I disagree with part of this. A proper VM can actually perform faster in many complex scenarios where runtime optimization is better than static compilation. What makes web services suck is XML and SOAP. It's extremely bloated compared to packed binary representations. Parsing XML and walking DOM trees can be a killer.
"All right, let me see if I understand the logic of this correctly. We are going to ignore the United Nations in order to make clear to Saddam Hussein that the United Nations cannot be ignored. We're going to wage war to preserve the UN's ability to avert war. The paramount principle is that the UN's word must be taken seriously, and if we have to subvert its word to guarantee that it is, then by gum, we will. Peace is too important not to take up arms to defend. Am I getting this right? Further, if the only way to bring democracy to Iraq is to vitiate the democracy of the Security Council, then we are honor-bound to do that too, because democracy, as we define it, is too important to be stopped by a little thing like democracy as they define it. Also, in dealing with a man who brooks no dissension at home, we cannot afford dissension among ourselves. We must speak with one voice against Saddam Hussein's failure to allow opposing voices to be heard. We are sending our gathered might to the Persian Gulf to make the point that might does not make right, as Saddam Hussein seems to think it does. And we are twisting the arms of the opposition until it agrees to let us oust a regime that twists the arms of the opposition. We cannot leave in power a dictator who ignores his own people. And if our people, and people elsewhere in the world, fail to understand that, then we have no choice but to ignore them."- by PETER FREUNDLICH
the point, to put it delicately, is not that a windows machine cannot concievably be rendered reasonably secure. that may be possible. but microsoft has sold it's products on the ability to hire mindless boobs to operate them. the fact that microsoft can't secure it's own windows systems just goes to show that even a reasonably competent administrator would be challenged to maintain a basic windows system. i'm sure most of the world's windows admins aren't as godlike as you.
"We just had a security and penetration audit last month, and the only systems the auditors weren't able to penetrate were the Linux systems," he says.
gasps of shock and surprise. the same company replaced 40 windows web servers with 4 running linux/apache. I'll take one competent linux admin over 10 drooling idiots any day.
why are people so dense that they can't get a joke? that was a simpsons reference. usually the slashdot crowd picks up on that right away. I guess people are just taken up with too much jingo fever to see straight.
and I *am* an american. if you think people are jealous of america because of all of our "freedom", you've been smoking too much right-wing propaganda. they resent us for being a bunch swaggering of bung-hole bullies, spreading our own brand of fundamentalist christianity, having a double-standard with democracies (supporting dictators) and failing to keep basic promises.
I think it's simple to say you're responsible for your outbound traffic. If your machines are compromised, you should eat the bill for the traffic they generate. On the other hand, if you receive some wave of unwanted inbound traffic, you should definitely not be liable. Even a dropped UDP packet takes bandwidth.
In fact, I'd prefer a pricing model that is fixed for inbound and metered on the outbound. It puts a financial burden on spammers, copyright violators and the tragic/stupid victims viruses. On the other hand, if you've got something to sell, you should be more than happy to pay for bandwidth used to move that merchandise.
I like to hear stuff like this, but I'd like it even better if I heard it after it's already passed. The fact that this pending bill gets attention on Slashdot will only force Microsoft to 'deal' with it. And given the malleability of government servants in the face of cash bribes and coercion from large companies, this bill may not survive long.
and it's instant messaging... until they start to tax that as well. I spend a lot less time on the phone now that my family and friends are hooked up via cable modem or satellite.
Surely there must be a way to reduce spam without getting governments involved.
It's called vigilanteism. Let's all gang up on the bastards and give them a little taste of community justice. 'Cause if it isn't against the law, what other incentive do they have to stop.
It's obvious they're anti-spam because it's an American invention. In fact, I think George Bush invented it (shortly after Gore invented the internet).
this is all based on the flawed premise that your so-called 'belief system' has to be logical and self-consistent. hi, let me introduce you to the human capacity for rationalization.
please, show me the software on linux that will do this and not require a month to cobble together. really. I've looked and looked and played with everything out there. it's all pre-pre-alpha, takes forever to gather the pieces and still comes up short. if this software existed, I would cede your point.
in which scenario do they lose more money on a stock of existing consoles:
a) do not sell console
b) sell console
they've got a sunk cost and a huge inventory. considering the very small number of people willing to shell out dough to run linux on microsoft hardware, it will only defray their costs. you'd have to generate sales in the hundreds of thousands to even begin registering on their radar.
there was an article linked here recently where someone set up a cluster of xboxes and a cluster of cheap pc's and concluded that cheap walmart pc's were faster and more cost effective than the xboxes. so who's going to buy all these machines to run just linux? poorly?
no, if you buy an xbox, you're almost 100% going to play games, too.
IBM is all about Linux and Java these days. Choosing otherwise would have been a fatal mistake both in terms of marketing and technology. The Zaurus is good technology and a powerful proof point. With IBM's resources, they should be able to take the technology all the way.
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree with part of this. A proper VM can actually perform faster in many complex scenarios where runtime optimization is better than static compilation. What makes web services suck is XML and SOAP. It's extremely bloated compared to packed binary representations. Parsing XML and walking DOM trees can be a killer.
simple as that. I don't care how friggin' much I might want the music, I simply refuse to bankroll these jerks and their broken business models.
and I'm patient. this will all be sorted out in 10 years and I'll re-stock my collection.
this has everything to do with patents. W3C would have been an obstacle and they *definitely* want to try to set up a tollbooth for web services.
kofi annan (secretary general of the UN) said it would be a violation of international law.
