However, I stream video from my desktop (with TV tuner card) to a laptop (with TV-out) under the TV over 802.11b. I do this by mounting an NFS volume over a VPN I establish from the laptop to the desktop. My datarate is set so 1 hr of video will just fit on a 700 MB CD (in case I see a show I want to keep). I'm also running an ad-hoc (rather than access point) network, if that makes any difference. The laptop and desktop are fairly close together, but there are a few walls.
Under these conditions, I can just eek out enough bandwidth. There's more room for error if I stream over HTTP, but then I can't seek within the stream, so I stick with NFS.
Very occasionally for no apparent reason I'm unable to use the player - interference from something, I assume.
yeah, but the difference is, the sysadmin is a criminal, a CEO that's stealing is just unethical...
You know, I don't have any mod points, so I'm just going to say that is very "insightful."
My guess is the Paine-Webber guy will be reamed, and that's justice. But what about the people whose salarary+bonuses alone cost more than the damage this guy caused, and whose shenanigans drive a billion-dollar company into the ground, destroying people's pensions? That's a heck of a lot worse than forcing a Windows reinstall.
What I do wonder is why device drivers can't live in sandboxes or even user space.
Why, sure they could. In fact, they did - got any old copies of DOS lying around?
But without the OS to regulate access to devices, there was no pratical way to arbitrate among multiple processes and users, especially if you care about security at all.
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned citeseer.org yet. This is a big archives/search engine of published papers (mostly or all CS). I have had far better luck tracking down references at citeseer than anywhere else, including my university and workplaces' libraries, and paid online subscriptions (acm.org, ieeexplore, etc).
I think (and hope) that this will continue to take off and become more and more complete.
Uh, yes, that's the point. To sell more by putting your stuff where people will expect to find it. That's why plumbers advertize in the Yellow Pages under "plumbing" rather than "photography."
For ssl, this is addressed by having the site present a certificate signed by an authority whose public key is compiled into the browser.
For ssh/vpn, you will receive warning that the key has changed (and your client may disconnect automatically), unless you've never connected to the particular host before. (Granted, people are pretty likely to just accept the new host key).
I'm not saying you're wrong about it being a threat, but let's be aware that there are ways to address it. At the very least, if you're establishing a vpn to your workplace and are warned that the key has changed, STOP right there are make a phone call before accepting the new key. And before connecting for the first time, transfer the key to the client by some other means if possible (even sending it by email would be pretty safe in practice)
The one word metamoderation system sounds "OK," but I like to see some haggling:)
Besides mechanism, culture is very important, too. For instance, on palmgear.com, for some reason about 90% of the reviews are very positive, and that's bad.
Somehow, Usenet conveys that feeling of "they'll never find us here," and there's nobody running the show.
Heh, a little oxymoron from Reagan I was reminded of by what I'm about to say...
If these suspicious persons have reviewed so many products, they may have a reviewed a few of which you have personal knowledge. Those are golden data points.
If there aren't any such datapoints, maybe somebody whose reviews you DO agree with has reviewed products the suspicious person has also reviewed. Those are, shall we say, silver data points.
Obviously what I'm working up to here is an automated system for finding short paths in networks of reviewers. Not a Web of Trust, but a Web of Agreement, built upon the mutual information (the degree of agreement) between various reviewers.
I have seen "mutual interest" systems such as for music. Those are useless because of shills that (pretend to) like everything, but a system built on mutual information would find those reviewers to have 0 information content.
I like Usenet, because it is an exchange rather than a bunch of stand-alone reviews. Someone can still give bad information, but they tend to get shouted down.
I believe that with regards to an issue that deeply divides so many people and has no real scientific consensus either way, it is not the job of the government to step in and make a decision for everybody. Rather, it is up to individuals...
Unfortunately, I would argue most important questions have no scientific consensus. Science doesn't tell us when war is justified, how to spread the tax burden fairly, or when to take ill-parented children into protective custody.
