I went through this... I bought netgear gs105 and netgear nics, all really cheap at amazon.
Like me you'll probably find you don't get a 10x increase in speed, but maybe 25-50%, like from 8 MB/s to 13 MB/s when you transfer stuff between two computers.
This is because your hard drive is fragmented, and this will completely, and drastically affect performance when you copy stuff. You don't realize it, but you will take a massive hit when you try to copy your isos, movies, etc across the LAN.
I went from 13 MB/s to like 30 MB/s after i defragmented my source and destination drives.
The main thing is that with Gigabit Ethernet, you have to think of the entire network as a system that works completely together. There has to be a complete unity between all components on your network because you will see the bottlenecks a lot easier.
Also, none of the netgear cheap stuff support jumbo frames. The more expensive NICs do, but the gs10X ports do *not* support jumboframes.
As well, they get really, really, really hot. Unnecessarily hot if you ask me, like burning to the touch, and could really heat up the inside of your CPU. In fact, even the gs105 switch is hot to the touch, too.
I instead bought 2 Intel Pro 1000 MTs. They are much more reliable, they do support jumbo frames (but I can't use it until I actually get a jumob frame compatible switch) and they don't get hot at all.
So you spend all these resources to find one collision amongst 2^128 combinations.... not really that useful. Sure it is significant, but does it really bring down the entire MD5 infrastructure?
To really destroy MD5, you need to either be able to reverse the plaintext from the hash, or build a lookup table where you can get the plaintext from the hash.
Both of these seem infeasible, especially the lookup table, so things like Paypal using MD5, which the web site uses as an example, doesn't seem quite true.
Right... and that's why you see the Geological Engineering Department and French-Canadian History departments so lavishly filled with state of the art equipment and funding.
The less people go into CS, the less money colleges will put into it. These students will end up working on computers that are years out-of-date because colleges won't want to dump money for expensive hardward and software into a program that doesn't make them money.
This flies directly in the face of comments by Carly Fiorina, Andy Grove, and other CEOs that outsourcing will end up helping this country by exporting the "menial" jobs out to 3rd world countries. In the same breath, they say that the US needs to invest more in high tech in order to maintain their competitive edge.
Their comments are just bullshit, because as the US starts outsourcing their entry-level jobs to India, it leaves no jobs for graduating students. Why would a student pay $80k+ for a degree in which they need to compete against someone making $200/month?
By outsourcing our entry and medium level jobs to 3rd world countries, it is simply compounding our high-tech problem by creating zero incentive for new students to pursue careers in high tech. Because there is no new blood entering these professions, more jobs and more experience is being put into the hands of these 3rd world countries, and countries like the US and Britain end up losing. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, and then these CEOs turn around and say, "Well, we said that the US needed to invest more, but they didn't. And because they didn't, we're going to move all of our development to India." It's the fact that they care more about their bottom line over the health of their company and their countries that will cause this problem.
This is a clear indication that the outsourcing strategy has already had a pronounced effect on the US, and is damaging to its competitiveness in high tech.
It's pretty clear from the planes that each planet makes around the sun that every planet except for Pluto came from the original gas formation or whatever that created the solar system. Pluto is the only one that has a messed up orbit, so it's obvious it's some type of captured mass that got too close to the solar system.
But who cares? Let's just call it a planet for the sake of history. Jeeze, I mean we have the Pacific, Indian, and Atlantic Oceans even though they are clearly the same body of water. The difference between the Indian and Pacific Ocean is even more nebulous.
Why not call Pluto a captured planet, and keep it as it is, ie. a planet within the solar system, and everything else, just forget it. We don't need any new members... the people who are trying to induct anything new just want their names in the history books.
The most dangerous opponent you can ever have is someone who has nothing left to lose.
This is the exact problem that the governments of the world face when they go up against terrorists, especially terrorists that are willing to kill themselves.
In a similar vein, this is w2hat Microsoft and all the other for-pay software companies face when they go toe-to-toe with OSS developers. There is a multitude of college and experienced kids that are willing to donate their blood, sweat, and tears and completely give away their effort for free. New open-source developers are recruited everyday, just like suicide bombers.
