That's great for you but what about those to have cryogenically frozen themselves waiting for technology to develop far enough to revive them!
Since the chances of a hit in water with following waves is the most likely just make sure they store you far from the coast, in a cave in the mountain, with backup power
He natively speaks French but admits to forgetting words often. Especially nouns.
That can happen without actually leaving your home country. Almost every novel I read is in english (I'm norwegian). Part of the reason is that I don't like translators because often things can be translated without loosing something (e.g wordplay), part is I don't have the patience to wait for a translation and a lot of the books I read won't ever be translated to norwegian. In addition to this I work as a programmer and all technical information (that's up to date) is in english. The result of this is that my english vocabulary is better. I still speak norwegian daily, but sometimes when I want to describe something I can't come up with a suitable word in norwegian
I've got a better one
1. Enter site
2. Realize site sucks because they have audio popups you can't tur off
3. Edit host file
4. Never come back even by accident
<rant>If people would choose not to block plain banner ads (without javascript or cookies or other shit) while blocking the rest, things might improve. Sooner or later advertisers have to realize that the more obnoxious and annoying they make their ads the smaller the chance of getting positive attention gets. I will never visit a site through a popup ad or annoying blinking flash or any such shit. Now if enough of the internet user decide they've had enough and collectively ignore/block intrusive advertising we can get rid of it<rant/>
Plus, with one more octet, I'll have 100 IP addresses
Yes but there a still advantages to having an oversized address space. When script kiddies start scanning for targets it'll take a lot longer to find anything
With intelligent distribution if IP addresses routing can be made faster. Since an ISP doesn't have to use all of its address space a network can be set up so that (using ip4 syntax for simplicity) if the isp owns the 1.2.*.* ip range pakets for 1.2.1.* go on network segment1 1.2.2.* goes on segment 2 and so on. You couldn't have done that with ip4 since you would have to use the IP space efficiently. Simple way to do this is combined routers/switch/dhcp server that get's a range of of addresses and assigns them this way (a series of these could be used in a tree structure for large netwoks). Since the r/s/d box decides the distribution if addresses swithcing can be made very efficient since it would need to check only part of the destination address (could be done in hw) and introduce less latency
I don't want my toaster to have a public IP address
You just wait until they put that IP enabled pacemaker into you. The hospital will be able to monitor the battery easily, and that ungratefule slob of useless trash grandson you put in your will anyway get's to practice his 1337 h4x0rin9 zki115. It's technology, how can it be bad?
But if they were unaware at the time that the infracting code was in it, it's ludicrous to claim they suddenly have surrendered portions of their code base.
But afaik they still ship it. To be taken seriously they would have to stop distributing the kernel, or make one where all the parts (they think) they have claims on are removed. (Which would make it easy to just do a diff against a real kernel, see what the alleged infringements are, and then laugh in SCO's face.) When they keep distributing code under GPL after they have discovered somone else put their code in it they would have to stop distributing it, by continuing to give away code that they know contains their code they are surrendering it
But if there is significant proprietary code in open source that the owner did not put some type of open license
Which is exactly what sco themselves does when distributing OpenLinux. Any claim they may have had on any part of the code is uninteresting now since they themselves (as copyrightholders) have distributed the source under GPL (and other lisences).
If they never themselves ditributed linux they might have had the snowball's chance, now they haven't even got that.
and you WILL start seeing things like EULAs that require you to give up your children
I've seen this at the top of an EULA (quote from memory so it's probably not completely accurate:
It's important that you read this, especially the part about your firstborn child
I think it was for the crossover plugin. I laughed so hard I almost splurted coffe all over my keyboard. And for once I actually read the complete EULA to see if there was any more fun in there, sadly it wasn't
I fail to understand what is new about this... you do realize this is Slashdot, right?
I do. Slashdot where anonymous nerds post comments to an article whitout having read it. But the editors shouldn't, at least not when their comment shows on the front page. And in this case the comment isnt adding to the misinformation / rumors, it's creating them.
"money to id in exchange for the right to make their latest game an Xbox-only title as far as consoles are concerned. (It'd still come out on the PC, of course.)"
I can live with people commenting without having read the articles, but now the editors add their clever comment without having read (or understood) the article
And how does that affect the logic behind "When you work for someone they have the right to your work.
I was arguing that signing away copyright can't be made illegal, because that would make it impossible for companies (big or small) that create IP (developers, newspapers, research...) to exist, since any employee could quit and take the copyright to the companys product with him.
