I don't mean to be a troll but, I am curious about something you said. You stated that Clearcase uses a custom kernel and that this is bad, which I agree with. But, then you say that the software that you are developing, in Clearcase, requires a customized kernel.
My question is, why does your software require a custom kernel, especially if you think that the use of a custom kernel is a bad idea?
Advertising. Marketing. Airtime on radio play lists. Concert organization and promotion.
As well as the things you mentioned, like:
Recording studios. Qualified engineers. All the back office stuff for running a music business. Distribution channels. (Janis doesn't make money fom MP3s) etc.....
Bottom line, a better chance at a steady paycheck. Doubt it? Name one garage band that is distributing over the internet that has global mind share and is making the big bucks that even burned out stars are making, much less Brittney or Backstreet or any other pop group.
Your Cisco teacher was referring to fully meshed networks and she was correct. Fully meshed networks, typically based on point-to-point or frame-relay connections such as those that would be used in corporate environments, do not scale well. They very rapidly become far too cumbersome and expensive to maintain due to the fact that these types of networks grow exponentially.
This 802.11 solution would not be a fully meshed network but, rather a series of partially meshed networks which would make them smaller and more manageable. Furthermore, these networks would have the ability to develop new interconnections automatically and dynamically so the management aspect would not be an issue. Also, due to the use of wireless for these connections, rather than physical connections used by point-to-point and frame-relay, cost would not be nearly as big an issue.
In other words, your teacher was correct but, those rules do not apply in this scenario.
This article, at UltraWideband Planet suggest that 802.11 is doomed. Perhaps most interestingly, the Ultrawideband site is from the same people that offer 802.11-Planet, Internet.com.
Let's think for just a moment. If the internet were to be completely shutdown or even unplugged, do you really think that we will be in such desperate straights as to be terrorized? Sure, for a few wierdos, no Slasdot access may be terrifying. But, for the rest of the world it would mean little. It would mean an inconvenience to many, perhaps a slowdown for commerce and indeed an end to some businesses based on crappy business models. But nothing more.
No dams will open, killing millions. No planes will fall from the sky. Your head will not explode. Your funds will not disappear from the bank.
Try to remember that the internet is not a life giving force. It is not a life support system and it's disappearance will not take away life. Well, perhaps it is to eBay and Amazon but, when we are talking terror on a national of global scale they aren't much cause for concern.
I mean, so what if the internet goes down? It's not like the Seatle Starbucks running out of coffee or something serious like that. Now, that would be real terror.;)
But, the pontential harm that a large asteroid striking the earth would cause is also _huge_. But, the level of risk is, in fact, rather low.
It is the level of risk that is grossly over-hyped. Sure the risk or potential is there but the risk is easily mitigated with a little bit of effort and a massive dose of common sense.
Obviously there are risks from cyber attacks, regardless of whether they are script kiddies or "eTerrorists". But these scare monger, over hyped "scenarios" have been beaten to death already. This article tries to pass itself off as objective but, it is just more ludicrous hype.
I'm starting to wonder if these stories aren't plants from the justice department designed to generate irrational fear in order to grease the path of John Ashcroft's next chip at American freedoms.
Can an OS X user copy an object from one application to another? Specifically, can you right click an image in your browser choose "Copy" and then past that image into your word processor or Photo Shop?
As stated before, this "hack" is piracy and therefore illegal. Furthermore it is a stupid waste of money.
Why spend $800 for a amateurish, rigged up, pirated Pix when you can have the real thing for less. If what you really want is to learn about the Pix and its configuration simply hop on to eBay and buy the real thing. On eBay Pix 501s and 520s can be had for $400 and $500 respectively.
Things we have to consider are the maximum distance from transmitter to receiver; power source, and if battery-powered, the average battery life; video quality; additional necessary hardware and software; outdoor/indoor capabilities; and weather resistance.
You don't give your requirements for the parameters that you mention. I suspect, being an Ask Slashdot, that you are looking for something on the cheap. If this is the case then X-10 is your only real choice and you will have to live with poor quality, short range and short battery life.
