Those who seek to "loose controls" would have musicians receive no payment in exchange for recorded music. Isn't that the essence of slavery?
No, it is not. Nobody is working to make copyrighted music free. They are fighting so that people can share files. What people share or not it's a personal decision. If you have an illegal mp3, that's a personal choice you've made.
Should music be free? Maybe. As long there's a decent revenue model for Artists to get rewarded. For example, Radio Broadcasts are free but Artits profit from them.
I just donated $35 from they main website. I did it by credit card but you can also use PayPal and numerous other methods.
Check to see if you work or worked for a company that would honor match employees donations (ie: if you donate $30 they will donate $30 more).
It's about time the users of the Internet start defending their principles. We are always depending on good luck and fortune in this regard. I urge people to take an active role on this matter before it's too late.
They may not even know what ports they should filter. Remember that. Everything could be encripted if we really wanted. The connection and what is transmitted.
The only way of monitoring would be to passive search all day. But bsically, searches could DES encripted.
For example i want to search for maddona's new album. Search: maddona album_name songname
And it would send the string as "DF$DFFDF%F HJFJGS&SD&S DSHDGSD**".
Now they don't even know what people are seraching for. And the seach base (ie: the names of file names in my PC) could also be encrypted. Say if have the file:
madonna_new_song-album.mp3 then the file name could become DES encripted.
If a file matches, i can request the unencripted plain text of the file to the owning Peer.
Ok, it would add (a lot of) overhead and also limit to word matching (no substring matching). But how can you stop it? How can an ISP be responsible if they don't know what is going through?
First you need to trust the peer. Second, that peer need to be online for hours. Third, not everyone has the bandwith to do distro sharing. Forth, it's a known product with high quality ftp sites for downloading with a lot of known mirrors. And last, the % of people needing new distros is really small relative to the gnutella network.
The benefits of p2p are outnumbered by the disadvantages in this case?
Why not charge the air? So the Air copyright holder could promote clean air and shutdown offending tree and the cigarette producers.
They may also develop richer air which, for a profit, everyone could have.
Come on...profit is powerfull, but must be used wisely. An musician earns like $1 from a CD and Joe has to pay $18. Something is wrong. Someone is profiting the wrong way.
Doesn't that tell you something about interoperability? In the begining the were all kind of high quality import and _export_ functions in Office (to WordPerfect, Quatro Pro, 123, DBF, etc.). Now you can't export anything. But the import filters work pretty well and are up to date.
Everything Microsoftish is compatible and has a lot of Interoperability as long as you are moving into Windows and not out. Once you are in, you better not try to move to something else. The path will just have banished and you will have to stay at the Microsoft's coast of the river.
Now they just need to kill Internet standards...and they are working on it hard. Everything is compatible if you are moving to Explorer, VB, ASP or MS.Net. But everyone will soon realize they can't swim back an ocean to get to the other coast.
First question: are you a troll? It seems so but...if you where sincere, then apologies and read my reply:
We've bastardized those laws to the point where they're just legal protection for companies that can no longer compete in a market.
If they win in a free market, that's ok. Let the competitors go bankrupt.
Now, I would say a company producing, for example, a Web Browser has a bussiness. If they make a really great product, they can earn money and reinvest.
Now, Explorer 3 was charged $29 and Netscape $39 at the time. And nobody wanted Explorer, it was crappy. Now Microsoft saw that they could control the web if they could control the brower. What's the easiest way? Integrate it with the OS you are just developing, make it run fast. Your competitor will have to release it free or nobody would buy it (you can't run Netscape without Windows, but you can run Windows without Netscape).
Now Netscape income: $0
Microsoft Income: the OS
End of story, Netscape can't improve the product, they can't interate it and they can't know the new quirks of the upcoming OS until it is realeased. They just can't compete. So obviosly Exporer is now the best browser arround. It's a multihundredbillion company against a company that has NO INCOME AT ALL and also that play with the "bundled disadvantage".