That doesn't mean that we should accept giving away copyright to anyone. Your ISP shouldn't take over any copyright. Nor should your job have any stake in IP you create on your spare time, unless it can be proven that it originated from your work
Yup, Linux, so up to date it's just beginning to suport hardware that hasn't been built for 2 years
The point is that 2.5.65 booted with preemtion patches on a 32 processor machine
That is preemtion of kernel threads. If there is a deadlock or race condition it would be more likely to show up un a beast like that than in your average dual athlon. So this is really not about supporting 32 processors (which is old news) but about the quality of the work that has gone into kernel preemtion
I have no idea if any other OSes out there support preemtion of kernel threads running on multiple cpus. Anyone care to enlighten me?
Clearly signing away rights to IP is equally incompatible with our way of life.
Actually signing away rights to IP is essential to our way of life, e.g If you go to work for someone anything you create as part of your job be it physical property or IP belongs to the company. How would you get anyone to employ you if you didn't agree to that?
Zealots are like that, and the same thing can be seen from windows zealots if there is a pro-linux-on-the-desktop article. We just have to learn to ignore zealots of both types
Some claim the user is technically incompetent.
I'd say in this case she was simply lazy, it sounds as if she could have resolved her issues if she had bothered doing a little research. But her criteria was that she shouldn't need to go beyond the help files that came with the system.
The same "Linux for the world" crowd does a complete 180 and says Linux is only for developers.
See the above part about zealots
While I agree that linux isn't ready for joe-sixpack I believe a lot of people could use linux for their desktop if they want to. The point is that they don't since they already have windows and it does what they need. The users that are likely to switch to linux on the desktop are those that find they are limited by windows, and when you do that you're probably competent enough to get linux to work. (The other kind is desktops in a business environment, and they should have hel(l)pdesk to deal with the users that use linux because they have to.)
While linux may not be as ready for the desktop as windows is, it's ready enough for now. But of course the points the writer makes are valid and should be improved upon, to lower the threshold for moving to linux. Simply because the more linux users there are the more indows users will be aware of the problem of closed proprietary file formats (read.doc).
Knowledge about what the japanese were planning has nothing to do with it. America could have dropped ONE bomb over an unpopulated area (or even better the sea) letting the japanese see the destructive power, and then if the japanese didn't get the hint they could have bombed ONE city. They didn't do that they bombed TWO cities at once. That's all the history you need to know. Truman didn't try to spare lives.
The kind of logic you are using to justify the nuking of japanese civilians is just one step avay from American supporting Israeli soldiers are harming our muslim brothers, that makes it ok to crash planes into american buildings
Now repeat after me: The end does not justify the means and if I'm willing to sacrifice anyone to reach my goal then the goal is probably wrong, and I'm propbably the bad guy
Every time my Mother sends me an online animated card for my birthday, Christmas, Easter, etc. I just don't open them, but call her up anyway and thank her for her thoughtfulness.
What you should do is call her and explain why it actually was thoughtlessness. She just added your email to another list that could potentially be used for spam. Besides electronic isn't thoughtful, just easy, handwritten on a carefully selected (or better yet, selfmade) card is thoughtful.
Oh dear, I just realized that I said something bad about you mother. No offence intended, I just needed her as an example to illustrate the evil of online greeting card.
Any other micro electronics would be in the sighting systems, and those would probably be faraday shielded at least.
Would those be laser sights?
Seriously though, why would they need any electronics in the sighting system? It should be basically the same as in todays guns (point and click) with the added benefit that you won't have to compensate for wind and distance.
Ok, maybe I didn't get my argument across, let's try again
bounces allow the sender to know whether the email got through or not.
This is plain simply wrong. There's a lot of reasons mail could get lost, and not all of them result in a bounce message. Additionaly the bounce message itself could get lost. Granted receiving a bounce message let's you know right away that there wasn't an error, but not receiving one doesn't indicate an error. Additionaly even if the message was sucessfully delivered there is no guaranteee that it will ever be read, therefore confirmation from the receiver is required no matter what.
It is also required and people who do not accept bounces are asking to be blocked and people who dump bounces are asking for trouble from their users.
And this requirement cause more problems than it's worth. There is no way to not accepte bounces since for all intents and purposes they're ordinary mail. You won't know it's a bounce message until you receive it. You could however ignore them, but that's not easy if you're the victim om beein used as a faked from address in spam.
As it stands bounce messages is the perfect DDOS tool: Take over a few macines, but instead of having them dos your target make them send mail all over the place that appears to originate from your target.