But, lets pretend that you really wanted the best. In this case I would recommend the Canon VCC 4, at truely great remote video camera. Of course, you will need power for this. For power, you should get a Honda generator. Finally for the wireless part, you should look into the Ikegami Microwave link or the Canon Canobeam DT50.
Now we're talking about a serious long range, high quality, remote control webcam. Ain't it cool?
The following statements will be highly inflamatory to many people. They are not intended to be inflamatory but, rather a simple observation.
Basically, Leo is yet another tool to automate the documentation of programming code. There are dozens, possibly hundreds, of programs available for this task. Yet, the problem that these tools were designed to solve remain very prevalent, if not pervasive.
The reason that the problem remains and that Leo will not solve the problem either is relatively simple. Simply put, the problem is garbage-in, garbage-out (GIGO). These tools are not able to determine the purpose of the code or the intent of the programmer that is writing it. These tools cannot read the minds of the programmers. The tools rely on the programmer to write out their thoughts and the intended purpose of the code.
Most programmers are unwilling or incapable of performing this critical step thoroughly. All too often, they use shorthand and expect the reader to understand what they mean. Or, they believe that the reader should be able to understand their thought process by reading the code itself. Furthermore, they assume that if the reader can't do this, they are simply not a good programmer (1337).
To go a step further, many programmers are not capable of clearly expressing their thoughts in their native tongue. These people are quite brilliant and can do amazing things with their code but, they can't express their thoughts to another person unless that person is indeed, able to read and comprehend the code itself.
Now, in fairness to the programmers, we have to look at what they do and what they are taught. Most programming languages are all about efficiency. They rely heavily on abreviations and aliases, why do you think it's called code? They are designed to require a minimum or typing while providing a maximum of functionallity. The programmers themselves are always striving for increased efficiency both in their code and in the way they get the code done. They always try to put out more which leads to further shortcuts and abreviations. This all tends to make programmers minimalists and their documentation clearly reflects this.
So, Leo is unlikely to provide any documentation breakthroughs. The old rules still apply, garbage-in, garbage-out. The best idea I've seen was an earlier post, where the documentation is written first and then the code is developed to match the documentation. But, honestly, which of us going to do it that way. That's a lot of work and our ingrained habits are going to be hard to break.
This seems to contradict, the stories of excessive bandwith etc. Or perhaps, it helps to explain how it is possible to have all the supposed excess capacity and yet there is no "demand". There is no doubt that the demand is there, it always has been.
If the demand wasn't there we would all still be using 9600 baud modems, or perhaps 300 baud C-64 modems. But, instead we have tried to squeeze out every possible bit per second from our modems and it is still inadequate.
And, in case you didn't know, this doesn't change with today's broadband. Almost anyone who has used broadband (xDSL/Cable) for any period of time will tell you that the speed is the best available and that it is much better than dial-up but, they are still wanting or needing more speed. I assure you that if everyone could get a T-3 (45Mbps) for a decent cost, everyone would have one and still complain that it wasn't quite enough for them. The demand is there!
I'm amazed that there is so much interest in live bait vending machines. Take a look at the counter at the bottom of the page. Who would have guessed there would be so much traffic for a web site in that industry.
Looks like I've found my next career move, since IT is down. From the looks of that single page, I'd have to guess that live bait vending must be a multi-billion dollar industry.
This is utter hogwash. You'd better check your facts. Try looking through some of the statistics and reports at The Bureau of Justice Statistics. The opposite of your statement is demonstrated again and again.
Furthermore, many argue that not only economic minorities but, also racial minorities (so often the same) are unjustly labeled as the largest source of criminals. Again the statistics say otherwise.
The fact is that economic and racial minorities produce a disproportionately high volume of criminals. Additionally, and interestingly to me, the minorities are statistically the largest group of victims of crime. That means that most criminal activity is perpetrated by minorities against other minorities. This has been case throughout history and is still true today.
You say that you have used some of the larger enterprise frame works but, you don't mention which ones. If you have a large, very large budget, I would recommend you look at Unicenter TNG from Computer Associates.