Now, from the consumer point of view EX POST, i can attest Explorer is a better browser now. Does that mean the consumer is the winner here? You either use Explorer or mostly everything will be incompatible. If Microsoft decides to charge for Explorer in 2002, what would you do? I am pretty sure you'll have no choice but to pay or get segregated. They pussed the browser Monopoly with the OS Monopoly.
Follow that line with every product Microsoft releases for free and you get the point: i bundle it with the OS for "free", kill everyone and then I have an asset i can exploit for money or go for other markets (why turn all profits now and expose us? Let's better control more industries and make the consumer think we are on their side).
Open Source is the only thing fighting the Monopoly, because it's mainly a moral thing. I could use Windows and Office as it came bundled with my Laptop. But i use Abiword and Gnumeric, and those are not an inch better than MS Office.
No company can pose a threat to the Microsoft's monopoly. There's no money to be made when a sinlge company can decide what runs well or not in 90% of the worlds computers. Also, they control what products" are free and when.
Then you are left with no choice but to compete in the OS market. But Microsoft has the OEM market by the balls (Letter from Microsoft: "Dear Mr. OEM, 90% of the people want Windows. Now be nice to me it will cost you a LOT of money").
You can only hope to make a product so small Microsoft won't go for it (yet). That's just about it.
And now, it's not about software anymore. It's about business. Microsoft.Net is about companies, services and the Economy.
And once they are granted the right to control protocols and standard (turning the propietary) then you'll really find yourself with no other choice but to surrender to Microsoft.
Bottom line: i don't want a crappy Netscape, i don't want a crappy Windows Trumpet, I don't want a crappy Novell and I don't want an expensive Sun (unless for free). But i also don't want Microsoft to kill thouthands of decent companies by means of leveraging their monopoly until there are the only folks arround and i am left with no choice. Also, I don't want them to ask me to compare the product EX POST, when they have killed their competitors source of income.
It's a moral thing and I will try to be on the right road (for as long as i can without definetly hurting my business. Ie: until they get to control everything).
A Monopoly is a Monopoly. And a Monopoly is Anti-Capitalist and Anti-American, no matter how that position was achieved. It's very easy to probe if Microsoft is running a Monopoly.
If you care for your economy you should start defending it, because it has some basic rules that are not being met. And guess what? And if the DoJ thinks they "building" a US Monopoly to rule the software world market then they are wrong.
The US is the most developed and computer intensive country and it depends on innovation and on possible reward. As it is today, all the rewards are blong to Bill. He owns the Desktop, he owns you document, he owns the tools you use to get your job done.
And next thing is to control the tools you use to run a bussiness. This alone is the biggest threat to you lovely free economy.
If I see something that doesn't have a package, I usually compile it and make it in to a package.
How do you do that in an easy way. I tried to do that for glibc 2.2.4 (vs the stock 2.2.3 slack 8 that has regexp somewhat broken) and it would have been a mess...
It's not like you use a prefix and then tar.gz it properly. For example, glibc install in slackware has a nice lib-copy feature and you'll need to manually edit the install.sh, etc. Or php which hardcodes the path used in --prefix=[whatever] for some of it's related scripts.
Plz answer me at fferreresPLZ@DONT-SPAMarrancar.com as i wish to help with packaging for slackware.
The fact is you are reading or writing this because nobody used nukes after many countries had some of them. Manking is not getting better. If japan had some nukes then...
The fact that we are alive after 40 years of nukeability doesn't mean we are gonna live much longer. The very second something goes wrong we are all dead. So do sit and be confortable with our "stats".
earth> uptime
Manking Uptime after Nukes: 40 years.
earth> shutdown -r now
file not found
earth>
My own thinking is that we want to ensure that the development of defensive measures outpaces the development of offensive weapons.