How can a company, even Microsoft, beat them over the long haul? Technically, they can't because OSS will last forever, and bad quarters, accounting scandals, or corporate greed can't take them down.
The only way they can is through legislation, like forcing software providers to assume liability security violations, and patents.
If we let legislation pass that would force companies to assume liability for security violations, then all OSS is doomed. Some people have suggested that OSS projects be exempt from such a law, but do you really think that Microsoft's lobbyists would allow for that? If individual programmers were liable for security problems, this would definitely kill OSS.
The second issue is patents, and companies like Microsoft could very well corner the market on some key piece of software that would squeeze out OSS developers. Although it seems all-but-inevitable, Europe neeeds to do whatever it can to avoid getting US-style patent laws that patent both software and business processes, otherwise OSS will be mired in more lawsuits and less programming.
I don't get it... to me this is completely short-sighted.
But having these referral sites, I have been introduced to news sites that I would never have thought to go to. From slashdot, I now regularly scan through cnet's site, etc.
why not take advantage of the extra eyeballs and put more targetted advertising? Ads are the only thing keeping these content sites anyway... This to me would be the smarter business decision, instead of just blocking people from viewing free content. Why not put up an ad from Redhat or Microsoft whenever a viewer comes from LinuxJournal???
What is so insane is that the rules for profanity are completely inconsistent. Oprah can have a show talking about "tossing salads" which include a detailed description of what that is, but if Howard Stern says it, he will get fined.
This is a problem for several reasons:
1) Our freedom of speech is killed because we can be fined into bankruptcy for talking edgy, so obviously people will be more careful of anything that they say
2) freedom of speech is completely killed because the FCC can decide months later if what you said was profane, so the feedback mechanism is completely messed up.
3) initial rulings on profanity can be "overruled" by the FCC, meaning that political agendas can be enforced through the FCC now
For a listing of required reading go directly to Howard Stern's web site.
I have several co-workers that are Indian. They say that the starting wage for someone out of college in India, in those high-wage markets is like 10,000 rupees a month. This is about $2000 US a month.
However, for 1000 rupees a month, you can get yourself a butler/servant. As well, rent is like 1000 rupees a month, meaning you have several thousand rupees left to do what you want.
If you have more experience, I would think 20,000 rupees a month is more reasonable, which means that you could easily save $3000 US dollars a month and still live like a king, which is not bad at all. Even assuming 0% interest except inflation and no raises, after 10 years you could come back with almost $400,000 US. Not too bad...
However, hell would freeze over before I moved to India... I'd rather just take my chances here in the US.
One-way missions will NEVER HAPPEN. Here's why:
on
One-Way Ticket to Mars?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Sure, on the surface it sounds fine where a scientist says, "Okay, we have a one-way mission to Mars, there is no chance for you to get back. Are you okay with that?" And you could have plenty of people volunteer.
But what happens when these people get on Mars? Then what? What if, after a few weeks, the video/radio transmissions back to Mission Control are:
"OH GOD PLEASE GET ME OUT OF HERE! PLEASE I'LL DO ANYTHING! PLEASE I DON'T WANT TO DIE ON THIS PLANET!"
Imagine how horrifying that would be to everyone involved? It would be like watching a person who was condemned to die and fighting it at the last minute. No matter how justified it is, I think don't think there is anything that can prepare you for someone struggling to live and begging for their lives. Imagine the outrage that people on Earth would feel when the media shows a clip of this astronaut pleading for his life? It would go down as one of the darkest days of humanity.
I mean, they can't just shut off the radio and ignore the person.
The humane aspect of sending a person on a one-way death mission is the aspect that the author has completely and utterly ignored. It's easy to forget that right now, but when death is about to happen, everyone will be thinking, "Dear Lord, what have we done? How could we have done this?" and we as a species will regret the entire thing.
How can you say rewrites are bad? That is simply ridiculous. Without rewrites, there would be no progress. Sure, people get inconvenienced, but it's a minor inconvenience relative
There are some rewrites that are simply horrible and make no sense. But every single one of the examples that the author gives is an example of a GOOD rewrite!
Apache 2.0? Mozilla? Perl? This is ridiculous. I love Apache 2 and Mozilla (I don't use Perl) and find Mozilla much smoother to use than Netscape. These are platforms that people will be using going forward. If going forward is impeded by the current architecture of the software, YOU NEED A REWRITE.
