Funnily, almost ironically, your homepage points to Project Payday, "a way to make money for the average Joe". If you've found such a good way to make money, how come your budget is that tight? I guess we now know how well that method works.
I totally agree with you about the save format, wish I had mod points. Anyway, you must have really slow server harddisk(s), or way too little RAM, if copying a 10 meg save takes that long. Are you using Vista on a laptop as server? If you have an available (480 Mbps) USB port on the server, use a flash drive to save/keep the game on. Of course, not the smallest, slowest flash drive you can find.. For added speed, only format some of it, like 1.5 GB out of a 2 GB drive. If not, at least keep it on a FAT32 filesystem, as that tends to be a bit faster than NTFS.
Doing (I'm on Ubuntu 10.04 64-bit) find . -type f | wc -l in the World1 folder gives 7938 files. According to minecraft, my savegame is currently 21.4 Megs. However, doing
du -b in the same folder gives 40476015 bytes, almost double that. (I have sailed around a lot in my world. Probably why the save is that big).
Every directory contains one or two files, each only a few thousand bytes (1500 - 6000 bytes or so). Looks like Notch is doing very frequent, incremental backup of every little thing you do in the game, to minimize the amount of work lost in a crash.
So software developers should be expected to constantly research exactly which methods/algorithms they can or can't use? That would make programming any big project almost impossible. Most people skilled in the art can come up with a similar or identical idea and implement it, but researching if someone else has patented it takes a lot of time, which could be spent programming instead. In the US, If you come up with an algorithm/method you want to use in your program, but find that it's patented, you'll have to circumvent it in some way, which takes more time. In some cases, a software patent could actually prevent you from finishing the program, if there's no way to circumvent the patent, and then every minute you and everyone else has worked on that program has been a complete waste. How would you like to tell your boss that you've wasted half a year on a software project you now can't finish, because of some software patent(s)? Sure, your company could license it from whoever owns the patent, but if you have to do this several times in just one project, it might very well kill the expected profit from the project. Or, you could wait 5-6 months, only to find that there's another software patent which your now finished project violates, and wait another 5-6 months, rinse and repeat. The same goes for free/open source software - why should I wait for some patent(s) to expire before I can release my source code and binaries, if I'm not charging any money for it?
Please get this: software patents are a menace to software developers. They turn software development into a minefield of patent violations.
(BTW, I can see why lawyers would just love to have software patents be globally applicable. It would be a never-ending smorgasbord of lawsuits waiting to happen).
I'm surprised you completely forgot about durability. That is the one inherent feature that will (probably) make me buy a laptop with a SSD next time - I won't have to worry about the drive suddenly having thousands or maybe even millions of bad sectors if I accidentally drop it, or it slides off a chair. I know, standard laptop drives have become more durable over the years, but with SSD, it certainly beats losing data, having to buy a new drive, move the old drive to a stationary PC, partition and format the new drive, and copy whatever can be saved from the old - with the risk of losing more data and having to do it all over, if it happens again.
That said, I am waiting for HRDs to get on the market. They're (supposed to be) lightning-fast, more durable than HDDs, use less power than HDDs/SSDs, and will probably last decades. I'm kind of sad SSDs had such a head start on them; had it been the other way around, I don't think SSDs would ever have had more than the niche of the market where durability is top-priority. Why? - SSDs will fail sooner or later, when enough data has been written to them. It really sucks knowing that you're wearing down your expensive SSD, everytime it's written to.
As you might or might not know, every time NTFS reads a file, it also writes to the filesystem, changing the 'file last accessed' time. So even if you've filled a SSD with data and thereafter only read from it, you're still wearing it down by reading from it. I don't know of any other filesystems that do that, but there are probably some. I apologize in advance, if you've disabled that feature, or you're using some other filesystem on your SSD.
Like the AC said, it won't matter much, if any. The proper thing to do, like your moral compass told you, is to contact some address registry about it - but it probably won't be worth their time to reallocate a/16, so chances are they won't do anything about it.
If you want to help that lawyer sell it, and make a few bucks, go for it.