Thanks a double edge solution. The Antrax in the mail seems to be of the same "breed" as the Antrax being used for research projects (meaning the defense measures enpower the offensive weapons).
Likewise, attack and defense can be diferent in scope. For example, what is the defense agaist nuclear weapons? There's almost no defense. You either control the radioactive material and send spies all over the world and kill whoever is trying to build a bomb. If it's a reasonable enemy you can biudl some atomics yourself so that they don't use them against you.
Defense is such a broad task that you cannot grasp it's scope beforehand. It may have nothing to do with the technology. Also limiting or regulating nanotech is like regulating light speed spaceships. None of those will exist in the near future! But once you achieve near light speed for a ship, what would happen if it colides with the earth at full speed?
Oh, fast ships are lethal weapons....oh nanotech is dangerous. What makes nanotech interesting is the phychological fact that you CAN'T SEE IT and thus the US can't bomb it out of earth like Afganistan.
things caught in the background of a photo that were only discovered on later examination...
1) You have videos for that. You can't delete frames and they have proven to be more "later discovery" prolific. In fact, digital can capture more because 90% of the priceless records are the ones NEVER recorded because to few shots where taken. Now digital solves that because you probably fire 200 shots instead of 2. And 90% of the hidden perls are find on first examinations.
2) Also, by the year 3001 none of your stupid papers is going to survive and digital photos will remain 100% accurate.
Your last paragraph is simple put, stupid and the argument false. You could instead argue that we need all cameras to support the same formats and not propietary ones, but that's simply what they do.
---
Re:Ternary has been known to be efficient...
on
Ternary Computing
·
· Score: 1
>The fact that fewer transistors are required to >achieve the same work (despite the fact that there >are more transistors per gate) will INCREASE the >yields. This DECREASES costs.
Fewer transistors would increase yields if the cost of producing each transistor were equal. And how can it decrease costs?
Even in the unexpected that costs of producing both transistors are equal, you'll only get increased yields and not reduced costs.
How in hell did your post get modded up? Simple: the same way yours did.
So? That's life not Open Source. That can happen in your family, your company and can happen to Bill Gates. Or do you think they never lose leaders who know well what they do?
Also, this has happened before for Linux for example in the TCP/IP stack where Linus had to choose and the other guy would fade...
The important thing to keep in mind is that Linus / Alan / Whoever need to choose what's best for the Kernel now while not compomising the kernel's future.
It is also important for what we do with Linux. We need sshd to live. If the VM kills any needed daemon plus sshd, then we are pretty much screwed because we are 10000 miles away from the server and support is expensive and not time-friendly.
I'd love to mark ssh and inetd as not-killable. Just kill mysql, sendmail and httpd but leave those alone! (maybe it'd be good to have the killing notified/var/messages so i can send me an email).
In the past you probably needed a relative swap/ram ratio. Not, it really depends on the case.
If you usually "touch" the swap partitions you can do well with 120mb swap. If you run a big webserver then you need a lot of swap just in case (it can't hurt). If you reach the post where it's not uncommon to need that load of swap, then you need more ram!
In the end, how big your swap must be depends on what you are using the machine for. On a 1 GB Linux system for desktop use you can leave it with NO swap at all.
Yeah. Now you'd hire a programmer to redesign printed media as well. After all, how and where things go and interact does not matter. What matters is that the code is writen by a software professional.
I trully believe the web need good programers, good interface designers, a lot of usability testing. It's different to a software proyect. It's beyond a software proyect scope.
That doesn't mean you don't need good programmers and a clear view of what and how things can be done. But certainly a web site is NOT a software project.
I'll agree in that you need a team that know about the web and not about "generic stuff". You need to know the WEB. WEB Programers, interface designers for WEB projects and a project leader that knows what he is doing and why.
TCP/IP is a standard and although not 100% of it's breeds are 100% standard compliant you can't say TCP/IP is not working for you.