My conclusion is that system of bounce messages is flawed, and as such needs to be ignored or changed. My new and revised proposal is that the server is configured with a threshold, if the percentage of undeliverable mail (due to no such user) reaces this threshold stop sending (since there's probably a shitstorm of spam flying around and the network don't need the extra traffic) bounces until the rate goes down. Under normal operation when a mail can't be delivered run it through the spam filter, if it is tagged as spam then don't bounce. This will save bandwith and spare the poor guy at the receiving end of those bounces (and you can bet he isn't the spammer).
But there is no way that the bounce messages are going to help that, since they would most likely end up in some poor users mailbox on a completely different network.
And I don't see that not receiving a bounce is a big problem anyway. Email in itself is essentially an unconfirmed service since not getting a bounce is no sure indication of sucess (success == that the intended person has received and seen your mail). If your email is important enough you would include something along the lines of "please reply to this mail to indicate that you've received it, even if you don't reply to the actual content right away", and resend the email later or pick up the phone if you don't receive the expected reply. Essentially turning email into a confirmed service.
What I'm trying to say is that esentially bounce messages are redundant, and sending for undeliverable spam is likely to hurt some innocent third part, so they should be done away with.
One possible solution to the problem of bounce messages is to not send them.
When an undeliverable mail arrives check against a set of criteria, and if the mail looks like spam then don't send the bounce, since the adresses are likely to be faked anyway. This way the poor sod that got his adress used as the sender won't recieve (as many) bounces. The disadvantage is the possibility for false positives, that a legitimate mail might be tagged as spam and the sender won't see the bounce. Anyway for a large mail service it should be relatively easy to detect multiple identical undeliverable mails, and then don't bounce for them.
In the event that a spammer uses a real "bounce-to" address to clean their adress list this would rob them of that possibility too
Slashdot Mirror
That's great for you but what about those to have cryogenically frozen themselves waiting for technology to develop far enough to revive them!
Since the chances of a hit in water with following waves is the most likely just make sure they store you far from the coast, in a cave in the mountain, with backup power
See, nothing to worry about
He natively speaks French but admits to forgetting words often. Especially nouns.
That can happen without actually leaving your home country. Almost every novel I read is in english (I'm norwegian). Part of the reason is that I don't like translators because often things can be translated without loosing something (e.g wordplay), part is I don't have the patience to wait for a translation and a lot of the books I read won't ever be translated to norwegian. In addition to this I work as a programmer and all technical information (that's up to date) is in english. The result of this is that my english vocabulary is better. I still speak norwegian daily, but sometimes when I want to describe something I can't come up with a suitable word in norwegian
BweeepPhsoooooOOOOOOOooo sHOOOOooooooo bweeeeeeeeeep be boooong pshoooooooooooo!
R2D2 is that you? Long time no see. Where have you been all this time?
I've got a better one
1. Enter site
2. Realize site sucks because they have audio popups you can't tur off
3. Edit host file
4. Never come back even by accident
<rant>If people would choose not to block plain banner ads (without javascript or cookies or other shit) while blocking the rest, things might improve. Sooner or later advertisers have to realize that the more obnoxious and annoying they make their ads the smaller the chance of getting positive attention gets. I will never visit a site through a popup ad or annoying blinking flash or any such shit. Now if enough of the internet user decide they've had enough and collectively ignore/block intrusive advertising we can get rid of it<rant />
Vive le revolucion
Plus, with one more octet, I'll have 100 IP addresses
Yes but there a still advantages to having an oversized address space. When script kiddies start scanning for targets it'll take a lot longer to find anything
With intelligent distribution if IP addresses routing can be made faster. Since an ISP doesn't have to use all of its address space a network can be set up so that (using ip4 syntax for simplicity) if the isp owns the 1.2.*.* ip range pakets for 1.2.1.* go on network segment1 1.2.2.* goes on segment 2 and so on. You couldn't have done that with ip4 since you would have to use the IP space efficiently. Simple way to do this is combined routers/switch/dhcp server that get's a range of of addresses and assigns them this way (a series of these could be used in a tree structure for large netwoks). Since the r/s/d box decides the distribution if addresses swithcing can be made very efficient since it would need to check only part of the destination address (could be done in hw) and introduce less latency
I don't want my toaster to have a public IP address
You just wait until they put that IP enabled pacemaker into you. The hospital will be able to monitor the battery easily, and that ungratefule slob of useless trash grandson you put in your will anyway get's to practice his 1337 h4x0rin9 zki115. It's technology, how can it be bad?