Here's an idea. Create a whole bunch of ~700mb video files - content is unimportant as long as you filmed it yourself. Name them things like "Aliens.mp4" and "Terminator.mp4"
Why would the enforcers waste time downloading and verifying the files referred to by torrents, when torrent users already do that for them?
But here it comes: have we bought a central processing unit which has now become our property because we paid for it, or are we simply buying a "license" to use Intel's "intellectual property"?
Very good point. Intel might be looking at a class action lawsuit down the road, if enough customers buy into it, then later figure that they're getting ripped off and decide to sue. I suspect some bean counter came up with this, and got the idea from shareware/demo-versions, which can be unlocked to full versions if you pay for a serial number or key. This is yet another example of hardware, which is defective by design. http://www.defectivebydesign.org/ Next up; pay to enable some GPU features, or enable the GPU (or any number of them) in next-gen CPUs.
This has the potential to get ugly.
It could get even more ugly, if Intel decides to put a time-out on the upgrade. There just needs to be a tiny piece of flash memory in the CPU, which keeps count of how many minutes it has been running with the features switched on. Let's say you buy a six month upgrade, which will let it run for approx. 263,000 minutes. That might come out to 18 months, if your PC runs for 8 hours every day. Then the features get switched off, and you have to pay to switch them back on again. Effectively, the features are now a subscription which you pay for.
Intel can be damn sure, that I won't buy into any of this. And neither should you. These types of business models need to be discouraged. Just buying the PC, and only letting the suckers buy the upgrade won't get the message through. We need to actively warn people against buying PCs with processors like this, otherwise it's going to be that way with all processors in a few years.
But here it comes: have we bought a central processing unit which has now become our property because we paid for it, or are we simply buying a "license" to use Intel's "intellectual property"?
Very good point. I'd say Intel might be looking at a class action lawsuit down the road, if enough customers buy into this, then figure they're being ripped off and decide to sue. I suspect this came from some bean counter, who got the idea from shareware or demo versions with limited functionality, where you can purchase a serial number or key code to unlock the full functionality, and who figured this could work for CPUs too. Next up; enabling features in GPUs, and/or enabling the GPU in next-gen CPUs?
This has the potential to get ugly.
It could get even uglier - what if Intel decides to put a time-out on the upgrade, by using a tiny piece of flash memory embedded in the CPU for counting how long the CPU has been on with those features enabled? Let's say you buy a one year upgrade, which means the CPU will run for a year (or approx. 526,000 minutes) with those features enabled, then switch those features off again. That might come out to three years, if the PC is only on 8 hours every day. Then those features will have become a subscription you pay for. Very ugly indeed.
Intel can be damn sure, that I won't buy into any of this.
Then USB drives hit the market and you had the best of both worlds, the size and the usability.
If you mean USB flash drives, there's that little, non-advertised 'snag', that USB drives start to lose write speed, when every datablock has been written to once. In SSDs, that was (almost) fixed with the TRIM feature. Not so for USB flash drives. Until that feature goes into them (if at all possible), I grind my teeth having to buy a USB flash drive to carry data with me.
Flash cells are degraded a little for every write, so flash drives will start to fail sooner or later. Even if this takes some years, flash is still 'a sword hanging over your data', if written to on a daily basis. If your PSU craps out, a voltage spike might fry any SSDs, as well as any attached USB flash drives along with it. For comparison, magnetically stored data would be recoverable.
It would cheer me up a great deal if HRDs came to market soon: http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/18/dataslides-hard-rectangular-drive-set-to-revolutionize-storage/ Although intended for internal storage, smaller editions might also be sturdy enough to compete with USB flash drives, and certainly replace external HDDs. Longevity measured in decades (as I understand it), and the speed of SSD's. The seek time (or equivalent) might be somewhere between Raptors and SSDs, but I could live with that.
There was an article online a few months ago about a guy who was accused of having child porn, except that the pornstar in question showed up at his trial and testified that she was 25 (25 for christ sake!) at the time the movie was made. People in the comments section of the article were universally of the opinion that he got off on a technicality.