A bad rewrite is when it completely breaks everything and no one migrates to the new version because there is no gain for anyone involved.
And Windows 2K -> XP -> 2K3 were not rewrites. They are evolutionary changes... now the author doesn't think that software should be improved or changed to add functionality???
I have UNIX Services 3.0 and I personally love it. I was NT-only until 4 years ago when I started adopting UNIX/Linux, and now I routinely use vi instead of notepad, just out of habit. Things like pwd are small utilities, but really useful when I need it.
I use the NFS feature to mount my W2K box to NFS mounts. That part is simple.
I also mount from Linux to NT. If you give the NT share anonymous, read-only access, then it's simple. If you want more refined security, then it gets more complicated.
You need to do mapping between NT usernames and UNIX user names via a User Name Mapping proxy. I'm sure it works well, but it's kind of hard to understand how to use, and after 30 minutes, I gave up and made the shares from NT anonymous read-only access.
I'm sure if I spent maybe 2 hours on this I could get everything to work, but since this is my home network and I don't have a whole lot of user accounts, I figured I didn't need it.
I have a major Coke habit. I loved Coke and drank it often but was relatively normal until I joined my current company that provided free soft drinks. Then I went on a major Coke binge that lasted 5 years. I would literally, literally have 6+ Cokes a day for 5 years straight.
I know I needed to stop because I was getting physiological problems from the caffeine (stomach problems, diarrhea, etc) and I gained around 40 lbs since joining this company, in part due to the massive amounts of sugar I was ingesting. So I went cold turkey and switched to Sprite, like a heroin addict going to methadone. It gave me a similar burn when I drank it but just didn't have the caffeine.
Sprite by itself didn't do the trick, but it does require a massive amount of willpower, too. There is no quick fix for a disease like what we share.
It's been over 1 year, and it has really done the trick. Oh, I still love Coke and will have it maybe once a month. I love Coke. I love Coke. I love Coke. But I don't drink it in nearly the same amounts as what I used to, and with the Sprite, I usually drink around 2-3 a day instead of 6+. I hoping to switch to either water or fruit juice soon, except those are prohibitively more expensive and more inconvenient to drink (I need to have a glass that I wash, instead of a convenient can that I can throw away). Costco water makes me piss every fifteen minutes which really sucks for a programmer.
Actually, I think in the "Chinese Lottery" scenario, there is one string/hash pair that is chosen, and all the clients try other combinations of strings. Whoever gets the same hash will "win" the lottery. Thus, the web site wouldn't have to store anything except the returned plaintext that hashed to the same MD5 value.
I think the original "Chinese Lottery" scenario was if everyone one in China had a radio that was set to do encryption, and the Chinese government broadcasted a particular ciphertext that it wanted to encrypt, every radio would do the decryption using different strings until one of them got the answer. I think it would be under the guise of a lottery, so whichever citizen came back with the winning radio would receive a prize, and the Chinese government would have their cracked ciphertext.
MD5 is a hashing algorithm. It will take an input of theoretically any size and create a 16 byte number that maps to this string. Most security algorithms use MD5 (or SHA-1 or some other hashing algorithm) to verify that the plaintext or cryptotext has not been altered during transit.
Obviously, since a string can be an almost infinite length, there has *got* to be collisions somewhere, but so far, no one has found any.
Realize that 16 bytes = 128 bits = 3.40282367e38 different outputs of MD5. Given that the half-life of a proton is 10e31 years, you need to do about 1 per second before half of the universe ends for good. Or, if you want to finish it in 100 years, you would need to 10e20 per second.
To me, this is typical reporter-trash: all opinion and zero fact or experience.
First off, calling Microsoft earnings opaque is a ridiculous proposition. Analysts pore over their numbers because they need to. To accuse Microsoft of accounting fraud by manipulating their numbers in an age of corporate accounting scandal borders on libel. I don't think you can accuse Microsoft of putting money away and manipulating their numbers without proof, and the author has offered none of this. I have followed Microsoft quarterly reports since 1995, and although they were dinged for something close to this a few years back, they do nothing along the lines of what this so-called reporter is alleging.