Also, HTML is a standard and that's why you can read any HTML. If it was a Microsoft invention you'd now be using IE even if you didn't want it to.
Now, the standards EVOVE...
If they evolve BEFORE implementation you may find you don't yet want to support that features yet. After some time it may be usable when 80% of the software has been updated.
If they evolve AFTER implementation, then it means the are "putting on paper" features that (in this case) the standard browers have (IE, Mozilla). And you'll argue "damn, i have to code differently for diferent browser. Why don't they do things the same way?!". That leads you to the last paragraph.
In practice, you try to accomodate 80% of the browers or hurt the user experience and reach everyone. And of course you won't care about testing your site with the W3C tools (Users run browsers not testing tools).
Common sense can't be bought nor learned. Common sense can only be copied for a specific situtation. As soon as something changes a bit, that guy is back his "nonsense" world and has to read another "common sense" book.
And that's how things work for most companies! The look at your CV to learn what courses you where in (copied common sense) and what you do know. They don't ask you how devoted and determined you are and how much common sense you are endowed with.
This is a generalization that represents the mayority of the cases. And of course, there are some people with "titles" and common sense as well as companies that will ask you "how would you deal this situation" in the interviews or test you for "common senseness".
--
Re:Ternary has been known to be efficient...
on
Ternary Computing
·
· Score: 1
I suppose a binary system could easily emulate a trinary system (say use two transistors as if it where a "trisistor").
So unless a true trinary system device can beat a "binary emulated trinary" (hardware or software emulated) cost efectively there's not point on producing it. Add to that the software + engineering cost of producing / developing the trinary system.
I bought a VA Linux Server in June 2000 for my company. The thing was:
- It was respectable
- The price was fair (not the cheapest)
- It was Linux based (like Penguin)
I would have always bought the hardware there. They would have earned at least the basic "support" contracts.
Now that they destroyed their Bussiness Model, they should close Slashdot and everything and distribute whatever cash if left to the investors.
The revenue model of selling SourceForge is stupid. Windows developers will NOT USE IT, they have other tools and way of working. And Linux/whatever can't afford to pay it if they are not selling they OS work.
IF anyone at VA Whatever shareholder is reading this, please go to shareholders meetings and fire the CEO. Else, dump your shares while they valued more that $0.0000001
As long as Microsoft still requires run regedit to access the registry the...ah wait..it's hiddend for the novice!
You don't need the command like in a "Secretary Enviroment" just as you don't need to edit the registry in normal Windows use.
The comand line is powerfull and you may learn it, but the normal user should not be forced to use it. He shoul only know what he is trying to acomplish (print a document, search the web, read email, finish that BP and making those invitations for the children birthday)...
Oh god you troll i am sure you mean what you say but how come? How can you be such a troll?
Don't you get it that an Open Source Monopoly it's the same as saying "No Monopoly at all". It's like the peoples monopoly for Elections. Americans have the Monopoly to elect the candidates and no company has or will ever have that right (that can be argued). Voting is free. Anyone can try to get elected as senator or president. And they will all geit paid. Or you rather replace the USA goverment for a privately held one?
You had a civil war to free yourselves from the UK crown. They had the Monopoly to govern your lifes. Now Microsoft has that right in softwareland. And business run on top of software. And if Microsoft is the only one controling it then they will rule your bussiness. And by nobody can compete is not because everyone else is incompetent. It's because it's a natural monopoly just like goverment is a natural monpoly of the civilian (now) and the tirans (in the past and in some countries as well).
Don't you get it? Software is not like making cars. It's a building block of the society. An interactive international business system. A means of comunicating. It has no marginal costs. It is radicaly different. Special porpuse software can always be closed source and really expensive, but not the building blocks.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as you dont use Windows CE for an artificial heart timer or something like that it's all right...
One human being is worth more than the hole universe (and if you agree with this, then why are we letting people die of hunger and stupid diseases).