I remember that slashdot article, although somewhat differently. Sadly, I can't find it again. Anyone who can?
Please read this: http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/gravity/gps-twins.asp In short: According to Special Relativity, since all motion is relative, time should pass slower on a spaceship speeding by Earth (as seen from Earth), but from the spaceship traveller's view, time should equally pass slower at the same rate on Earth, compared to the clock on the spaceship.
Well, this was the man page I found yesterday: http://linux.die.net/man/1/d4x And, if you get the package from debian or ubuntu, it has the Artistic License.
Anyway, I just noticed that f I install d4x (version 2.5.7.1-4 in debian 4.0), the binary is called "nt", and d4x is just a symlink to that binary. The man page installed along with it refers to "nt" and not d4x. Maybe the license was changed from the artistic one at some point by the author, which probably means the source code was forked by debian developers and the name of the binary changed in the debian fork.
So, get the source package from debian or ubuntu, and you can modify it all you want. I'm assuming that the name change won't bother you.
Actually, d4x was released under the Artistic License: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0.php From a brief read of it, I don't see much difference from the GPL. You're certainly allowed to modify it. Section 2 and 3 say:
"2. You may apply bug fixes, portability fixes and other modifications derived from the Public Domain or from the Copyright Holder. A Package modified in such a way shall still be considered the Standard Version.
3. You may otherwise modify your copy of this Package in any way, provided that you insert a prominent notice in each changed file stating how and when you changed that file, and provided that you do at least ONE of the following:
a) place your modifications in the Public Domain or otherwise make them Freely Available, such as by posting said modifications to Usenet or an equivalent medium, or placing the modifications on a major archive site such as ftp.uu.net, or by allowing the Copyright Holder to include your modifications in the Standard Version of the Package."
There is also an Artistic License 2.0, but the original homepage for d4x is down, so I can't tell whether or not it was released or relicensed under AL 2.0. If it was, it's allowed to change the license to a compatible one such as GPL, MPL, or Apache.
First of all, don't *you* have copyright of your own DNA? Also, I think music from it could/should be considered a derivative work. So to make any music from DNA legally, that someone would either have to obtain (buy/lease) the copyright from someone else, or use their own DNA.
Considering that copyright extends for 70 years beyond the 'author's death, maybe these lawyers will try to dig up people who have been dead for 70 years.. somehow, the notion of lawyers digging up long-dead people doesn't seem all that strange to me.
Try avocadoes, they contain a lot of fat - but it's good fat. Not trans fats like you'll find in a lot of food products. Did you know, that most fat built-up on the inside of your arteries consist of trans fats?
After eating avocadoes a few times, they taste almost like nuts. Remember to keep them in the fridge when the peel turns dark. If they become very soft, they are too old, same with tomatoes.
A flying car pretty much implies using anti-gravity, or free energy to hover/power the car. Build it yourself - rexresearch.com is as good a place as any to start looking for the info how to do it. A Volf propeller should get you started, a GEET engine should make it cheap enough to operate on a daily basis.
Slashdot Mirror
Funnily, almost ironically, your homepage points to Project Payday, "a way to make money for the average Joe".
If you've found such a good way to make money, how come your budget is that tight?
I guess we now know how well that method works.
At a minimum, each home user is going to be assigned 2^48 IPv6 addresses.
Where do you see that? I thought the smallest possible allocation was a /64 (and the largest a /48)?
I totally agree with you about the save format, wish I had mod points.
Anyway, you must have really slow server harddisk(s), or way too little RAM, if copying a 10 meg save takes that long.
Are you using Vista on a laptop as server?
If you have an available (480 Mbps) USB port on the server, use a flash drive to save/keep the game on. Of course, not the smallest, slowest flash drive you can find..
For added speed, only format some of it, like 1.5 GB out of a 2 GB drive.
If not, at least keep it on a FAT32 filesystem, as that tends to be a bit faster than NTFS.
Doing (I'm on Ubuntu 10.04 64-bit)
find . -type f | wc -l
in the World1 folder gives 7938 files.