Secondly, as usual, this guy has no real world experience and talks from his ass, not his head. Let me shed some light on the things I came up against when working with Linux.
(Full disclosure: I am no Microsoft fan, but I do like some of their products, namely the NT family, and MS VC 6.0. Hate.NET, and haven't installed anything more than W2K SP2 because of licensing terms in sp3. Despise their monopololistic behavior)
I work for a company that develops enterprise software. I single-handedly ported it to Linux over the Xmas holidays a few years back. But then, when it came to actually selling this to customers, we ran into issues, namely support. I chose Red Hat at the time because they were a name brand and I could get support if I wanted (or so I thought). We needed database support and Red Hat supported Oracle which was great. But then, Oracle shifted gears and now wanted to only support Red Hat's Advanced Server product, which was fine, except it cost $1000+. Then, we tried to buy support from Red Hat, and that ended up costing us >$10K. Now, they have dropped support for their free distro, which means that our customers who will use it will need to pay $1000+ for their version of Linux, which is probably a huge showstopper. This is supposed to be free?
I looked into switching over to SUSE, but they offer no developer support. This is critical because as an ISV, we need someone we can go to if we run into Linux problems that we can't figure out or that we don't have the experience to solve. We can't possibly sell a product to customers and then have them go to the internet to figure out how to solve their problems.
So the article is totally off-base is claiming the benefits of Linux being free. Linux is not free for corporations, and definitely not free for ISVs that want to sell products to customers. It is as expensive, if not more expensive than Microsoft solutions. Red Hat AS is $1000 but W2k3 is $799. What gives???
As for the X-box, I like it, although the PS2 is superior in many ways, especially the joystick and no f'n x-box live which i refuse to pay for. But the graphics are nicer, and having a hard drive to store data is so much faster and convenient than a memory card. I can see x-box being a formidable competitor for years to come. Yes, it may be losing money, but Microsoft can afford to make an investment, espcailly since the gaming industry is growing faster than the movie industry. It's easy to poke at it like this article does, but frankly its something that can really help the company in the long run and is a smart investment of their $50 billion.
Who would have guessed the X-men 2 would be so great?
I literally shed tears when I saw the way they did Nightcrawler... it was perfect. The attack at the beginning of the movie was perfect... I just wish that I hadn't seen the previews so that I would have been completely caught offguard.
The portrayal especially his religiousness was amazing.
The only minor problems that I overlooked:
1) He wasn't fuzzy (ie. Fuzzy Elf) 2) In the attack scene, he was clearly teleporting behind walls and such, something that he wouldn't be able to do properly. The only reason that I could think of that he would do that was because he was under the mind control and that forced him to do crazy things.
The rest of the world needs a different US. You might not care, tho - but I for one hope you do.
The rest of the world might want a different U.S., but the President acts strictly for the interests of his own country. I, for one, think Bush has done an amazingly good job with foreign policy. Not one citizen has died from foreign terrorism on U.S. soil since 9/11...that is a tremendous track record for the Bush administration. I shudder to think where we'd be today if Gore had won in 2000.
Good point about how the President should be looking out for the best interests of his own country.
However, your point of U.S. citizens not dying from terrorism is extremely weak.
No US citizens have died from foreign terrorism on U.S. soil EVER... until GWB. So, that means, according to your logic, since George Washington, it was a tremendous track record for every single president of the US to avoid this... except for Bush because he was the only president to ever allow U.S. citizens to die from a foreign terrorist act on U.S. soil.
I understand the business reasons why you would discontinue Red Hat Linux... namely because it doesn't pay. But don't you think you will lose a lot of grassroots support for Red Hat because regular people like me won't be able to "play before you buy"? You will only lose more and more mindshare in the up-and-coming Linux market as time goes on if Red Hat becomes a business-only OS.
I was solely responsible for pushing and implementing the port of our company's product to Linux. I specifically chose Red Hat because of brand-name recognition, and because it was a distro I could play around with before I actually committed to porting our software to it.
