How many of the chucklehead companies out there who license software "per CPU" are getting kicked in the groin by Microsoft hyperthreading? (Hyperthreading makes one CPU show up as two.)
Anyway...2+ CPUs seem to be standard on many servers these days, so this Sybase "free database" stuff appears to be crippleware, perhaps even more so than Microsoft's crappy little MSDE engine.
"I still don't get how anybody can even THINK of abandoning iron-to-gold alchemy. Sure, unusual chemicals are fragile and expensive. Sure, it's cheaper to just mine it. But CRIPES, people. It's an adventure! It's a new experience for the human race. That, IN AND OF ITSELF, is more than enough justification for continuing."
Let's face it. Humans aren't built for space. Put down the science-fiction magazine and think about reality for a while; just because we want something to be so doesn't make so. (Queue Clarke's quote about magic here...)
If there's one place closed source is on the level with open source, its when the entire package has been validated by the folks at NIST under the FIPS 140 program.
http://csrc.nist.gov/focus_areas.html#cryptograp hi c
In the United States, the National Institute of Standards and Technology determines what is and what is not to be considered secure enough for federal data processing using the definition below. I highlighted the part where MD5 would run into trouble because a method has been discovered to predict collisions in MD5. (NIST never classified MD5 as a "secure" hash.)
From the NIST site, FIPS 180-2 (http://www.nist.gov):
Federal Information
Processing Standards Publication 180-2
3. Explanation: This Standard specifies four secure hash algorithms - SHA-1, SHA-256,
SHA-384, and SHA-512 - for computing a condensed representation of electronic data
(message). When a message of any length < 264 bits (for SHA-1 and SHA-256) or < 2128 bits (for
SHA-384 and SHA-512) is input to an algorithm, the result is an output called a message digest.
The message digests range in length from 160 to 512 bits, depending on the algorithm. Secure
hash algorithms are typically used with other cryptographic algorithms, such as digital signature
algorithms and keyed-hash message authentication codes, or in the generation of random
numbers (bits).
The four hash algorithms specified in this standard are called secure because, for a given
algorithm, it is computationally infeasible 1) to find a message that corresponds to a given
message digest, or 2) to find two different messages that produce the same message digest. Any
change to a message will, with a very high probability, result in a different message digest. This
will result in a verification failure when the secure hash algorithm is used with a digital signature
algorithm or a keyed-hash message authentication algorithm.
NIST (http://csrc.nist.gov/cryptval/) ran the AES contest (http://csrc.nist.gov/CryptoToolkit/aes/index.html ). They would be the body to run future contests of the same sort.
BTW, NIST never approved MD5 for government use (as per FIPS), but they have been validating implementations of SHA-1 for several years. NIST also now validates SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512, each essentially a longer version of SHA-1 ("160").
I think $60/student/year for unlimited filesharing was a no-brainer for NIU. This service appears to be only available in the dorms, and one of NIU's focuses in the past decade has been to convert the campus from a Chicagoland commuters' university a back to a traditional 4-year residential university. I think this is a big step toward figuring out how to fill the dorms.
Of course by now I'm sure every floor has a Comp Sci major who has figured out how to break through the protections on the media service, but hacking through a local media store is probably safer than hacking into Japanese video game companies anyway...
Actually, its TWO new MMORPGs. If you check their site, they are also planning on releasing D&D Online in the same year. With both of these going toe-to-toe with World of Warcraft, who know who will survive.
But what do I know? One of these days I'll finish my quest to level to 10 in Smaug, and then move on. (Sigh)
Programmers and other technicians are akin to auto mechanics. Not that that's necessary a bad thing, with good auto mechanics making around 80-100K. However, I agree you don't need a college education to be a good entry-level, grunt-work programmer or technician - just experience.
I'd still always put someone with a computer science or engineering degree on an architecture or design team first. The nice thing about people without college degrees is that I can pay them less, but people with formal educations tend to take things like testing, conformance to design and timelines more seriously. (If nothing else, the discipline it took them to get a college degree puts them up over people living in their mom's basement while fooling around with Dad's PC for two years.)
Basically Hawking admitted that black holes "leak" information in such a way that "white holes" and wormholes linked to black holes (as people popularly envisioned them) were probably not possible.