According to minecraft, my savegame is currently 21.4 Megs. However, doing
du -b
in the same folder gives 40476015 bytes, almost double that.
(I have sailed around a lot in my world. Probably why the save is that big).
Every directory contains one or two files, each only a few thousand bytes (1500 - 6000 bytes or so).
Looks like Notch is doing very frequent, incremental backup of every little thing you do in the game, to minimize the amount of work lost in a crash.
For those that don't know this abbreviation:
PFYs = Pimply-Faced Youths
Originated (I think) in the stories about the BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell).
Software/Method patents: Six months.
So software developers should be expected to constantly research exactly which methods/algorithms they can or can't use?
That would make programming any big project almost impossible.
Most people skilled in the art can come up with a similar or identical idea and implement it, but researching if someone else has patented it takes a lot of time, which could be spent programming instead.
In the US, If you come up with an algorithm/method you want to use in your program, but find that it's patented, you'll have to circumvent it in some way, which takes more time.
In some cases, a software patent could actually prevent you from finishing the program, if there's no way to circumvent the patent, and then every minute you and everyone else has worked on that program has been a complete waste.
How would you like to tell your boss that you've wasted half a year on a software project you now can't finish, because of some software patent(s)?
Sure, your company could license it from whoever owns the patent, but if you have to do this several times in just one project, it might very well kill the expected profit from the project.
Or, you could wait 5-6 months, only to find that there's another software patent which your now finished project violates, and wait another 5-6 months, rinse and repeat.
The same goes for free/open source software - why should I wait for some patent(s) to expire before I can release my source code and binaries, if I'm not charging any money for it?
Please get this: software patents are a menace to software developers.
They turn software development into a minefield of patent violations.
(BTW, I can see why lawyers would just love to have software patents be globally applicable. It would be a never-ending smorgasbord of lawsuits waiting to happen).
I'm surprised you completely forgot about durability.
That is the one inherent feature that will (probably) make me buy a laptop with a SSD next time - I won't have to worry about the drive suddenly having thousands or maybe even millions of bad sectors if I accidentally drop it, or it slides off a chair.
I know, standard laptop drives have become more durable over the years, but with SSD, it certainly beats losing data, having to buy a new drive, move the old drive to a stationary PC, partition and format the new drive, and copy whatever can be saved from the old - with the risk of losing more data and having to do it all over, if it happens again.
That said, I am waiting for HRDs to get on the market. They're (supposed to be) lightning-fast, more durable than HDDs, use less power than HDDs/SSDs, and will probably last decades.
I'm kind of sad SSDs had such a head start on them; had it been the other way around, I don't think SSDs would ever have had more than the niche of the market where durability is top-priority.
Why? - SSDs will fail sooner or later, when enough data has been written to them. It really sucks knowing that you're wearing down your expensive SSD, everytime it's written to.
As you might or might not know, every time NTFS reads a file, it also writes to the filesystem, changing the 'file last accessed' time.
So even if you've filled a SSD with data and thereafter only read from it, you're still wearing it down by reading from it.
I don't know of any other filesystems that do that, but there are probably some.
I apologize in advance, if you've disabled that feature, or you're using some other filesystem on your SSD.
Like the AC said, it won't matter much, if any. /16, so chances are they won't do anything about it.
The proper thing to do, like your moral compass told you, is to contact some address registry about it
- but it probably won't be worth their time to reallocate a
If you want to help that lawyer sell it, and make a few bucks, go for it.
Otherwise, just forget about it. I would.
Certainly all those who use bittorrent, and/or run their own webserver and/or mailserver.
Here's an idea. Create a whole bunch of ~700mb video files - content is unimportant as long as you filmed it yourself. Name them things like "Aliens.mp4" and "Terminator.mp4"
Why would the enforcers waste time downloading and verifying the files referred to by torrents, when torrent users already do that for them?
But here it comes: have we bought a central processing unit which has now become our property because we paid for it, or are we simply buying a "license" to use Intel's "intellectual property"?
Very good point. Intel might be looking at a class action lawsuit down the road, if enough customers buy into it, then later figure that they're getting ripped off and decide to sue.