Now that RH is going completely in the Advanced Server route, I no longer have the ability to play with the OS before I do my development. My company balked at the prices AS was being sold at, as well as our customers, and we are now re-evaluating our push into Linux, at least using Red Hat. The whole point was that Linux was supposed to be CHEAP. Once they start going up in price, why wouldn't I go with a more established vendor with a more mature product like Solaris X86?
And please don't say that Fedora is the same as Red Hat. It isn't. It will have a different look and feel, different marketing, and different demographics especially as time goes on. People will not pick up Fedora and say, "Oh this is really just Red Hat Advanced Server".
I know it's not something that pays, but having Red Hat's name out there as one of the premier distros with exceptional quality was one of the things that kept Red Hat's name in the spotlight. It's the same reason why Microsoft is pushing for the education market... they want to have the kids already have experience with their products. If you stop the up-and-coming kids who are interested in computers not able to use your distro, you have already lost mindshare.
Getting rid of the publically accessible distro will relegate Red Hat to the same status and mindset of SCO (before the lawsuit crap), where it was a business version of UNIX but regular people didn't play around with it. It won't be the first thing people will think of when it comes to Linux.
Please reconsider this disasterous decision because I actually do like Red Hat a lot.
Slashdot Mirror
Water naturally ionized into H+ and OH-, which is the cause of the conduction of water.
I went through this... I bought netgear gs105 and netgear nics, all really cheap at amazon.
Like me you'll probably find you don't get a 10x increase in speed, but maybe 25-50%, like from 8 MB/s to 13 MB/s when you transfer stuff between two computers.
This is because your hard drive is fragmented, and this will completely, and drastically affect performance when you copy stuff. You don't realize it, but you will take a massive hit when you try to copy your isos, movies, etc across the LAN.
I went from 13 MB/s to like 30 MB/s after i defragmented my source and destination drives.
The main thing is that with Gigabit Ethernet, you have to think of the entire network as a system that works completely together. There has to be a complete unity between all components on your network because you will see the bottlenecks a lot easier.
Also, none of the netgear cheap stuff support jumbo frames. The more expensive NICs do, but the gs10X ports do *not* support jumboframes.
As well, they get really, really, really hot. Unnecessarily hot if you ask me, like burning to the touch, and could really heat up the inside of your CPU. In fact, even the gs105 switch is hot to the touch, too.
I instead bought 2 Intel Pro 1000 MTs. They are much more reliable, they do support jumbo frames (but I can't use it until I actually get a jumob frame compatible switch) and they don't get hot at all.
So you spend all these resources to find one collision amongst 2^128 combinations.... not really that useful. Sure it is significant, but does it really bring down the entire MD5 infrastructure?
To really destroy MD5, you need to either be able to reverse the plaintext from the hash, or build a lookup table where you can get the plaintext from the hash.
Both of these seem infeasible, especially the lookup table, so things like Paypal using MD5, which the web site uses as an example, doesn't seem quite true.
Right... and that's why you see the Geological Engineering Department and French-Canadian History departments so lavishly filled with state of the art equipment and funding.
The less people go into CS, the less money colleges will put into it. These students will end up working on computers that are years out-of-date because colleges won't want to dump money for expensive hardward and software into a program that doesn't make them money.
This flies directly in the face of comments by Carly Fiorina, Andy Grove, and other CEOs that
outsourcing will end up helping this country by exporting the "menial" jobs out to 3rd world countries. In the same breath, they say that the US needs to invest more in high tech in order to maintain their competitive edge.
Their comments are just bullshit, because as the US starts outsourcing their entry-level jobs to India, it leaves no jobs for graduating students. Why would a student pay $80k+ for a degree in which they need to compete against someone making $200/month?
By outsourcing our entry and medium level jobs to 3rd world countries, it is simply compounding our high-tech problem by creating zero incentive for new students to pursue careers in high tech. Because there is no new blood entering these professions, more jobs and more experience is being put into the hands of these 3rd world countries, and countries like the US and Britain end up losing. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, and then these CEOs turn around and say, "Well, we said that the US needed to invest more, but they didn't. And because they didn't, we're going to move all of our development to India." It's the fact that they care more about their bottom line over the health of their company and their countries that will cause this problem.
This is a clear indication that the outsourcing strategy has already had a pronounced effect on the US, and is damaging to its competitiveness in high tech.