But if they were unaware at the time that the infracting code was in it, it's ludicrous to claim they suddenly have surrendered portions of their code base.
But afaik they still ship it. To be taken seriously they would have to stop distributing the kernel, or make one where all the parts (they think) they have claims on are removed. (Which would make it easy to just do a diff against a real kernel, see what the alleged infringements are, and then laugh in SCO's face.) When they keep distributing code under GPL after they have discovered somone else put their code in it they would have to stop distributing it, by continuing to give away code that they know contains their code they are surrendering it
But if there is significant proprietary code in open source that the owner did not put some type of open license
Which is exactly what sco themselves does when distributing OpenLinux. Any claim they may have had on any part of the code is uninteresting now since they themselves (as copyrightholders) have distributed the source under GPL (and other lisences).
If they never themselves ditributed linux they might have had the snowball's chance, now they haven't even got that.
and you WILL start seeing things like EULAs that require you to give up your children
I've seen this at the top of an EULA (quote from memory so it's probably not completely accurate:
It's important that you read this, especially the part about your firstborn child
I think it was for the crossover plugin. I laughed so hard I almost splurted coffe all over my keyboard. And for once I actually read the complete EULA to see if there was any more fun in there, sadly it wasn't
Just had to say: Your .sig rules
I fail to understand what is new about this ... you do realize this is Slashdot, right?
I do. Slashdot where anonymous nerds post comments to an article whitout having read it. But the editors shouldn't, at least not when their comment shows on the front page. And in this case the comment isnt adding to the misinformation / rumors, it's creating them.
And even better yet:
"money to id in exchange for the right to make their latest game an Xbox-only title as far as consoles are concerned. (It'd still come out on the PC, of course.)"
I can live with people commenting without having read the articles, but now the editors add their clever comment without having read (or understood) the article
Human owners of IP would be treated like royalty as companies are forced to keep them happy and on-board.
One could wish, I would be set up until retirement if that had been the case.
But getting a job would be horrible, just think of the kinds of screening companies would do to get an employee that would stay forever
And how does that affect the logic behind "When you work for someone they have the right to your work.
I was arguing that signing away copyright can't be made illegal, because that would make it impossible for companies (big or small) that create IP (developers, newspapers, research ...) to exist, since any employee could quit and take the copyright to the companys product with him.
That doesn't mean that we should accept giving away copyright to anyone. Your ISP shouldn't take over any copyright. Nor should your job have any stake in IP you create on your spare time, unless it can be proven that it originated from your work
Yup, Linux, so up to date it's just beginning to suport hardware that hasn't been built for 2 years
The point is that 2.5.65 booted with preemtion patches on a 32 processor machine
That is preemtion of kernel threads. If there is a deadlock or race condition it would be more likely to show up un a beast like that than in your average dual athlon. So this is really not about supporting 32 processors (which is old news) but about the quality of the work that has gone into kernel preemtion
I have no idea if any other OSes out there support preemtion of kernel threads running on multiple cpus. Anyone care to enlighten me?
Clearly signing away rights to IP is equally incompatible with our way of life.
Actually signing away rights to IP is essential to our way of life, e.g If you go to work for someone anything you create as part of your job be it physical property or IP belongs to the company. How would you get anyone to employ you if you didn't agree to that?
Zealots get up in arms at the blasphemy.
Zealots are like that, and the same thing can be seen from windows zealots if there is a pro-linux-on-the-desktop article. We just have to learn to ignore zealots of both types
Some claim the user is technically incompetent.
I'd say in this case she was simply lazy, it sounds as if she could have resolved her issues if she had bothered doing a little research. But her criteria was that she shouldn't need to go beyond the help files that came with the system.
The same "Linux for the world" crowd does a complete 180 and says Linux is only for developers.
See the above part about zealots
While I agree that linux isn't ready for joe-sixpack I believe a lot of people could use linux for their desktop if they want to. The point is that they don't since they already have windows and it does what they need. The users that are likely to switch to linux on the desktop are those that find they are limited by windows, and when you do that you're probably competent enough to get linux to work. (The other kind is desktops in a business environment, and they should have hel(l)pdesk to deal with the users that use linux because they have to.)
While linux may not be as ready for the desktop as windows is, it's ready enough for now. But of course the points the writer makes are valid and should be improved upon, to lower the threshold for moving to linux. Simply because the more linux users there are the more indows users will be aware of the problem of closed proprietary file formats (read .doc).