Unicenter TNG is an Enterprise Management System, which is different than a network management system. Unicenter TNG allows you to monitor, control and automatically respond to events in your enterprise from a failed router to a single process that is about to have difficulty. It is infinitely configurable to manage and respond to events in very intelligent and or complex manners. It has agents called Neugents that actually learn from events in your environment and become increasingly intelligent, ultimately able to predict failures and when they will occur, well in advance of the actual failure. These events can then be responded to automatically, which prevents the failure from actually occuring.
Unicenter TNG can manage almost anything, literally. It can monitor logs or other files, manage hardware, manage protocols, backups, authentication, virus control, security and firewalls, manage databases or individual processes, or even manage complex business processes and jobs across the enterprise. It operates on a very wide range of platforms and can schedule and control individual jobs across all of those platforms.
Having said all that, CA also offers, for free, the Unicenter TNG Framework. This is the core processing engine of Unicenter but without the agents or options. It runs on most any platform and a Linux version is available. In fact, it use to come with the Suse distro, though I am not certain that it still does. With a fair bit of work and if you write a few of your own agents (the agent SDK is also free) you could give your scripts a level of intelligence that is just amazing.
When I read it, it suggests that the CCD is able to store the 103 frames slightly after the image is taken. Therefore, to me, the 103 frames are simply a caching buffer.
However, the really strange part is that the article says the playback is actualy 10 frames per second, which if true is really sucky playback.
This is easily done, and no, it does not violate the DMCA.
The TV signal is first encoded using an MPEG or similar format. This encoded signal is then streamed on the network via multicast. There are plenty of these systems out there, most are rather expensive but, they do exist and it can be done with Linux. The trick is to have a powerful enough box to do the realtime MPEG encoding.
Commercial versions of this are used for desktop video conferencing, distance learning and even entertainment transmission. Nothing sells highend networking equipment better than a demo with a Top Gun DVD broadcasting to a dozen PCs and TVs around the room.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't mean to be a troll but, I am curious about something you said. You stated that Clearcase uses a custom kernel and that this is bad, which I agree with. But, then you say that the software that you are developing, in Clearcase, requires a customized kernel.
My question is, why does your software require a custom kernel, especially if you think that the use of a custom kernel is a bad idea?
Advertising.
Marketing.
Airtime on radio play lists.
Concert organization and promotion.
As well as the things you mentioned, like:
Recording studios.
Qualified engineers.
All the back office stuff for running a music business.
Distribution channels. (Janis doesn't make money fom MP3s)
etc.....
Bottom line, a better chance at a steady paycheck. Doubt it? Name one garage band that is distributing over the internet that has global mind share and is making the big bucks that even burned out stars are making, much less Brittney or Backstreet or any other pop group.
Your Cisco teacher was referring to fully meshed networks and she was correct. Fully meshed networks, typically based on point-to-point or frame-relay connections such as those that would be used in corporate environments, do not scale well. They very rapidly become far too cumbersome and expensive to maintain due to the fact that these types of networks grow exponentially.
This 802.11 solution would not be a fully meshed network but, rather a series of partially meshed networks which would make them smaller and more manageable. Furthermore, these networks would have the ability to develop new interconnections automatically and dynamically so the management aspect would not be an issue. Also, due to the use of wireless for these connections, rather than physical connections used by point-to-point and frame-relay, cost would not be nearly as big an issue.
In other words, your teacher was correct but, those rules do not apply in this scenario.
This article, at UltraWideband Planet suggest that 802.11 is doomed. Perhaps most interestingly, the Ultrawideband site is from the same people that offer 802.11-Planet, Internet.com.
See here. Admittedly a pleasant troll but, a rose by any other name....
This looks like an updated Commodore 128. Perhaps a C-256?
Let's think for just a moment. If the internet were to be completely shutdown or even unplugged, do you really think that we will be in such desperate straights as to be terrorized? Sure, for a few wierdos, no Slasdot access may be terrifying. But, for the rest of the world it would mean little. It would mean an inconvenience to many, perhaps a slowdown for commerce and indeed an end to some businesses based on crappy business models. But nothing more.
;)
No dams will open, killing millions. No planes will fall from the sky. Your head will not explode. Your funds will not disappear from the bank.
Try to remember that the internet is not a life giving force. It is not a life support system and it's disappearance will not take away life. Well, perhaps it is to eBay and Amazon but, when we are talking terror on a national of global scale they aren't much cause for concern.