Fede
No, it is not. It's quite good depending on what you need. If i even fell the need to migrate there's no problem.
mysqldump database_name
Done. Or even import it to SQL Server via ODBC. MySQL is great for me, so there's no need in dumping (except for backup).
I have 90 queries/s average on a low end server and never had a problem.
Those who seek to "loose controls" would have musicians receive no payment in exchange for recorded music. Isn't that the essence of slavery?
No, it is not. Nobody is working to make copyrighted music free. They are fighting so that people can share files. What people share or not it's a personal decision. If you have an illegal mp3, that's a personal choice you've made.
Should music be free? Maybe. As long there's a decent revenue model for Artists to get rewarded. For example, Radio Broadcasts are free but Artits profit from them.
Fede
I just donated $35 from they main website. I did it by credit card but you can also use PayPal and numerous other methods.
Check to see if you work or worked for a company that would honor match employees donations (ie: if you donate $30 they will donate $30 more).
It's about time the users of the Internet start defending their principles. We are always depending on good luck and fortune in this regard. I urge people to take an active role on this matter before it's too late.
Fede
They may not even know what ports they should filter. Remember that. Everything could be encripted if we really wanted. The connection and what is transmitted.
:)
The only way of monitoring would be to passive search all day. But bsically, searches could DES encripted.
For example i want to search for maddona's new album. Search: maddona album_name songname
And it would send the string as "DF$DFFDF%F HJFJGS&SD&S DSHDGSD**".
Now they don't even know what people are seraching for. And the seach base (ie: the names of file names in my PC) could also be encrypted. Say if have the file:
madonna_new_song-album.mp3 then the file name could become DES encripted.
If a file matches, i can request the unencripted plain text of the file to the owning Peer.
Ok, it would add (a lot of) overhead and also limit to word matching (no substring matching). But how can you stop it? How can an ISP be responsible if they don't know what is going through?
It would be nice
First you need to trust the peer. Second, that peer need to be online for hours. Third, not everyone has the bandwith to do distro sharing. Forth, it's a known product with high quality ftp sites for downloading with a lot of known mirrors. And last, the % of people needing new distros is really small relative to the gnutella network.
The benefits of p2p are outnumbered by the disadvantages in this case?
Why not charge the air? So the Air copyright holder could promote clean air and shutdown offending tree and the cigarette producers.
They may also develop richer air which, for a profit, everyone could have.
Come on...profit is powerfull, but must be used wisely. An musician earns like $1 from a CD and Joe has to pay $18. Something is wrong. Someone is profiting the wrong way.
Fede
Doesn't that tell you something about interoperability? In the begining the were all kind of high quality import and _export_ functions in Office (to WordPerfect, Quatro Pro, 123, DBF, etc.). Now you can't export anything. But the import filters work pretty well and are up to date.
.Net. But everyone will soon realize they can't swim back an ocean to get to the other coast.
Everything Microsoftish is compatible and has a lot of Interoperability as long as you are moving into Windows and not out. Once you are in, you better not try to move to something else. The path will just have banished and you will have to stay at the Microsoft's coast of the river.
Now they just need to kill Internet standards...and they are working on it hard. Everything is compatible if you are moving to Explorer, VB, ASP or MS
--
First question: are you a troll? It seems so but...if you where sincere, then apologies and read my reply:
.Net is about companies, services and the Economy.
We've bastardized those laws to the point where they're just legal protection for companies that can no longer compete in a market.
If they win in a free market, that's ok. Let the competitors go bankrupt.
Now, I would say a company producing, for example, a Web Browser has a bussiness. If they make a really great product, they can earn money and reinvest.
Now, Explorer 3 was charged $29 and Netscape $39 at the time. And nobody wanted Explorer, it was crappy. Now Microsoft saw that they could control the web if they could control the brower. What's the easiest way? Integrate it with the OS you are just developing, make it run fast. Your competitor will have to release it free or nobody would buy it (you can't run Netscape without Windows, but you can run Windows without Netscape).