Go crawl up in the ditch you came from
Knowledge about what the japanese were planning has nothing to do with it. America could have dropped ONE bomb over an unpopulated area (or even better the sea) letting the japanese see the destructive power, and then if the japanese didn't get the hint they could have bombed ONE city. They didn't do that they bombed TWO cities at once. That's all the history you need to know. Truman didn't try to spare lives.
The kind of logic you are using to justify the nuking of japanese civilians is just one step avay from American supporting Israeli soldiers are harming our muslim brothers, that makes it ok to crash planes into american buildings
Now repeat after me: The end does not justify the means and if I'm willing to sacrifice anyone to reach my goal then the goal is probably wrong, and I'm propbably the bad guy
Every time my Mother sends me an online animated card for my birthday, Christmas, Easter, etc. I just don't open them, but call her up anyway and thank her for her thoughtfulness.
What you should do is call her and explain why it actually was thoughtlessness. She just added your email to another list that could potentially be used for spam. Besides electronic isn't thoughtful, just easy, handwritten on a carefully selected (or better yet, selfmade) card is thoughtful.
Oh dear, I just realized that I said something bad about you mother. No offence intended, I just needed her as an example to illustrate the evil of online greeting card.
Any other micro electronics would be in the sighting systems, and those would probably be faraday shielded at least.
Would those be laser sights?
Seriously though, why would they need any electronics in the sighting system? It should be basically the same as in todays guns (point and click) with the added benefit that you won't have to compensate for wind and distance.
the significance of the title would be lost on most of the population
The same part of the population that would "get" 19A4?
I don't think most of the population would understand the significance unless it is explained to them, and then it should be done properly anyway.
At least you should try to get it rigth: the name should be: 0x7C0
0x19A4 is about four and a half thousand years into the future
Ok, maybe I didn't get my argument across, let's try again
bounces allow the sender to know whether the email got through or not.
This is plain simply wrong. There's a lot of reasons mail could get lost, and not all of them result in a bounce message. Additionaly the bounce message itself could get lost. Granted receiving a bounce message let's you know right away that there wasn't an error, but not receiving one doesn't indicate an error. Additionaly even if the message was sucessfully delivered there is no guaranteee that it will ever be read, therefore confirmation from the receiver is required no matter what.
It is also required and people who do not accept bounces are asking to be blocked and people who dump bounces are asking for trouble from their users.
And this requirement cause more problems than it's worth. There is no way to not accepte bounces since for all intents and purposes they're ordinary mail. You won't know it's a bounce message until you receive it. You could however ignore them, but that's not easy if you're the victim om beein used as a faked from address in spam.
As it stands bounce messages is the perfect DDOS tool: Take over a few macines, but instead of having them dos your target make them send mail all over the place that appears to originate from your target.
My conclusion is that system of bounce messages is flawed, and as such needs to be ignored or changed. My new and revised proposal is that the server is configured with a threshold, if the percentage of undeliverable mail (due to no such user) reaces this threshold stop sending (since there's probably a shitstorm of spam flying around and the network don't need the extra traffic) bounces until the rate goes down. Under normal operation when a mail can't be delivered run it through the spam filter, if it is tagged as spam then don't bounce. This will save bandwith and spare the poor guy at the receiving end of those bounces (and you can bet he isn't the spammer).
But there is no way that the bounce messages are going to help that, since they would most likely end up in some poor users mailbox on a completely different network.
And I don't see that not receiving a bounce is a big problem anyway. Email in itself is essentially an unconfirmed service since not getting a bounce is no sure indication of sucess (success == that the intended person has received and seen your mail). If your email is important enough you would include something along the lines of "please reply to this mail to indicate that you've received it, even if you don't reply to the actual content right away", and resend the email later or pick up the phone if you don't receive the expected reply. Essentially turning email into a confirmed service.
What I'm trying to say is that esentially bounce messages are redundant, and sending for undeliverable spam is likely to hurt some innocent third part, so they should be done away with.
One possible solution to the problem of bounce messages is to not send them.
When an undeliverable mail arrives check against a set of criteria, and if the mail looks like spam then don't send the bounce, since the adresses are likely to be faked anyway. This way the poor sod that got his adress used as the sender won't recieve (as many) bounces. The disadvantage is the possibility for false positives, that a legitimate mail might be tagged as spam and the sender won't see the bounce. Anyway for a large mail service it should be relatively easy to detect multiple identical undeliverable mails, and then don't bounce for them.
In the event that a spammer uses a real "bounce-to" address to clean their adress list this would rob them of that possibility too