I mean, so what if the internet goes down? It's not like the Seatle Starbucks running out of coffee or something serious like that. Now, that would be real terror.
But, the pontential harm that a large asteroid striking the earth would cause is also _huge_. But, the level of risk is, in fact, rather low.
It is the level of risk that is grossly over-hyped. Sure the risk or potential is there but the risk is easily mitigated with a little bit of effort and a massive dose of common sense.
Obviously there are risks from cyber attacks, regardless of whether they are script kiddies or "eTerrorists". But these scare monger, over hyped "scenarios" have been beaten to death already. This article tries to pass itself off as objective but, it is just more ludicrous hype.
I'm starting to wonder if these stories aren't plants from the justice department designed to generate irrational fear in order to grease the path of John Ashcroft's next chip at American freedoms.
Can an OS X user copy an object from one application to another? Specifically, can you right click an image in your browser choose "Copy" and then past that image into your word processor or Photo Shop?
Have you considered Novell's eDirectory it would do you proud, if your budget allows. It's not free but, it isn't expensive either.
-- Do you count?
And the trolls say BSD i dieing.
As stated before, this "hack" is piracy and therefore illegal. Furthermore it is a stupid waste of money.
Why spend $800 for a amateurish, rigged up, pirated Pix when you can have the real thing for less. If what you really want is to learn about the Pix and its configuration simply hop on to eBay and buy the real thing. On eBay Pix 501s and 520s can be had for $400 and $500 respectively.
eBlocker, like so many other key logger programs, intercepts the email, web sites, etc before it reaches the network. So hushmail won't help.
Things we have to consider are the maximum distance from transmitter to receiver; power source, and if battery-powered, the average battery life; video quality; additional necessary hardware and software; outdoor/indoor capabilities; and weather resistance.
You don't give your requirements for the parameters that you mention. I suspect, being an Ask Slashdot, that you are looking for something on the cheap. If this is the case then X-10 is your only real choice and you will have to live with poor quality, short range and short battery life.
But, lets pretend that you really wanted the best. In this case I would recommend the Canon VCC 4, at truely great remote video camera. Of course, you will need power for this. For power, you should get a Honda generator. Finally for the wireless part, you should look into the Ikegami Microwave link or the Canon Canobeam DT50.
Now we're talking about a serious long range, high quality, remote control webcam. Ain't it cool?
The following statements will be highly inflamatory to many people. They are not intended to be inflamatory but, rather a simple observation.
Basically, Leo is yet another tool to automate the documentation of programming code. There are dozens, possibly hundreds, of programs available for this task. Yet, the problem that these tools were designed to solve remain very prevalent, if not pervasive.
The reason that the problem remains and that Leo will not solve the problem either is relatively simple. Simply put, the problem is garbage-in, garbage-out (GIGO). These tools are not able to determine the purpose of the code or the intent of the programmer that is writing it. These tools cannot read the minds of the programmers. The tools rely on the programmer to write out their thoughts and the intended purpose of the code.
Most programmers are unwilling or incapable of performing this critical step thoroughly. All too often, they use shorthand and expect the reader to understand what they mean. Or, they believe that the reader should be able to understand their thought process by reading the code itself. Furthermore, they assume that if the reader can't do this, they are simply not a good programmer (1337).
To go a step further, many programmers are not capable of clearly expressing their thoughts in their native tongue. These people are quite brilliant and can do amazing things with their code but, they can't express their thoughts to another person unless that person is indeed, able to read and comprehend the code itself.
Now, in fairness to the programmers, we have to look at what they do and what they are taught. Most programming languages are all about efficiency. They rely heavily on abreviations and aliases, why do you think it's called code? They are designed to require a minimum or typing while providing a maximum of functionallity. The programmers themselves are always striving for increased efficiency both in their code and in the way they get the code done. They always try to put out more which leads to further shortcuts and abreviations. This all tends to make programmers minimalists and their documentation clearly reflects this.
So, Leo is unlikely to provide any documentation breakthroughs. The old rules still apply, garbage-in, garbage-out. The best idea I've seen was an earlier post, where the documentation is written first and then the code is developed to match the documentation. But, honestly, which of us going to do it that way. That's a lot of work and our ingrained habits are going to be hard to break.
