This is a great thing. Amazon is learning. In the past Amazon has been too much like Apple, with their being a controlling dick about everything upfront.
They should learn from MS, and be kind upfront, only to be a controlling dick later after they have huge market share.
Open source is largely about scratching your own itch. One would only expect that open source programming tools would be of much higher quality then open source in other categories.
I am but a young'in(~30 sun cycles) but I can't remember a time when commercial compilers and tools were better then open source ones.. Of course, I do have a Beardy Unix Guy, so my opinions are widely different from some MCSE I guess.
Upper middle class is a clearly defined term. It uses a quintile system, where earners are broken down into 5 equal sized groups. Upper middle is currently $55K-$88K.
If you prefer to use a quartile system, the inter quartile range (called the middle by normal people) is 25K-75K.
The median income is $44K. The mean income is $60K. It's significantly higher then the median because the rich are SO much richer then the poor, and they skew the scale.
Any way you want to define middle, the top 1.5% DO NOT QUALIFY.
Perhaps it's good that people don't have a good grasp of the true nature of wealth distribution in this country, there would be riots in the streets.
We're over, but in the same way that England is "over". A time is coming soon when we won't account for 1/2 of the world's military spending. When we have to be a little bit kinder and a little more humble. Lets start doing that *NOW* before it comes from the barrel of a gun.
I decided it was too rich for my blood, and bought a Casio FX-115ES for my bag carry calculator. Doesn't have RPN or equation storage, but what you do get for under $20 is quite impressive.
I too prefer HP calcs, and have HP 50G for home use, but it's too large and too expensive for me to keep in my bag.
Yes, the fossil record only contradicts the literal reading of a 6000 year old earth with special creation of each type of animal, literal world-wide flood, etc.
If I had to make a prediction, the iPhone will go up in numbers in use, but down in total smartphone marketshare, as Android gobbles up the low end. At the high end, iOS will still have a large market share.
Personally, I'm invested enough in iOS software that I'm not switching anytime soon, even if Android hardware became 4x faster then Apple hardware tomorrow..
Coal releases more radiation in an average year then a nuke plant, releases more small particulate matter that causes lung disease, releases CO2 that correlates with global warming, and has killed far more more miners then have ever been killed by all nuclear power incidents combined.
I work in computer security, and do risk assessment for a living, so I recognize the biases on this issue as similar to those in my day job. Coal related deaths are slow and silent(usually, though think of the number of mining related incidents you've heard of in the past year), nuke plant accidents are big, noisy, and unusual. Our biases are to be afraid of big noisy unusual things like nuke plants and terrorists, while ignoring the obvious things that are actually likely to kill us like auto accidents, heart disease, and to a much smaller extent, coal generation.
I live about 11 miles from a nuke plant, which happens to be the largest spent fuel holding facility in the nation. I bought this house knowing that, and and if there was a coal plant that far away I probably wouldn't have bought this house.
I'm totally in favor of them building 2 more nuke plants close to me as is planned. I'm also in favor of review of the safety systems of the older plants. Nuclear safety designes have gotten much better than they were in the 80s when construction stopped.
Yes, no one can clearly define the difference, which is what I said in my post.
Saying there is therefore no difference is what is called the Fallacy of the Beard or Continuum fallacy. There's no clear dividing line between stubble and a beard, but there are some that clearly have beards and some that don't.
This same problem comes up in obscenity cases. A supreme court justice famously said "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced[b]ut I know it when I see it"
The fact that you choose to deny any qualitative difference between long term investment in a company (think Warren Buffet's way of investing) and flash trading or high frequency trading is disappointing if not surprising. One is at least potentially a long-term benefit to our countries economic growth, the other is pure gambling. There is of course a lot more grey area in between, but trying to hide any possible difference just because you can't define a strong line in the sand is philosophically bankrupt.
GPL seeks to maximise liberty for the end user. BSD seeks to maximise liberty for the developer.
Both promote a kind of freedom, just for different parties. That's the way it is in the real world, liberties for different parties are balanced against each other.