And for that matter, scientific conclusions have no bearing on government until values (moral judgement) are applied to them. For instance, science may produce studies showing that taking drugs or not wearing a seatbelt are bad for you. But does that mean these things should be illegal?
I don't think there is any way to avoid moral issues in government. Even the choice to do nothing is full of consequence.
Well, if you ask me, "pro-choise" is right on the money.
"Pro-life" on the other hand could more accurately be called "no-choise".
Talk about avoiding the issue at hand...
I have to agree that "pro-life" is equally nondescript. I have no problem with "anti-abortion."
my sister has been spending the last 4 months recovering from a 90 mph head on collision because some ditz crossed into her lane of traffic; if it hadn't been for her wearing a selt belt properly and airbags she would be dead
I guess I don't have an important point to make, but I just think that is an amazing story. Surviving a 90 mph head-on collision! I am sorry that she still sustained serious injury, but I am amazed that she survived.
Your use of the word "Pro-abortion" gives your position away immediately. No matter how rational you try to make yourself sound, you kill your argument by using such rhetoric.
What's the correct term? "Pro-choice" is a laughable euphemism, considering it avoids specific mention of the issue at hand. The term could apply just as well to the NRA or the ACLU. Even the Southern Confederacy felt they were fighting for the "freedom" to own slaves.
Why do you expect us to be interested in whether it will make a profit? We're not getting a cut. We're more interested in whether we will enjoy watching the movie.
And FWIW, I waited to see Episode II in the dollar theater:)
I think everyone talking about companies screwing over, and the consumer getting smart is null and void. Companies need to make money, all companies have a mark-up.
Yes, that's a given. The point is that while the companies are calculating and methodical in acheiving their ends, there's a certain mindset that consumers should NOT scheme, calculate, and lobby as well.
It's like one team in a basketball game sitting on the bench and saying, "Oh, don't worry, those other guys are scoring baskets because they're a basketball team and that's what basketball teams do. Nothing to worry about." To which the correct response is, "What's your point? Get off your butt and fight back, or you will lose."
This isn't some ploy to personally screw you over.
"Personally"? No. Collectively? Of course.
I always find it odd when people are sarcastic about companies' "conspiracies."
Do you think companies *DON'T* have meetings where they discuss how to keep prices "healthy"? Do you think they don't hire lobbyists to sway lawmakers? Do you think they don't try to drive the competition out of business? Of course they do.
They plan, and budget, and lobby to make things go their way. And meanwhile a certain type of consumer sits back and says, "whatever will be will be, and deservedly so."
OF COURSE they are trying to screw us over. Greed is the muscle inside the invisible hand, if you will. The consumer's job is to get educated and work against it.
Which of the popular applications and uses of OpenBSD would benefit from SMP support?
I don't suppose anybody is running apache on it?:) But seriously, the only requirement to benefit from SMP is that you run more than one cpu-intensive process on the computer at once. Servers (like apache) usually fork a process for each client.
Slashdot Mirror
Guess what's wrong with this code for an access member in an array class (assuming it's C++, except I had to use lt for "less than"):
const T & operator[](int i) { assert(i lt size()); return data[i]; };
However, I stream video from my desktop (with TV tuner card) to a laptop (with TV-out) under the TV over 802.11b. I do this by mounting an NFS volume over a VPN I establish from the laptop to the desktop. My datarate is set so 1 hr of video will just fit on a 700 MB CD (in case I see a show I want to keep). I'm also running an ad-hoc (rather than access point) network, if that makes any difference. The laptop and desktop are fairly close together, but there are a few walls.
Under these conditions, I can just eek out enough bandwidth. There's more room for error if I stream over HTTP, but then I can't seek within the stream, so I stick with NFS.
Very occasionally for no apparent reason I'm unable to use the player - interference from something, I assume.