Now Netscape income: $0 Microsoft Income: the OS
End of story, Netscape can't improve the product, they can't interate it and they can't know the new quirks of the upcoming OS until it is realeased. They just can't compete. So obviosly Exporer is now the best browser arround. It's a multihundredbillion company against a company that has NO INCOME AT ALL and also that play with the "bundled disadvantage".
Now, from the consumer point of view EX POST, i can attest Explorer is a better browser now. Does that mean the consumer is the winner here? You either use Explorer or mostly everything will be incompatible. If Microsoft decides to charge for Explorer in 2002, what would you do? I am pretty sure you'll have no choice but to pay or get segregated. They pussed the browser Monopoly with the OS Monopoly.
Follow that line with every product Microsoft releases for free and you get the point: i bundle it with the OS for "free", kill everyone and then I have an asset i can exploit for money or go for other markets (why turn all profits now and expose us? Let's better control more industries and make the consumer think we are on their side).
Open Source is the only thing fighting the Monopoly, because it's mainly a moral thing. I could use Windows and Office as it came bundled with my Laptop. But i use Abiword and Gnumeric, and those are not an inch better than MS Office.
No company can pose a threat to the Microsoft's monopoly. There's no money to be made when a sinlge company can decide what runs well or not in 90% of the worlds computers. Also, they control what products" are free and when.
Then you are left with no choice but to compete in the OS market. But Microsoft has the OEM market by the balls (Letter from Microsoft: "Dear Mr. OEM, 90% of the people want Windows. Now be nice to me it will cost you a LOT of money").
You can only hope to make a product so small Microsoft won't go for it (yet). That's just about it.
And now, it's not about software anymore. It's about business. Microsoft
And once they are granted the right to control protocols and standard (turning the propietary) then you'll really find yourself with no other choice but to surrender to Microsoft.
Bottom line: i don't want a crappy Netscape, i don't want a crappy Windows Trumpet, I don't want a crappy Novell and I don't want an expensive Sun (unless for free). But i also don't want Microsoft to kill thouthands of decent companies by means of leveraging their monopoly until there are the only folks arround and i am left with no choice. Also, I don't want them to ask me to compare the product EX POST, when they have killed their competitors source of income.
It's a moral thing and I will try to be on the right road (for as long as i can without definetly hurting my business. Ie: until they get to control everything).
Federico --
A Monopoly is a Monopoly. And a Monopoly is Anti-Capitalist and Anti-American, no matter how that position was achieved. It's very easy to probe if Microsoft is running a Monopoly.
If you care for your economy you should start defending it, because it has some basic rules that are not being met. And guess what? And if the DoJ thinks they "building" a US Monopoly to rule the software world market then they are wrong.
The US is the most developed and computer intensive country and it depends on innovation and on possible reward. As it is today, all the rewards are blong to Bill. He owns the Desktop, he owns you document, he owns the tools you use to get your job done.
And next thing is to control the tools you use to run a bussiness. This alone is the biggest threat to you lovely free economy.
If I see something that doesn't have a package, I usually compile it and make it in to a package.
How do you do that in an easy way. I tried to do that for glibc 2.2.4 (vs the stock 2.2.3 slack 8 that has regexp somewhat broken) and it would have been a mess...
It's not like you use a prefix and then tar.gz it properly. For example, glibc install in slackware has a nice lib-copy feature and you'll need to manually edit the install.sh, etc. Or php which hardcodes the path used in --prefix=[whatever] for some of it's related scripts.
Plz answer me at fferreresPLZ@DONT-SPAMarrancar.com as i wish to help with packaging for slackware.
The fact is you are reading or writing this because nobody used nukes after many countries had some of them. Manking is not getting better. If japan had some nukes then ...
