The sad thing is that you have to *recompile* the kernel in the first place in order to get the desired result: *reconfiguring* a system for maximal performance. In Windows 2000, I can go to the management console and change the settings for various services from "automatic" to "disabled", and the code that implements them doesn't get loaded into the system on the next boot. Why aren't we talking about making Linux work similarly?
Go ahead, mod me down for giving MS some credit. I didn't earn 48 karma points so that I could be politically correct.
My post was *not* redundant. There were no other posts when I posted it, and right after I posted it there were a grand total of three posts, including mine (the other two were trolls). Therefore mine was one of the first three posts to this story, so where do you get off calling it "redundent" [sic]?
MEDIA RELATIONS OFFICE
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov
Mars Odyssey Mission Status
January 11, 2002
Flight controllers for NASA's Mars Odyssey spacecraft sent commands overnight to raise the spacecraft up out of the atmosphere and conclude the aerobraking phase of the mission.
At 12:18 a.m. Pacific time Jan. 11, Odyssey fired its small thrusters for 244 seconds, changing its speed by 20 meters per second (45 miles per hour) and raising its orbit by 85 kilometers (53 miles). The closest point in Odyssey's orbit, called the periapsis, is now 201 kilometers (125 miles) above the surface of Mars. The farthest point in the orbit, called the apoapsis, is at an altitude of 500 kilometers (311 miles). During the next few weeks, flight controllers will refine the orbit until the spacecraft reaches its final mapping altitude, a 400-kilometer (249-mile) circular orbit.
"The successful completion of the aerobraking phase is a major milestone for the project. Aerobraking is the most complex phase of the entire mission and the team came through it without a hitch," said David A. Spencer, Odyssey's mission manager at JPL. "During the next month, we will be reconfiguring the spacecraft to begin the science mapping mission." The science mission is expected to begin in late February.
During the aerobraking phase, Odyssey skimmed through the upper reaches of the martian atmosphere 332 times. By using the atmosphere of Mars to slow down the spacecraft in its orbit rather than firing its engine or thrusters, Odyssey was able to save more than 200 kilograms (440 pounds) of propellant. This reduction in spacecraft weight enabled the mission to be launched on a Delta II 7925 launch vehicle, rather than a larger, more expensive launcher.
JPL manages the 2001 Mars Odyssey mission for NASA's Office of Space Science, Washington, D.C. Principal investigators at Arizona State University in Tempe, the University of Arizona in Tucson, and NASA's Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, operate the science instruments. Additional science investigators are located at the Russian Space Research Institute and Los Alamos National Laboratories. Lockheed Martin Astronautics, Denver, Colo., is the prime contractor for the project, and developed and built the orbiter. Mission operations are conducted jointly from Lockheed Martin and from JPL, a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va., is providing aerobraking support to JPL's navigation team during mission operations.
Am I the only one thinking antimatter costs more energy to produce than you get out of it?
It's not about cost to produce. It's about how much usable energy you get per pound of fuel that you have to carry with you. It's worth it to spend the energy up front in order to make the trip through space feasable.
You can't know that 50% will be below the mode either. You're confusing "mode" with "median". The mode, in a list of values, is the value that appears most often.
In other news, the company which managed to remove redundancy from pure entropy also managed breaking the absolute-zero barrier. It was previously thought that you couldn't make something colder if it already had zero heat in it. But apparently this is not the case, according to ZeoSync.
However, works that no one cared about, by default were "donated" to the public domain.
And this did not mean that your private info had to be distributed to anyone.
But that's exactly what's being discussed. Forcing people to distribute their private information (in this case, source code). It's one thing to let a government-supplied protection expire. It's something else to compel an author/owner to do something he/she doesn't want to do.
Yes, but no one is compelled to document their invention. They are encouraged to do so with the reward of a patent. But if they choose not to, nothing compels them to do so.
I'm not saying copyrights shouldn't expire. After the expiration, you can make copies galore of whatever you've got. But if the author/owner never released the source code, they should not be COMPELLED to do so. If you've got a binary that is now PD, great. Go nuts. Allowing the government to COMPEL people to do something is going a step further.
Your examples are completely off-base. There is no parallel between client-attorney privilage and copyright law.
Your objection is completely off base, because this discussion has nothing to do with copyright law. This isn't about the removal of copyright protection. It's about COMPELLING people to turn over secret and/or private information.
This isn't about copyright. It's about compelling people, under penalty of law, to release information of their own creation. I have no qualms about the expiration of copyrights. But if they want to keep their source code secret, what are we prepared to allow the government to do to compel them to do this? Shall the government be empowered to stick bamboo shutes under their fingernails? What if they shred all copies? Do we throw them in prison?
If you don't ever want your source code out there, you don't have to file for a copyright. But, then people could copy/hack the binaries all they wanted
The binaries can't be copied because they are protected by copyright. I have no problem with copyrighted source code becoming public domain after a certain time period, as that is the way things are now. But I don't want to give the government more power to COMPEL people to relinquish their information. The expiration of a copyright allows others additional rights to the work, but it doesn't compel the former copyright owner into taking any particular action.