I suspect some bean counter came up with this, and got the idea from shareware/demo-versions, which can be unlocked to full versions if you pay for a serial number or key.
This is yet another example of hardware, which is defective by design.
http://www.defectivebydesign.org/
Next up; pay to enable some GPU features, or enable the GPU (or any number of them) in next-gen CPUs.
This has the potential to get ugly.
It could get even more ugly, if Intel decides to put a time-out on the upgrade.
There just needs to be a tiny piece of flash memory in the CPU, which keeps count of how many minutes it has been running with the features switched on.
Let's say you buy a six month upgrade, which will let it run for approx. 263,000 minutes. That might come out to 18 months, if your PC runs for 8 hours every day.
Then the features get switched off, and you have to pay to switch them back on again.
Effectively, the features are now a subscription which you pay for.
Intel can be damn sure, that I won't buy into any of this. And neither should you. These types of business models need to be discouraged.
Just buying the PC, and only letting the suckers buy the upgrade won't get the message through.
We need to actively warn people against buying PCs with processors like this, otherwise it's going to be that way with all processors in a few years.
But here it comes: have we bought a central processing unit which has now become our property because we paid for it, or are we simply buying a "license" to use Intel's "intellectual property"?
Very good point. I'd say Intel might be looking at a class action lawsuit down the road, if enough customers buy into this, then figure they're being ripped off and decide to sue.
I suspect this came from some bean counter, who got the idea from shareware or demo versions with limited functionality, where you can purchase a serial number or key code to unlock the full functionality, and who figured this could work for CPUs too. Next up; enabling features in GPUs, and/or enabling the GPU in next-gen CPUs?
This has the potential to get ugly.
It could get even uglier - what if Intel decides to put a time-out on the upgrade, by using a tiny piece of flash memory embedded in the CPU for counting how long the CPU has been on with those features enabled?
Let's say you buy a one year upgrade, which means the CPU will run for a year (or approx. 526,000 minutes) with those features enabled, then switch those features off again.
That might come out to three years, if the PC is only on 8 hours every day.
Then those features will have become a subscription you pay for. Very ugly indeed.
Intel can be damn sure, that I won't buy into any of this.
Then USB drives hit the market and you had the best of both worlds, the size and the usability.
If you mean USB flash drives, there's that little, non-advertised 'snag', that USB drives start to lose write speed, when every datablock has been written to once.
In SSDs, that was (almost) fixed with the TRIM feature. Not so for USB flash drives.
Until that feature goes into them (if at all possible), I grind my teeth having to buy a USB flash drive to carry data with me.
Flash cells are degraded a little for every write, so flash drives will start to fail sooner or later.
Even if this takes some years, flash is still 'a sword hanging over your data', if written to on a daily basis.
If your PSU craps out, a voltage spike might fry any SSDs, as well as any attached USB flash drives along with it.
For comparison, magnetically stored data would be recoverable.
It would cheer me up a great deal if HRDs came to market soon:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/18/dataslides-hard-rectangular-drive-set-to-revolutionize-storage/
Although intended for internal storage, smaller editions might also be sturdy enough to compete with USB flash drives, and certainly replace external HDDs.
Longevity measured in decades (as I understand it), and the speed of SSD's.
The seek time (or equivalent) might be somewhere between Raptors and SSDs, but I could live with that.
There was an article online a few months ago about a guy who was accused of having child porn, except that the pornstar in question showed up at his trial and testified that she was 25 (25 for christ sake!) at the time the movie was made. People in the comments section of the article were universally of the opinion that he got off on a technicality.
I remember that slashdot article, although somewhat differently.
Sadly, I can't find it again. Anyone who can?
Please read this:
http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/gravity/gps-twins.asp
In short:
According to Special Relativity, since all motion is relative, time should pass slower on a spaceship speeding by Earth (as seen from Earth), but from the spaceship traveller's view, time should equally pass slower at the same rate on Earth, compared to the clock on the spaceship.
This might also interest you:
http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm
What if; you're innocent, but have forgotten the password?