That is only hearsay about Chrome 8, not to mention by now Chrome 8 is all but is gone from the net. With Chrome's auto-update, it takes about 2 weeks from the release of a new chrome version to the old one being irrelevant. Impressive graph here: http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-weekly-201106-201111 . Chrome 10 came out 2 weeks ago, and Chrome 9 went from ~15% market share to ~0.5% market share in two weeks because of auto-updates. There's now more IE 5 out there then Chrome 8.
Chrome 10 works fine on XP and Windows 7. I just tested them both at https://sni.velox.ch/. I don't have a Vista install handy at the moment, but I'm sure it works fine too.
Chrome used to use the native Windows SSL libraries, but switched to NSS (the firefox crypto library) a few versions ago, and is now working just fine.
As for Safari on Windows XP, the market share is so low that it doesn't matter. Safari on Windows is almost non-existent to begin with.
Because: 1) XP is still supported. Mainstream support ended Spring 2009, but extended support runs until 2014. 2) SNI was added to IE 7 in 2006, before the last XP service pack, but SNI support was only added to Vista and higher. MS chose on purpose to not add it to XP at a time XP was still in full support, and service packs (major updates) were still being produced.
Yes, orgs and individuals could upgrade off XP, but it is not primarily their fault. Microsoft made the decision to not include SNI in XP on purpose, whatever their motivation was.
The certs from StartCom are whatever you generate for them to sign. Last year they accepted 1024 bit RSA and 2048 bit RSA. LIke the rest of the SSL vendors, in 2011 only 2048 bit RSA certs are allowed for issuance, and full transition to 2048 only certs by 2013.
Secondly, the 128 or 256 bit symmetric crypto has nothing to do with the SSL cert or provider, that's software settings on the host. 128 bit AES is widely considered secure against attacks for the next 20 years or so, and 256 bit should be secure for the as far into the future as we can guess. http://www.keylength.com/
The (in)security I refer to has to do with the level of checking into who you are. Basically, they just send an email to administrator type address at the site you want a cert for, and if you get the email you are assumed to be the admin. This can be attacked easily through DNS flaws or just signing up for a webmail account with an address that the SSL provider thinks sounds like an admin account. This happened to many of the large webmail providers before they started blocking the common admin accounts for registration.
XKCD was right. The common attacks are against the humans who run your DNS or mail providers, not that the crypto is weak. http://xkcd.com/538/
Whether it requires significantly more depends on your usage model. The bulk private key crypto is fast enough to be free for all practical purposes. The private key crypto that is done at the beginning of the session adds both CPU time and network latency due to the multiple extra steps in the handshake.
When Google switched gmail over to SSL only, they saw no noticeable impact (~%1 change)because the site tends to have long lived sessions with many requests, and the setup cost is amortized over the length of the connections.
If you had a site where millions of people connected once an hour or once a day and your SSLSessionCache is set to shorter than the expected reconnect time, you would have a high overhead due to having to renegotiate a shared secret again for the bulk, cheap, public key crypto.
So, if you have long lived sessions and reasonable SSLSessionCache settings, SSL can have very little overhead. If you have short lived sessions and small SSLSessionCache time, it can have fairly high overhead.
These CPU costs aren't the limiting factor, it's the added admin complexity as you noted and the fact that IE on XP does not support SSL on virtual hosts.
Free certs are available, and every bit as (in)secure as the paid standard ssl certs. http://cert.startcom.org/ [startcom.org]
Virtual hosts are only a problem if all the following are true: You use IE on XP on IPv4. Everyone else but IE on XP now supports SNI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication IPv6 makes name based virtual hosting unnecessary.
I think personally I'll give IE on XP on IPv4 another year or two before I'll stop supporting that combo on my personal sites. Sorry MS, but you don't get to hold the internet back forever.
For large hosters, SSL key distribution and updates becomes a problem when using large server farms or CDNs. Doing SSL in hardware on load balancers solves this for server farms, while CDNs are a more difficult problem.
Those are the main reasons. Latency and CPU usage are not deal-breakers today, though they are a factor.
Today one of the major reasons is that IE on XP does not support the SSL/TLS extensions for virtual hosting. When he says,"it's only partially implemented" he means everywhere but IE(any version) on XP. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication
If you were as heavily involved in attacking the computer systems of other countries as China is, you would want to make sure that you control as much of your own systems as possible.