And, for the record, I think it was unfair of those four people or so to mod my post as a troll. It was not a troll.
MANDATORY source code release? You want to make it a crime to keep your own information secret for as long as you choose, if that information happens to be source code? Why stop there? Here's a few other things we can make subject to mandatory release after a set period of time:
1. Your PIN
2. Your PGP key and passphrase
3. Your diary
4. Any recorded discussions between you and your attorney.
5. Your complete medical history.
The government is obtrusive enough as it is. I don't want the government to be able to force anyone to release information that they don't want to, just because some arbitrarily chosen timer has run out.
Not knowing the innards of DNS doesn't make someone an idiot. 99.99999% of the DNS entries out there are probably owned by the same people who own the IP that they point to.
IMO, Ford could quite reasonably have asked 2600 to add something like "This website is in no way associated with any automobile manufacturer" to the page, or face a slander suit
Ford could have asked 2600 to add such a disclaimer to WHAT? The domain name??? Sure, I can see that happening:
Ford: Excuse us, but could you please change that domain name to "www.fuckgeneralmotors andbythewaythisDOMAINNAMEisnotassociatedwithanyautomobilemanufacturereventhoughthe websiteitselfisfords.com". Thanks. Love, Jacques.
"This is/etc where your configuration data is stored!"
"This is/usr - you'll find the actual programs and more there!"
Huh? Is this what you consider to be intuitive? Or is this just what your preconceived prejudices tell you about what is intuitive? Why should you expect configuration data to be in a folder whose name is is an abbreviation for a word that means "and other stuff"? Why should actual programs be stored in a folder whose name is an abbreviation for "user"? I would expect that folder to contain data belonging to users. If you're going to propose breaking free of an irrational-but-familiar paradigm, don't propose replacing it with another irrational-but-familiar paradigm.
Slashdot Mirror
The sad thing is that you have to *recompile* the kernel in the first place in order to get the desired result: *reconfiguring* a system for maximal performance. In Windows 2000, I can go to the management console and change the settings for various services from "automatic" to "disabled", and the code that implements them doesn't get loaded into the system on the next boot. Why aren't we talking about making Linux work similarly?
Go ahead, mod me down for giving MS some credit. I didn't earn 48 karma points so that I could be politically correct.
My post was *not* redundant. There were no other posts when I posted it, and right after I posted it there were a grand total of three posts, including mine (the other two were trolls). Therefore mine was one of the first three posts to this story, so where do you get off calling it "redundent" [sic]?
Human colonization is quite unlikely due to the plant being so close to the Sun.
Mars is further from the sun, not closer, than Earth.
Here's the article:
January 11, 2002
MEDIA RELATIONS OFFICE
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov
Mars Odyssey Mission Status
January 11, 2002
Flight controllers for NASA's Mars Odyssey spacecraft sent commands overnight to raise the spacecraft up out of the atmosphere and conclude the aerobraking phase of the mission.
At 12:18 a.m. Pacific time Jan. 11, Odyssey fired its small thrusters for 244 seconds, changing its speed by 20 meters per second (45 miles per hour) and raising its orbit by 85 kilometers (53 miles). The closest point in Odyssey's orbit, called the periapsis, is now 201 kilometers (125 miles) above the surface of Mars. The farthest point in the orbit, called the apoapsis, is at an altitude of 500 kilometers (311 miles). During the next few weeks, flight controllers will refine the orbit until the spacecraft reaches its final mapping altitude, a 400-kilometer (249-mile) circular orbit.
"The successful completion of the aerobraking phase is a major milestone for the project. Aerobraking is the most complex phase of the entire mission and the team came through it without a hitch," said David A. Spencer, Odyssey's mission manager at JPL. "During the next month, we will be reconfiguring the spacecraft to begin the science mapping mission." The science mission is expected to begin in late February.
During the aerobraking phase, Odyssey skimmed through the upper reaches of the martian atmosphere 332 times. By using the atmosphere of Mars to slow down the spacecraft in its orbit rather than firing its engine or thrusters, Odyssey was able to save more than 200 kilograms (440 pounds) of propellant. This reduction in spacecraft weight enabled the mission to be launched on a Delta II 7925 launch vehicle, rather than a larger, more expensive launcher.
JPL manages the 2001 Mars Odyssey mission for NASA's Office of Space Science, Washington, D.C. Principal investigators at Arizona State University in Tempe, the University of Arizona in Tucson, and NASA's Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, operate the science instruments. Additional science investigators are located at the Russian Space Research Institute and Los Alamos National Laboratories. Lockheed Martin Astronautics, Denver, Colo., is the prime contractor for the project, and developed and built the orbiter. Mission operations are conducted jointly from Lockheed Martin and from JPL, a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va., is providing aerobraking support to JPL's navigation team during mission operations.
Am I the only one thinking antimatter costs more energy to produce than you get out of it?
It's not about cost to produce. It's about how much usable energy you get per pound of fuel that you have to carry with you. It's worth it to spend the energy up front in order to make the trip through space feasable.