The fact that we are alive after 40 years of nukeability doesn't mean we are gonna live much longer. The very second something goes wrong we are all dead. So do sit and be confortable with our "stats".
earth> uptime
Manking Uptime after Nukes: 40 years.
earth> shutdown -r now
file not found
earth>
--
My own thinking is that we want to ensure that the development of defensive measures outpaces the development of offensive weapons.
Thanks a double edge solution. The Antrax in the mail seems to be of the same "breed" as the Antrax being used for research projects (meaning the defense measures enpower the offensive weapons).
Likewise, attack and defense can be diferent in scope. For example, what is the defense agaist nuclear weapons? There's almost no defense. You either control the radioactive material and send spies all over the world and kill whoever is trying to build a bomb. If it's a reasonable enemy you can biudl some atomics yourself so that they don't use them against you.
Defense is such a broad task that you cannot grasp it's scope beforehand. It may have nothing to do with the technology. Also limiting or regulating nanotech is like regulating light speed spaceships. None of those will exist in the near future! But once you achieve near light speed for a ship, what would happen if it colides with the earth at full speed?
Oh, fast ships are lethal weapons....oh nanotech is dangerous. What makes nanotech interesting is the phychological fact that you CAN'T SEE IT and thus the US can't bomb it out of earth like Afganistan.
things caught in the background of a photo that were only discovered on later examination ...
1) You have videos for that. You can't delete frames and they have proven to be more "later discovery" prolific. In fact, digital can capture more because 90% of the priceless records are the ones NEVER recorded because to few shots where taken. Now digital solves that because you probably fire 200 shots instead of 2. And 90% of the hidden perls are find on first examinations.
2) Also, by the year 3001 none of your stupid papers is going to survive and digital photos will remain 100% accurate.
Your last paragraph is simple put, stupid and the argument false. You could instead argue that we need all cameras to support the same formats and not propietary ones, but that's simply what they do.
---
>The fact that fewer transistors are required to >achieve the same work (despite the fact that there >are more transistors per gate) will INCREASE the >yields. This DECREASES costs.
Fewer transistors would increase yields if the cost of producing each transistor were equal. And how can it decrease costs?
Even in the unexpected that costs of producing both transistors are equal, you'll only get increased yields and not reduced costs.
How in hell did your post get modded up? Simple: the same way yours did.
-
So? That's life not Open Source. That can happen in your family, your company and can happen to Bill Gates. Or do you think they never lose leaders who know well what they do?
Also, this has happened before for Linux for example in the TCP/IP stack where Linus had to choose and the other guy would fade...
The important thing to keep in mind is that Linus / Alan / Whoever need to choose what's best for the Kernel now while not compomising the kernel's future.
--
It is also important for what we do with Linux. We need sshd to live. If the VM kills any needed daemon plus sshd, then we are pretty much screwed because we are 10000 miles away from the server and support is expensive and not time-friendly.
/var/messages so i can send me an email).
I'd love to mark ssh and inetd as not-killable. Just kill mysql, sendmail and httpd but leave those alone! (maybe it'd be good to have the killing notified
-
In the past you probably needed a relative swap/ram ratio. Not, it really depends on the case.
If you usually "touch" the swap partitions you can do well with 120mb swap. If you run a big webserver then you need a lot of swap just in case (it can't hurt). If you reach the post where it's not uncommon to need that load of swap, then you need more ram!
In the end, how big your swap must be depends on what you are using the machine for. On a 1 GB Linux system for desktop use you can leave it with NO swap at all.
--
Yeah. Now you'd hire a programmer to redesign printed media as well. After all, how and where things go and interact does not matter. What matters is that the code is writen by a software professional.
I trully believe the web need good programers, good interface designers, a lot of usability testing. It's different to a software proyect. It's beyond a software proyect scope.
That doesn't mean you don't need good programmers and a clear view of what and how things can be done. But certainly a web site is NOT a software project.