My guess is the Paine-Webber guy will be reamed, and that's justice. But what about the people whose salarary+bonuses alone cost more than the damage this guy caused, and whose shenanigans drive a billion-dollar company into the ground, destroying people's pensions? That's a heck of a lot worse than forcing a Windows reinstall.
The whole point of protection is to support multiprocessing, so yes they are very related.
But without the OS to regulate access to devices, there was no pratical way to arbitrate among multiple processes and users, especially if you care about security at all.
I think (and hope) that this will continue to take off and become more and more complete.
Uh, yes, that's the point. To sell more by putting your stuff where people will expect to find it. That's why plumbers advertize in the Yellow Pages under "plumbing" rather than "photography."
Interestingly, Bill Joy said exactly the same thing on the Charlie Rose show a year or two ago.
For ssl, this is addressed by having the site present a certificate signed by an authority whose public key is compiled into the browser.
For ssh/vpn, you will receive warning that the key has changed (and your client may disconnect automatically), unless you've never connected to the particular host before. (Granted, people are pretty likely to just accept the new host key).
I'm not saying you're wrong about it being a threat, but let's be aware that there are ways to address it. At the very least, if you're establishing a vpn to your workplace and are warned that the key has changed, STOP right there are make a phone call before accepting the new key. And before connecting for the first time, transfer the key to the client by some other means if possible (even sending it by email would be pretty safe in practice)
It seems your premise is that people shouldn't pollute each other's minds by communicating with each other.
Sad why?
Besides mechanism, culture is very important, too. For instance, on palmgear.com, for some reason about 90% of the reviews are very positive, and that's bad.
Somehow, Usenet conveys that feeling of "they'll never find us here," and there's nobody running the show.
If these suspicious persons have reviewed so many products, they may have a reviewed a few of which you have personal knowledge. Those are golden data points.
If there aren't any such datapoints, maybe somebody whose reviews you DO agree with has reviewed products the suspicious person has also reviewed. Those are, shall we say, silver data points.
Obviously what I'm working up to here is an automated system for finding short paths in networks of reviewers. Not a Web of Trust, but a Web of Agreement, built upon the mutual information (the degree of agreement) between various reviewers.
I have seen "mutual interest" systems such as for music. Those are useless because of shills that (pretend to) like everything, but a system built on mutual information would find those reviewers to have 0 information content.
I like Usenet, because it is an exchange rather than a bunch of stand-alone reviews. Someone can still give bad information, but they tend to get shouted down.
And for that matter, scientific conclusions have no bearing on government until values (moral judgement) are applied to them. For instance, science may produce studies showing that taking drugs or not wearing a seatbelt are bad for you. But does that mean these things should be illegal?
I don't think there is any way to avoid moral issues in government. Even the choice to do nothing is full of consequence.
If that cell is an embryo, what's the difference?
And FWIW, I waited to see Episode II in the dollar theater :)
It's like one team in a basketball game sitting on the bench and saying, "Oh, don't worry, those other guys are scoring baskets because they're a basketball team and that's what basketball teams do. Nothing to worry about." To which the correct response is, "What's your point? Get off your butt and fight back, or you will lose."
"Personally"? No. Collectively? Of course.
I always find it odd when people are sarcastic about companies' "conspiracies."
Do you think companies *DON'T* have meetings where they discuss how to keep prices "healthy"? Do you think they don't hire lobbyists to sway lawmakers? Do you think they don't try to drive the competition out of business? Of course they do.
They plan, and budget, and lobby to make things go their way. And meanwhile a certain type of consumer sits back and says, "whatever will be will be, and deservedly so."
OF COURSE they are trying to screw us over. Greed is the muscle inside the invisible hand, if you will. The consumer's job is to get educated and work against it.
Besides, Unix (and Linux) are very guick at creating processes. It doesn't take long and protects you from some security issues and memory leaks.
And yes, various servers use threads instead of full processes, which will also benefit from SMP (depending on which thread library is used).
But the point still stands, nothing very special need be done to utilize SMP, especially on a server.