forget about rings.
... is here, since the site is refusing connections.
The whole ship won't take 100 gees. Only the section near the blast. That section will tend to absorb the energy and less force will propagate outwards. I'd imagine that on a large ship, a 100G hit at one end might feel only like a Richter 5 or 6 earthquake at the other, maybe even less for something the size of an aircraft carrier. But if the computer is not actually punctured by shrapnel they want it to keep working.
I'll admit that at a 100 gee level, it does seem like there will be more significant problems than a computer failure. :) But if the computer is a single point of failure for major systems, you want to have it as protected as possible. And I don't know the tolerances of other objects nearby; maybe they are also fairly rugged.
Waitaminnit... a company named for an Isaac Asimov book? Seems like an infringement to me...
God was knocking, and he wanted in bad.
The significance of this is as a milestone: by their own admission, MS can never again be considered the ONLY choice.
I'll admit I lean Linuxward. But I don't require that MS die, be ground to ashes, and be scattered across the moons of Pluto. All I want is a fair playing field, and genuine competition. No "I win because it's my ball." No "embrace, extend, take over." Just "Whoever has the best product for the job gets the contract, ready, set, GO!"
I submit that Linux has improved markedly during the years that they suddenly realized they were competing against Microsoft: we got richer desktops, a more complete SAMBA package, performance improvements in networking and SMP, etc., etc., as a direct result of trying to catch up with the front lines of competition. Way to go, folks! [insert applause.wav here] Three cheers. Because now there is competition, and MS now has to pay attention to what Linux is doing in return.
To me that is the ultimate compliment. It means Linux has achieved its most significant goal: MS can't just do whatever it wants in the future. They also have to react to what the rest of the world thinks. MS and Linux can't help but both benefit from this kind of competitiveness. And the real winners will be the computer-using public.
If that's a manifesto, so be it. But after the stupid, insulting things they've pulled in this antitrust trial, their arguments about how "national security" would be set at risk if their source code were exposed, and their very clear intention to eventually dominate everything having to do with computers, I see no reason to support them.
C'mon, Judge Kollar-Kotelly, make me proud. :)
Two reasons: performance and redundancy. You could conceivably buy a disk array that would handle the load... but why would you want to? Cost a fortune. Get you nothing that one file server / datastore per dozen/hundred machines wouldn't, and duplicating the data's a lot more likely to not have a single point of failure. Think of the bandwidth that'd have to be going to and from that disk store -- keeping in mind that that number's significantly greater than the bandwidth going in and out from the external interface of the site itself. Also don't neglect the amount of bandwidth use instigated by the webcrawling they have to do. Scary numbers if you try to put them down one pipe... any one pipe.
Watchword of the industry these days: "disk is cheap."
I am also not from Salt Lake City. Nonetheless, I have heard of Elizabeth Smart.
I don't agree with everything Mr Katz says. (Actually, that's an understatement.) But if you think the amounts of media coverage these cases are getting are similar, you are insane.
Then watch how many of them try to find some way to pick apart the .exe so they can safely see the movie. :)
Skew the respondent audience by making it a web survey
Spin the questions and couch them in terms with multiple interpretations ... and call it a valid representation. Check the so-called survey results... there is just short of zero (and I'm being generous) information about how this study was conducted.
I have downloaded copyrighted software and not paid for it. Was it illegal? No -- it was "free for personal use" (e.g. WebWasher.) You know how guilty I feel about that? Not at all -- until now. Now, I feel terrible, because I helped the BSA fudge better numbers by fitting into that 57%.
Jackasses.
Just send me one copy of everything they put out.