You get to rot in jail for the rest of your life?
Well, this was the man page I found yesterday:
http://linux.die.net/man/1/d4x
And, if you get the package from debian or ubuntu, it has the Artistic License.
Anyway, I just noticed that f I install d4x (version 2.5.7.1-4 in debian 4.0), the binary is called "nt", and d4x is just a symlink to that binary. The man page installed along with it refers to "nt" and not d4x.
Maybe the license was changed from the artistic one at some point by the author, which probably means the source code was forked by debian developers and the name of the binary changed in the debian fork.
So, get the source package from debian or ubuntu, and you can modify it all you want. I'm assuming that the name change won't bother you.
Actually, d4x was released under the Artistic License: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0.php
From a brief read of it, I don't see much difference from the GPL.
You're certainly allowed to modify it. Section 2 and 3 say:
"2. You may apply bug fixes, portability fixes and other modifications derived from the Public Domain or from the Copyright Holder. A Package modified in such a way shall still be considered the Standard Version.
3. You may otherwise modify your copy of this Package in any way, provided that you insert a prominent notice in each changed file stating how and when you changed that file, and provided that you do at least ONE of the following:
a) place your modifications in the Public Domain or otherwise make them Freely Available, such as by posting said modifications to Usenet or an equivalent medium, or placing the modifications on a major archive site such as ftp.uu.net, or by allowing the Copyright Holder to include your modifications in the Standard Version of the Package."
There is also an Artistic License 2.0, but the original homepage for d4x is down, so I can't tell whether or not it was released or relicensed under AL 2.0.
If it was, it's allowed to change the license to a compatible one such as GPL, MPL, or Apache.
It's also included in all debian releases since at least 4.0 (Etch): http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=d4x&searchon=names&suite=all§ion=all. I don't think it would be, if it wasn't GPL-compatible.
Maybe you got hold of a version of d4x, that was relicensed inappropriately?
First of all, don't *you* have copyright of your own DNA?
.. somehow, the notion of lawyers digging up long-dead people doesn't seem all that strange to me.
Also, I think music from it could/should be considered a derivative work.
So to make any music from DNA legally, that someone would either have to obtain (buy/lease) the copyright from someone else, or use their own DNA.
Considering that copyright extends for 70 years beyond the 'author's death, maybe these lawyers will try to dig up people who have been dead for 70 years
That's 'serotonin' : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serotonin
The Xbox 360:
A product that literally is 'defective by design' (although probably not intentionally, DRM aside).
13 cm long? ... so, don't go skinny-dipping where these guys live. *shudders*
Try avocadoes, they contain a lot of fat - but it's good fat. Not trans fats like you'll find in a lot of food products.
Did you know, that most fat built-up on the inside of your arteries consist of trans fats?
After eating avocadoes a few times, they taste almost like nuts.
Remember to keep them in the fridge when the peel turns dark.
If they become very soft, they are too old, same with tomatoes.
Check Mother Earth News 1980:o n/1980-09-01/Mothers-Own-Hybrid-Car.aspx
w w.motherearthnews.com/Green-Transportation/1980-09 -01/Mothers-Own-Hybrid-Car.aspx+site:motherearthne ws.com+hybrid+1980
http://www.motherearthnews.com/Green-Transportati
The site was slow to begin with, so here's the Google cache:
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:ePauTxj56ckJ:w
No, but enforcing income tax is illegal - please read about Joe(Joseph) Banister, Larken Rose, and House Resolution 2525:
5 -06-28.htmI CLE_ID=44956
http://www.halexandria.org/dward295.htm
http://www.halexandria.org/dward294.htm
http://www.halexandria.org/dward293.htm
http://www.rense.com/general66/irstrial.htm
http://www.royalrife.com/banister.html
http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Update200
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ART
A flying car pretty much implies using anti-gravity, or free energy to hover/power the car.
Build it yourself - rexresearch.com is as good a place as any to start looking for the info how to do it.
A Volf propeller should get you started, a GEET engine should make it cheap enough to operate on a daily basis.