Basically, it's a bill written by Time Warner with the goal of killing municipal broadband and the competition and increased service it brings. They want to morgage our future competitiveness for a few thousand in campaign contributions, and I'm mad as hell about it.
I think this is the 3rd time a similar bill has come up, and it's more likely to pass with the greater Republican presence this go-around..
Which is exactly why there is a proposed bill in NC written by the Time Warner that would make it illegal for any more municipal Internet, and greatly increace the tax burden and accounting practices of the few that have already sprung up. They're scared still they might have to provide good service, so are willing to hobble broadband in my state for the forseeable future. My rep has gotten an ear-full about it, with more to come as the bill moves through...
Second, Abortion is pretty much a clear-cut case: the vast majority of abortions take place while the foetus is several millimeters long. They are not human beings, don't even have a brain let alone pain centers, and don't even remotely look like a child. You may still be against abortion -- and I am even willing to admit there is a moral component to this -- but it definitely require a bit more than the fuzzy statement given above.
It's much more complex than that. They are human in just about every possible way of defining humanity, but they are definitely not self-aware. It's totally a moral issue, and both sides can point to details in the science that supports their point of view.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a great thing. Amazon is learning. In the past Amazon has been too much like Apple, with their being a controlling dick about everything upfront.
They should learn from MS, and be kind upfront, only to be a controlling dick later after they have huge market share.
I don't care if a company is big, but I do care if a company is Oracle.
Larry, thanks for BTRFS. Otherwise, F*** You.
Open source is largely about scratching your own itch. One would only expect that open source programming tools would be of much higher quality then open source in other categories.
I am but a young'in(~30 sun cycles) but I can't remember a time when commercial compilers and tools were better then open source ones.. Of course, I do have a Beardy Unix Guy, so my opinions are widely different from some MCSE I guess.
Woah, woah, whoah!
$250,000 and above is the top 1.5%. That's not the middle of ANYTHING.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States
Upper middle class is a clearly defined term. It uses a quintile system, where earners are broken down into 5 equal sized groups.
Upper middle is currently $55K-$88K.
If you prefer to use a quartile system, the inter quartile range (called the middle by normal people) is 25K-75K.
The median income is $44K.
The mean income is $60K. It's significantly higher then the median because the rich are SO much richer then the poor, and they skew the scale.
Any way you want to define middle, the top 1.5% DO NOT QUALIFY.
Perhaps it's good that people don't have a good grasp of the true nature of wealth distribution in this country, there would be riots in the streets.
For people who don't like statistics, perhaps the funniez? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b66u-mzfBPE
We're over, but in the same way that England is "over". A time is coming soon when we won't account for 1/2 of the world's military spending. When we have to be a little bit kinder and a little more humble. Lets start doing that *NOW* before it comes from the barrel of a gun.
This is what the peace-nicks are on about.
The HP 35s sounds exactly like what you want.
I decided it was too rich for my blood, and bought a Casio FX-115ES for my bag carry calculator. Doesn't have RPN or equation storage, but what you do get for under $20 is quite impressive.
I too prefer HP calcs, and have HP 50G for home use, but it's too large and too expensive for me to keep in my bag.
Yes, the fossil record only contradicts the literal reading of a 6000 year old earth with special creation of each type of animal, literal world-wide flood, etc.
You might be surprised to learn how many people believe the Genesis story is literally true. http://scienceblogs.com/strangerfruit/2007/10/genesis_held_to_be_literally_t.php
If I had to make a prediction, the iPhone will go up in numbers in use, but down in total smartphone marketshare, as Android gobbles up the low end. At the high end, iOS will still have a large market share.
Personally, I'm invested enough in iOS software that I'm not switching anytime soon, even if Android hardware became 4x faster then Apple hardware tomorrow..
macvim is even better.
http://code.google.com/p/macvim/
Coal releases more radiation in an average year then a nuke plant, releases more small particulate matter that causes lung disease, releases CO2 that correlates with global warming, and has killed far more more miners then have ever been killed by all nuclear power incidents combined.