I'll agree in that you need a team that know about the web and not about "generic stuff". You need to know the WEB. WEB Programers, interface designers for WEB projects and a project leader that knows what he is doing and why.
--
TCP/IP is a standard and although not 100% of it's breeds are 100% standard compliant you can't say TCP/IP is not working for you.
Also, HTML is a standard and that's why you can read any HTML. If it was a Microsoft invention you'd now be using IE even if you didn't want it to.
Now, the standards EVOVE...
If they evolve BEFORE implementation you may find you don't yet want to support that features yet. After some time it may be usable when 80% of the software has been updated.
If they evolve AFTER implementation, then it means the are "putting on paper" features that (in this case) the standard browers have (IE, Mozilla). And you'll argue "damn, i have to code differently for diferent browser. Why don't they do things the same way?!". That leads you to the last paragraph.
In practice, you try to accomodate 80% of the browers or hurt the user experience and reach everyone. And of course you won't care about testing your site with the W3C tools (Users run browsers not testing tools).
--
Common sense can't be bought nor learned. Common sense can only be copied for a specific situtation. As soon as something changes a bit, that guy is back his "nonsense" world and has to read another "common sense" book.
And that's how things work for most companies! The look at your CV to learn what courses you where in (copied common sense) and what you do know. They don't ask you how devoted and determined you are and how much common sense you are endowed with.
This is a generalization that represents the mayority of the cases. And of course, there are some people with "titles" and common sense as well as companies that will ask you "how would you deal this situation" in the interviews or test you for "common senseness".
--
I suppose a binary system could easily emulate a trinary system (say use two transistors as if it where a "trisistor").
So unless a true trinary system device can beat a "binary emulated trinary" (hardware or software emulated) cost efectively there's not point on producing it. Add to that the software + engineering cost of producing / developing the trinary system.
--
I bought a VA Linux Server in June 2000 for my company. The thing was:
- It was respectable
- The price was fair (not the cheapest)
- It was Linux based (like Penguin)
I would have always bought the hardware there. They would have earned at least the basic "support" contracts.
Now that they destroyed their Bussiness Model, they should close Slashdot and everything and distribute whatever cash if left to the investors.
The revenue model of selling SourceForge is stupid. Windows developers will NOT USE IT, they have other tools and way of working. And Linux/whatever can't afford to pay it if they are not selling they OS work.
IF anyone at VA Whatever shareholder is reading this, please go to shareholders meetings and fire the CEO. Else, dump your shares while they valued more that $0.0000001
--
As long as Microsoft still requires run regedit to access the registry the...ah wait..it's hiddend for the novice!
You don't need the command like in a "Secretary Enviroment" just as you don't need to edit the registry in normal Windows use.
The comand line is powerfull and you may learn it, but the normal user should not be forced to use it. He shoul only know what he is trying to acomplish (print a document, search the web, read email, finish that BP and making those invitations for the children birthday)...
Oh god you troll i am sure you mean what you say but how come? How can you be such a troll?
Don't you get it that an Open Source Monopoly it's the same as saying "No Monopoly at all". It's like the peoples monopoly for Elections. Americans have the Monopoly to elect the candidates and no company has or will ever have that right (that can be argued). Voting is free. Anyone can try to get elected as senator or president. And they will all geit paid. Or you rather replace the USA goverment for a privately held one?
You had a civil war to free yourselves from the UK crown. They had the Monopoly to govern your lifes. Now Microsoft has that right in softwareland. And business run on top of software. And if Microsoft is the only one controling it then they will rule your bussiness. And by nobody can compete is not because everyone else is incompetent. It's because it's a natural monopoly just like goverment is a natural monpoly of the civilian (now) and the tirans (in the past and in some countries as well).
Don't you get it? Software is not like making cars. It's a building block of the society. An interactive international business system. A means of comunicating. It has no marginal costs. It is radicaly different. Special porpuse software can always be closed source and really expensive, but not the building blocks.