The fellows running the Mono project still say that if Microsoft says "boo" the first thing they will drop from the Mono project is ASP.NET support.
At my company, that is the only thing holding us up from switching over to Mono for our commercial solutions.
The fellows running the Mono project still say that if Microsoft says "boo" the first thing they will drop from the Mono project is ASP.NET support.
At my company, that is the only thing holding us up from switching over to Mono for our commercial solutions.
The fellows running the Mono project still say that if Microsoft says "boo" the first thing they will drop from the Mono project is ASP.NET support.
At my company, that is the only thing holding us up from switching over to Mono for our commercial solutions.
Pound-for-pound, I'll agree with you. Sun's hardware is top-of-the-line.
Dollar-for-dollar, I won't agree, however.
If you have unlimited budget, Sun looks good. But, if you need to live the real world, you can get the same job done cheaper with Linux and a few extra PCs.
How is this different? From the customers' perspective, the cool thing about Sun is the *nix OS. However, there are thousands of "makers" (e.g., Linux distributors) out there with a similar, often compatible system.
So, I think we agree that Sun isn't holding onto the *nix market because Sun's *nix implementation isn't really that proprietary.
However, faced with the choice of buying expensive Sun hardware (or IBM hardware twenty years ago) to to support a similar OS, users choose the discount hardware. That's why Sun is headed down the toilet.
Agreed?
If the transition away from motherboards would be "slow" and, as AMD is showing us, there are already other ways to achieve similar benefits with motherboards, why do you tout this tech as a "replacement" for motherboards?
No I haven't, but in large part that's my point. People are dumping Sun because of all the proprietary crap they need to support their systems. It's the same reason IBM couldn't hold on to the PC market twenty years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's all the prior art you will ever need to fight a generic file hashing patent from 1997:
http://www.itl.nist.gov/fipspubs/fip180-1.htm Published 1995 April 17 (FIPS 180 was published 1993 May 11)
Explanation: This Standard specifies a Secure Hash Algorithm, SHA-1, for computing a condensed representation of a message or a data file
Game over.
Vitals Missing from the Spec Sheet? What are the approved heat/cold and humidity ranges for the "CarBot"? I didn't see those on the "Spec Sheet"...
How many of the chucklehead companies out there who license software "per CPU" are getting kicked in the groin by Microsoft hyperthreading? (Hyperthreading makes one CPU show up as two.)
Anyway...2+ CPUs seem to be standard on many servers these days, so this Sybase "free database" stuff appears to be crippleware, perhaps even more so than Microsoft's crappy little MSDE engine.
Ethereal is for the weak - real admins use snort.
Why don't we just borrow China's design? (See yesterday's nuke discussion...)
"I still don't get how anybody can even THINK of abandoning iron-to-gold alchemy. Sure, unusual chemicals are fragile and expensive. Sure, it's cheaper to just mine it. But CRIPES, people. It's an adventure! It's a new experience for the human race. That, IN AND OF ITSELF, is more than enough justification for continuing."
Let's face it. Humans aren't built for space. Put down the science-fiction magazine and think about reality for a while; just because we want something to be so doesn't make so. (Queue Clarke's quote about magic here...)
If there's one place closed source is on the level with open source, its when the entire package has been validated by the folks at NIST under the FIPS 140 program.
p hi c
http://csrc.nist.gov/focus_areas.html#cryptogra
In the United States, the National Institute of Standards and Technology determines what is and what is not to be considered secure enough for federal data processing using the definition below. I highlighted the part where MD5 would run into trouble because a method has been discovered to predict collisions in MD5. (NIST never classified MD5 as a "secure" hash.)
From the NIST site, FIPS 180-2 (http://www.nist.gov):
Federal Information Processing Standards Publication 180-2
3. Explanation: This Standard specifies four secure hash algorithms - SHA-1, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512 - for computing a condensed representation of electronic data (message). When a message of any length < 264 bits (for SHA-1 and SHA-256) or < 2128 bits (for SHA-384 and SHA-512) is input to an algorithm, the result is an output called a message digest. The message digests range in length from 160 to 512 bits, depending on the algorithm. Secure hash algorithms are typically used with other cryptographic algorithms, such as digital signature algorithms and keyed-hash message authentication codes, or in the generation of random numbers (bits).