Here's Seth Godin's simple post of the number of deaths per terrawatt hour of different generating technology:
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2011/03/the-triumph-of-coal-marketing.html
I work in computer security, and do risk assessment for a living, so I recognize the biases on this issue as similar to those in my day job. Coal related deaths are slow and silent(usually, though think of the number of mining related incidents you've heard of in the past year), nuke plant accidents are big, noisy, and unusual. Our biases are to be afraid of big noisy unusual things like nuke plants and terrorists, while ignoring the obvious things that are actually likely to kill us like auto accidents, heart disease, and to a much smaller extent, coal generation.
I live about 11 miles from a nuke plant, which happens to be the largest spent fuel holding facility in the nation. I bought this house knowing that, and and if there was a coal plant that far away I probably wouldn't have bought this house.
I'm totally in favor of them building 2 more nuke plants close to me as is planned. I'm also in favor of review of the safety systems of the older plants. Nuclear safety designes have gotten much better than they were in the 80s when construction stopped.
Yes, no one can clearly define the difference, which is what I said in my post.
Saying there is therefore no difference is what is called the Fallacy of the Beard or Continuum fallacy. There's no clear dividing line between stubble and a beard, but there are some that clearly have beards and some that don't.
This same problem comes up in obscenity cases. A supreme court justice famously said "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced[b]ut I know it when I see it"
The fact that you choose to deny any qualitative difference between long term investment in a company (think Warren Buffet's way of investing) and flash trading or high frequency trading is disappointing if not surprising. One is at least potentially a long-term benefit to our countries economic growth, the other is pure gambling. There is of course a lot more grey area in between, but trying to hide any possible difference just because you can't define a strong line in the sand is philosophically bankrupt.
That sounds like investment work, and not what people dislike about finance.
The market players work in two basic ways: Investment and gambling.
Investment grows the economy, but high speed trading and the like are nothing more then gambling, redistributing wealth instead of creating it..
Obviously there's a fine line between investment and gambling, which is why it's a hard thing to regulate.
GPL seeks to maximise liberty for the end user.
BSD seeks to maximise liberty for the developer.
Both promote a kind of freedom, just for different parties. That's the way it is in the real world, liberties for different parties are balanced against each other.
That is only hearsay about Chrome 8, not to mention by now Chrome 8 is all but is gone from the net. With Chrome's auto-update, it takes about 2 weeks from the release of a new chrome version to the old one being irrelevant. Impressive graph here: http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-weekly-201106-201111 . Chrome 10 came out 2 weeks ago, and Chrome 9 went from ~15% market share to ~0.5% market share in two weeks because of auto-updates. There's now more IE 5 out there then Chrome 8.
Chrome 10 works fine on XP and Windows 7. I just tested them both at https://sni.velox.ch/. I don't have a Vista install handy at the moment, but I'm sure it works fine too.
Chrome used to use the native Windows SSL libraries, but switched to NSS (the firefox crypto library) a few versions ago, and is now working just fine.
As for Safari on Windows XP, the market share is so low that it doesn't matter. Safari on Windows is almost non-existent to begin with.
Because:
1) XP is still supported. Mainstream support ended Spring 2009, but extended support runs until 2014.
2) SNI was added to IE 7 in 2006, before the last XP service pack, but SNI support was only added to Vista and higher. MS chose on purpose to not add it to XP at a time XP was still in full support, and service packs (major updates) were still being produced.
Yes, orgs and individuals could upgrade off XP, but it is not primarily their fault. Microsoft made the decision to not include SNI in XP on purpose, whatever their motivation was.
The certs from StartCom are whatever you generate for them to sign. Last year they accepted 1024 bit RSA and 2048 bit RSA. LIke the rest of the SSL vendors, in 2011 only 2048 bit RSA certs are allowed for issuance, and full transition to 2048 only certs by 2013.
Secondly, the 128 or 256 bit symmetric crypto has nothing to do with the SSL cert or provider, that's software settings on the host. 128 bit AES is widely considered secure against attacks for the next 20 years or so, and 256 bit should be secure for the as far into the future as we can guess. http://www.keylength.com/
The (in)security I refer to has to do with the level of checking into who you are. Basically, they just send an email to administrator type address at the site you want a cert for, and if you get the email you are assumed to be the admin. This can be attacked easily through DNS flaws or just signing up for a webmail account with an address that the SSL provider thinks sounds like an admin account. This happened to many of the large webmail providers before they started blocking the common admin accounts for registration.