This seems to contradict, the stories of excessive bandwith etc. Or perhaps, it helps to explain how it is possible to have all the supposed excess capacity and yet there is no "demand". There is no doubt that the demand is there, it always has been.
If the demand wasn't there we would all still be using 9600 baud modems, or perhaps 300 baud C-64 modems. But, instead we have tried to squeeze out every possible bit per second from our modems and it is still inadequate.
And, in case you didn't know, this doesn't change with today's broadband. Almost anyone who has used broadband (xDSL/Cable) for any period of time will tell you that the speed is the best available and that it is much better than dial-up but, they are still wanting or needing more speed. I assure you that if everyone could get a T-3 (45Mbps) for a decent cost, everyone would have one and still complain that it wasn't quite enough for them. The demand is there!
I'm amazed that there is so much interest in live bait vending machines. Take a look at the counter at the bottom of the page. Who would have guessed there would be so much traffic for a web site in that industry.
Looks like I've found my next career move, since IT is down. From the looks of that single page, I'd have to guess that live bait vending must be a multi-billion dollar industry.
Who knew?
This is utter hogwash. You'd better check your facts. Try looking through some of the statistics and reports at The Bureau of Justice Statistics. The opposite of your statement is demonstrated again and again.
Furthermore, many argue that not only economic minorities but, also racial minorities (so often the same) are unjustly labeled as the largest source of criminals. Again the statistics say otherwise.
The fact is that economic and racial minorities produce a disproportionately high volume of criminals. Additionally, and interestingly to me, the minorities are statistically the largest group of victims of crime. That means that most criminal activity is perpetrated by minorities against other minorities. This has been case throughout history and is still true today.
You say that you have used some of the larger enterprise frame works but, you don't mention which ones. If you have a large, very large budget, I would recommend you look at Unicenter TNG from Computer Associates.
Unicenter TNG is an Enterprise Management System, which is different than a network management system. Unicenter TNG allows you to monitor, control and automatically respond to events in your enterprise from a failed router to a single process that is about to have difficulty. It is infinitely configurable to manage and respond to events in very intelligent and or complex manners. It has agents called Neugents that actually learn from events in your environment and become increasingly intelligent, ultimately able to predict failures and when they will occur, well in advance of the actual failure. These events can then be responded to automatically, which prevents the failure from actually occuring.
Unicenter TNG can manage almost anything, literally. It can monitor logs or other files, manage hardware, manage protocols, backups, authentication, virus control, security and firewalls, manage databases or individual processes, or even manage complex business processes and jobs across the enterprise. It operates on a very wide range of platforms and can schedule and control individual jobs across all of those platforms.
Having said all that, CA also offers, for free, the Unicenter TNG Framework. This is the core processing engine of Unicenter but without the agents or options. It runs on most any platform and a Linux version is available. In fact, it use to come with the Suse distro, though I am not certain that it still does. With a fair bit of work and if you write a few of your own agents (the agent SDK is also free) you could give your scripts a level of intelligence that is just amazing.
I'd rather have everything I need at once, rather than having to switch floppies and reboot for a different function.
For me a bootable CD solution like Knoppix is a much better choice for a recovery disk.
With a bandwidth requirement of 35Gbps even GigE would be inadequate. You'd need the newer 10GigE and you would still suffer a performance hit.
When I read it, it suggests that the CCD is able to store the 103 frames slightly after the image is taken. Therefore, to me, the 103 frames are simply a caching buffer.
However, the really strange part is that the article says the playback is actualy 10 frames per second, which if true is really sucky playback.
This is easily done, and no, it does not violate the DMCA.
The TV signal is first encoded using an MPEG or similar format. This encoded signal is then streamed on the network via multicast. There are plenty of these systems out there, most are rather expensive but, they do exist and it can be done with Linux. The trick is to have a powerful enough box to do the realtime MPEG encoding.
Commercial versions of this are used for desktop video conferencing, distance learning and even entertainment transmission. Nothing sells highend networking equipment better than a demo with a Top Gun DVD broadcasting to a dozen PCs and TVs around the room.
HTTP://shells.open-network.net