"All right, let me see if I understand the logic of .
this correctly. We are going to ignore the United
Nations in order to make clear to Saddam Hussein that
the United Nations cannot be ignored. We're going to
wage war to preserve the UN's ability to avert war
The paramount principle is that the UN's word must be
taken seriously, and if we have to subvert its word to
guarantee that it is, then by gum, we will. Peace is
too important not to take up arms to defend. Am I
getting this right?
Further, if the only way to bring democracy to Iraq is
to vitiate the democracy of the Security Council, then
we are honor-bound to do that too, because democracy,
as we define it, is too important to be stopped by a
little thing like democracy as they define it. Also,
in dealing with a man who brooks no dissension at
home, we cannot afford dissension among ourselves.
We must speak with one voice against Saddam Hussein's
failure to allow opposing voices to be heard. We are
sending our gathered might to the Persian Gulf to make
the point that might does not make right, as Saddam
Hussein seems to think it does. And we are twisting
the arms of the opposition until it agrees to let us
oust a regime that twists the arms of the opposition.
We cannot leave in power a dictator who ignores his
own people. And if our people, and people elsewhere in
the world, fail to understand that, then we have no
choice but to ignore them."-
by PETER FREUNDLICH
the point, to put it delicately, is not that a windows machine cannot concievably be rendered reasonably secure. that may be possible. but microsoft has sold it's products on the ability to hire mindless boobs to operate them. the fact that microsoft can't secure it's own windows systems just goes to show that even a reasonably competent administrator would be challenged to maintain a basic windows system. i'm sure most of the world's windows admins aren't as godlike as you.
"We just had a security and penetration audit last month, and the only systems the auditors weren't able to penetrate were the Linux systems," he says.
gasps of shock and surprise. the same company replaced 40 windows web servers with 4 running linux/apache. I'll take one competent linux admin over 10 drooling idiots any day.
that's a fine approach for 'new' applications, but this is a much faster approach for porting existing apps or using existing API skillsets.
why are people so dense that they can't get a joke? that was a simpsons reference. usually the slashdot crowd picks up on that right away. I guess people are just taken up with too much jingo fever to see straight.
and I *am* an american. if you think people are jealous of america because of all of our "freedom", you've been smoking too much right-wing propaganda. they resent us for being a bunch swaggering of bung-hole bullies, spreading our own brand of fundamentalist christianity, having a double-standard with democracies (supporting dictators) and failing to keep basic promises.
As to the Sorceror's Stone, that was done because the American publisher felt that it sounded more "Magic-like" than Philosopher's Stone.
Stupid Americans. Worst Democracy Ever.
why does everyone feel the need to over-engineer? vfat is understood ubiquitously and so are many encrypted file formats. awesome first post.
I think it's simple to say you're responsible for your outbound traffic. If your machines are compromised, you should eat the bill for the traffic they generate. On the other hand, if you receive some wave of unwanted inbound traffic, you should definitely not be liable. Even a dropped UDP packet takes bandwidth.
In fact, I'd prefer a pricing model that is fixed for inbound and metered on the outbound. It puts a financial burden on spammers, copyright violators and the tragic/stupid victims viruses. On the other hand, if you've got something to sell, you should be more than happy to pay for bandwidth used to move that merchandise.
I like to hear stuff like this, but I'd like it even better if I heard it after it's already passed. The fact that this pending bill gets attention on Slashdot will only force Microsoft to 'deal' with it. And given the malleability of government servants in the face of cash bribes and coercion from large companies, this bill may not survive long.
I wonder how they managed to up the clock so dramatically?
Xeon + hobby paint.
and it's instant messaging... until they start to tax that as well. I spend a lot less time on the phone now that my family and friends are hooked up via cable modem or satellite.
Surely there must be a way to reduce spam without getting governments involved.
It's called vigilanteism. Let's all gang up on the bastards and give them a little taste of community justice. 'Cause if it isn't against the law, what other incentive do they have to stop.
It's obvious they're anti-spam because it's an American invention. In fact, I think George Bush invented it (shortly after Gore invented the internet).
Slashdot for people with serious ADD.
having fully read the aforementioned article, I'm definitely qualified to comment this time.
...what you said.
this is all based on the flawed premise that your so-called 'belief system' has to be logical and self-consistent. hi, let me introduce you to the human capacity for rationalization.
please, show me the software on linux that will do this and not require a month to cobble together. really. I've looked and looked and played with everything out there. it's all pre-pre-alpha, takes forever to gather the pieces and still comes up short. if this software existed, I would cede your point.
in which scenario do they lose more money on a stock of existing consoles:
a) do not sell console
b) sell console
they've got a sunk cost and a huge inventory. considering the very small number of people willing to shell out dough to run linux on microsoft hardware, it will only defray their costs. you'd have to generate sales in the hundreds of thousands to even begin registering on their radar.
there was an article linked here recently where someone set up a cluster of xboxes and a cluster of cheap pc's and concluded that cheap walmart pc's were faster and more cost effective than the xboxes. so who's going to buy all these machines to run just linux? poorly?
no, if you buy an xbox, you're almost 100% going to play games, too.
IBM is all about Linux and Java these days. Choosing otherwise would have been a fatal mistake both in terms of marketing and technology. The Zaurus is good technology and a powerful proof point. With IBM's resources, they should be able to take the technology all the way.
It said, "Record Label Thieves Selling CDRs". Which is, in spirit, kind of like cops selling crack then arresting you. Oh, wait...
Philips remote control division has recently released a remote based on Linux and Java. You would think Microsoft hates that if they cared.