XKCD was right. The common attacks are against the humans who run your DNS or mail providers, not that the crypto is weak.
http://xkcd.com/538/
Whether it requires significantly more depends on your usage model.
The bulk private key crypto is fast enough to be free for all practical purposes.
The private key crypto that is done at the beginning of the session adds both CPU time and network latency due to the multiple extra steps in the handshake.
When Google switched gmail over to SSL only, they saw no noticeable impact (~%1 change)because the site tends to have long lived sessions with many requests, and the setup cost is amortized over the length of the connections.
If you had a site where millions of people connected once an hour or once a day and your SSLSessionCache is set to shorter than the expected reconnect time, you would have a high overhead due to having to renegotiate a shared secret again for the bulk, cheap, public key crypto.
So, if you have long lived sessions and reasonable SSLSessionCache settings, SSL can have very little overhead. If you have short lived sessions and small SSLSessionCache time, it can have fairly high overhead.
These CPU costs aren't the limiting factor, it's the added admin complexity as you noted and the fact that IE on XP does not support SSL on virtual hosts.
Free certs are available, and every bit as (in)secure as the paid standard ssl certs.
http://cert.startcom.org/ [startcom.org]
Virtual hosts are only a problem if all the following are true:
You use IE on XP on IPv4.
Everyone else but IE on XP now supports SNI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication
IPv6 makes name based virtual hosting unnecessary.
I think personally I'll give IE on XP on IPv4 another year or two before I'll stop supporting that combo on my personal sites. Sorry MS, but you don't get to hold the internet back forever.
Free certs are available, and every bit as (in)secure as the paid standard ssl certs.
http://cert.startcom.org/
The "annoying users when they expire" is a symptom of the main problem.
Well, actually it's 2 problems.
For small hosters, IE(any version) on XP doesn't support SSL/TLS on virtual hosts. Everybody else does. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication
For large hosters, SSL key distribution and updates becomes a problem when using large server farms or CDNs. Doing SSL in hardware on load balancers solves this for server farms, while CDNs are a more difficult problem.
Those are the main reasons. Latency and CPU usage are not deal-breakers today, though they are a factor.
Today one of the major reasons is that IE on XP does not support the SSL/TLS extensions for virtual hosting.
When he says,"it's only partially implemented" he means everywhere but IE(any version) on XP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication
If you were as heavily involved in attacking the computer systems of other countries as China is, you would want to make sure that you control as much of your own systems as possible.
For those with interest, the bill is here:
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2011&BillID=H129
There's good analysis and info here: http://www.muninetworks.org/taxonomy/term/564
http://www.muninetworks.org/content/natural-monopoly-north-carolina-need-community-networks-and-competition
http://www.newrules.org/information/news/bill-limit-community-broadband-north-carolina-will-kill-jobs
http://stopthecap.com/2011/03/08/broken-promises-rep-marilyn-avila-r-time-warner-says-one-thing-in-public-another-in-private/
Basically, it's a bill written by Time Warner with the goal of killing municipal broadband and the competition and increased service it brings.
They want to morgage our future competitiveness for a few thousand in campaign contributions, and I'm mad as hell about it.
I think this is the 3rd time a similar bill has come up, and it's more likely to pass with the greater Republican presence this go-around..
Which is exactly why there is a proposed bill in NC written by the Time Warner that would make it illegal for any more municipal Internet, and greatly increace the tax burden and accounting practices of the few that have already sprung up. They're scared still they might have to provide good service, so are willing to hobble broadband in my state for the forseeable future. My rep has gotten an ear-full about it, with more to come as the bill moves through...
The Uzebox is another one, which has a bigger developer folllowing than the Chameleon boards and even has an emulator for development use.
Second, Abortion is pretty much a clear-cut case: the vast majority of abortions take place while the foetus is several millimeters long. They are not human beings, don't even have a brain let alone pain centers, and don't even remotely look like a child. You may still be against abortion -- and I am even willing to admit there is a moral component to this -- but it definitely require a bit more than the fuzzy statement given above.
It's much more complex than that. They are human in just about every possible way of defining humanity, but they are definitely not self-aware.
It's totally a moral issue, and both sides can point to details in the science that supports their point of view.