The four hash algorithms specified in this standard are called secure because, for a given algorithm, it is computationally infeasible 1) to find a message that corresponds to a given message digest, or 2) to find two different messages that produce the same message digest. Any change to a message will, with a very high probability, result in a different message digest. This will result in a verification failure when the secure hash algorithm is used with a digital signature algorithm or a keyed-hash message authentication algorithm.
http://eprint.iacr.org/2004/199.pdf
NIST (http://csrc.nist.gov/cryptval/) ran the AES contest (http://csrc.nist.gov/CryptoToolkit/aes/index.html ). They would be the body to run future contests of the same sort.
BTW, NIST never approved MD5 for government use (as per FIPS), but they have been validating implementations of SHA-1 for several years. NIST also now validates SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512, each essentially a longer version of SHA-1 ("160").
I think $60/student/year for unlimited filesharing was a no-brainer for NIU. This service appears to be only available in the dorms, and one of NIU's focuses in the past decade has been to convert the campus from a Chicagoland commuters' university a back to a traditional 4-year residential university. I think this is a big step toward figuring out how to fill the dorms.
Of course by now I'm sure every floor has a Comp Sci major who has figured out how to break through the protections on the media service, but hacking through a local media store is probably safer than hacking into Japanese video game companies anyway...
Actually, its TWO new MMORPGs. If you check their site, they are also planning on releasing D&D Online in the same year. With both of these going toe-to-toe with World of Warcraft, who know who will survive.
But what do I know? One of these days I'll finish my quest to level to 10 in Smaug, and then move on. (Sigh)
Why hack the GOP - just hack your local Diebold...
I'd still always put someone with a computer science or engineering degree on an architecture or design team first. The nice thing about people without college degrees is that I can pay them less, but people with formal educations tend to take things like testing, conformance to design and timelines more seriously. (If nothing else, the discipline it took them to get a college degree puts them up over people living in their mom's basement while fooling around with Dad's PC for two years.)
Yeah - I was being cheeky.
Basically Hawking admitted that black holes "leak" information in such a way that "white holes" and wormholes linked to black holes (as people popularly envisioned them) were probably not possible.
The fellows running the Mono project still say that if Microsoft says "boo" the first thing they will drop from the Mono project is ASP.NET support. At my company, that is the only thing holding us up from switching over to Mono for our commercial solutions.
The fellows running the Mono project still say that if Microsoft says "boo" the first thing they will drop from the Mono project is ASP.NET support. At my company, that is the only thing holding us up from switching over to Mono for our commercial solutions.
The fellows running the Mono project still say that if Microsoft says "boo" the first thing they will drop from the Mono project is ASP.NET support. At my company, that is the only thing holding us up from switching over to Mono for our commercial solutions.
Ahem...didn't you hear Hawking a few weeks back?
Yep. .NET 1.1 + IIS 6 (on Windows 2003) is good stuff. It's fast, reliable and relatively secure.
Now, if only the Mono project would grow a pair and free up their ASP.NET implementation...
Pound-for-pound, I'll agree with you. Sun's hardware is top-of-the-line. Dollar-for-dollar, I won't agree, however. If you have unlimited budget, Sun looks good. But, if you need to live the real world, you can get the same job done cheaper with Linux and a few extra PCs.
How is this different? From the customers' perspective, the cool thing about Sun is the *nix OS. However, there are thousands of "makers" (e.g., Linux distributors) out there with a similar, often compatible system. So, I think we agree that Sun isn't holding onto the *nix market because Sun's *nix implementation isn't really that proprietary. However, faced with the choice of buying expensive Sun hardware (or IBM hardware twenty years ago) to to support a similar OS, users choose the discount hardware. That's why Sun is headed down the toilet. Agreed?
If the transition away from motherboards would be "slow" and, as AMD is showing us, there are already other ways to achieve similar benefits with motherboards, why do you tout this tech as a "replacement" for motherboards?
No I haven't, but in large part that's my point. People are dumping Sun because of all the proprietary crap they need to support their systems. It's the same reason IBM couldn't hold on to the PC market twenty years ago.