You may look at it as four hours, but I look at it as 1/10 of a work week. Does that mean that in reality it will take 7.2 weeks?
The German company "Crayon" probably decided that SuSE was small-potatos and that there are other companies that might have more money to extort.
You can't know that 50% will be below the mode either. You're confusing "mode" with "median". The mode, in a list of values, is the value that appears most often.
Be very careful before you decide to waive your dick around
I'd think twice before I even *wave* my dick around. So you can be damn sure I'm gonna be very careful before I *waive* my dick.
I think we've just been insulted.
In other news, the company which managed to remove redundancy from pure entropy also managed breaking the absolute-zero barrier. It was previously thought that you couldn't make something colder if it already had zero heat in it. But apparently this is not the case, according to ZeoSync.
...this made it past the lameness filter, yet when I tried posting an entry from the IOCCC, it barfed at me.
What if Afghan women actually have the best bodies in the world? Think about it.
Ok, I've thought about it. Every time I've seen you post it. And I still don't get it. What's your point?
Would you like George "Duyba" Bush, Tony Blair or even Osama bin Laden to be a role model for your children ?
No, yes, and no, respectively.
However, works that no one cared about, by default were "donated" to the public domain.
And this did not mean that your private info had to be distributed to anyone.
But that's exactly what's being discussed. Forcing people to distribute their private information (in this case, source code). It's one thing to let a government-supplied protection expire. It's something else to compel an author/owner to do something he/she doesn't want to do.
What about patents? They expire.
Yes, but no one is compelled to document their invention. They are encouraged to do so with the reward of a patent. But if they choose not to, nothing compels them to do so.
I'm not saying copyrights shouldn't expire. After the expiration, you can make copies galore of whatever you've got. But if the author/owner never released the source code, they should not be COMPELLED to do so. If you've got a binary that is now PD, great. Go nuts. Allowing the government to COMPEL people to do something is going a step further.
Your examples are completely off-base. There is no parallel between client-attorney privilage and copyright law.
Your objection is completely off base, because this discussion has nothing to do with copyright law. This isn't about the removal of copyright protection. It's about COMPELLING people to turn over secret and/or private information.
This isn't about copyright. It's about compelling people, under penalty of law, to release information of their own creation. I have no qualms about the expiration of copyrights. But if they want to keep their source code secret, what are we prepared to allow the government to do to compel them to do this? Shall the government be empowered to stick bamboo shutes under their fingernails? What if they shred all copies? Do we throw them in prison?
If you don't ever want your source code out there, you don't have to file for a copyright. But, then people could copy/hack the binaries all they wanted
The binaries can't be copied because they are protected by copyright. I have no problem with copyrighted source code becoming public domain after a certain time period, as that is the way things are now. But I don't want to give the government more power to COMPEL people to relinquish their information. The expiration of a copyright allows others additional rights to the work, but it doesn't compel the former copyright owner into taking any particular action.
And, for the record, I think it was unfair of those four people or so to mod my post as a troll. It was not a troll.
MANDATORY source code release? You want to make it a crime to keep your own information secret for as long as you choose, if that information happens to be source code? Why stop there? Here's a few other things we can make subject to mandatory release after a set period of time:
1. Your PIN
2. Your PGP key and passphrase
3. Your diary
4. Any recorded discussions between you and your attorney.
5. Your complete medical history.
The government is obtrusive enough as it is. I don't want the government to be able to force anyone to release information that they don't want to, just because some arbitrarily chosen timer has run out.
I think IBM PCs will always have that image problem that they are expensive and underperforming, regardless of their true merits.
I guess the lack of an L2 cache a few years back was a mere image problem?
I hope all of the employees of Adobe are truly embarrassed about this.
I'm embarassed about this, because my government is making our country look like an ass.
Not knowing the innards of DNS doesn't make someone an idiot. 99.99999% of the DNS entries out there are probably owned by the same people who own the IP that they point to.
IMO, Ford could quite reasonably have asked 2600 to add something like "This website is in no way associated with any automobile manufacturer" to the page, or face a slander suit
Ford could have asked 2600 to add such a disclaimer to WHAT? The domain name??? Sure, I can see that happening:
Ford: Excuse us, but could you please change that domain name to "www.fuckgeneralmotors andbythewaythisDOMAINNAMEisnotassociatedwithanyautomobilemanufacturereventhoughthe websiteitselfisfords.com". Thanks. Love, Jacques.
...and name the function so that the comment is unneeded
The only function whose name makes the comment unneeded is "exit()".
"This is
"This is
Huh? Is this what you consider to be intuitive? Or is this just what your preconceived prejudices tell you about what is intuitive? Why should you expect configuration data to be in a folder whose name is is an abbreviation for a word that means "and other stuff"? Why should actual programs be stored in a folder whose name is an abbreviation for "user"? I would expect that folder to contain data belonging to users. If you're going to propose breaking free of an irrational-but-familiar paradigm, don't propose replacing it with another irrational-but-familiar paradigm.