It's pretty clear from the planes that each planet makes around the sun that every planet except for Pluto came from the original gas formation or whatever that created the solar system. Pluto is the only one that has a messed up orbit, so it's obvious it's some type of captured mass that got too close to the solar system.
But who cares? Let's just call it a planet for the sake of history. Jeeze, I mean we have the Pacific, Indian, and Atlantic Oceans even though they are clearly the same body of water. The difference between the Indian and Pacific Ocean is even more nebulous.
Why not call Pluto a captured planet, and keep it as it is, ie. a planet within the solar system, and everything else, just forget it. We don't need any new members... the people who are trying to induct anything new just want their names in the history books.
The most dangerous opponent you can ever have is someone who has nothing left to lose.
This is the exact problem that the governments of the world face when they go up against terrorists, especially terrorists that are willing to kill themselves.
In a similar vein, this is w2hat Microsoft and all the other for-pay software companies face when they go toe-to-toe with OSS developers. There is a multitude of college and experienced kids that are willing to donate their blood, sweat, and tears and completely give away their effort for free. New open-source developers are recruited everyday, just like suicide bombers.
How can a company, even Microsoft, beat them over the long haul? Technically, they can't because OSS will last forever, and bad quarters, accounting scandals, or corporate greed can't take them down.
The only way they can is through legislation, like forcing software providers to assume liability security violations, and patents.
If we let legislation pass that would force companies to assume liability for security violations, then all OSS is doomed. Some people have suggested that OSS projects be exempt from such a law, but do you really think that Microsoft's lobbyists would allow for that? If individual programmers were liable for security problems, this would definitely kill OSS.
The second issue is patents, and companies like Microsoft could very well corner the market on some key piece of software that would squeeze out OSS developers. Although it seems all-but-inevitable, Europe neeeds to do whatever it can to avoid getting US-style patent laws that patent both software and business processes, otherwise OSS will be mired in more lawsuits and less programming.
I don't get it... to me this is completely short-sighted.
But having these referral sites, I have been introduced to news sites that I would never have thought to go to. From slashdot, I now regularly scan through cnet's site, etc.
why not take advantage of the extra eyeballs and put more targetted advertising? Ads are the only thing keeping these content sites anyway... This to me would be the smarter business decision, instead of just blocking people from viewing free content. Why not put up an ad from Redhat or Microsoft whenever a viewer comes from LinuxJournal???
This is a mark of a stupid business person.
What is so insane is that the rules for profanity are completely inconsistent. Oprah can have a show talking about "tossing salads" which include a detailed description of what that is, but if Howard Stern says it, he will get fined.
This is a problem for several reasons:
1) Our freedom of speech is killed because we can be fined into bankruptcy for talking edgy, so obviously people will be more careful of anything that they say
2) freedom of speech is completely killed because the FCC can decide months later if what you said was profane, so the feedback mechanism is completely messed up.
3) initial rulings on profanity can be "overruled" by the FCC, meaning that political agendas can be enforced through the FCC now
For a listing of required reading go directly to Howard Stern's web site.
I have several co-workers that are Indian. They say that the starting wage for someone out of college in India, in those high-wage markets is like 10,000 rupees a month. This is about $2000 US a month.
However, for 1000 rupees a month, you can get yourself a butler/servant. As well, rent is like 1000 rupees a month, meaning you have several thousand rupees left to do what you want.
If you have more experience, I would think 20,000 rupees a month is more reasonable, which means that you could easily save $3000 US dollars a month and still live like a king, which is not bad at all. Even assuming 0% interest except inflation and no raises, after 10 years you could come back with almost $400,000 US. Not too bad...
However, hell would freeze over before I moved to India... I'd rather just take my chances here in the US.
But what happens when these people get on Mars? Then what? What if, after a few weeks, the video/radio transmissions back to Mission Control are:
"OH GOD PLEASE GET ME OUT OF HERE! PLEASE I'LL DO ANYTHING! PLEASE I DON'T WANT TO DIE ON THIS PLANET!"
Imagine how horrifying that would be to everyone involved? It would be like watching a person who was condemned to die and fighting it at the last minute. No matter how justified it is, I think don't think there is anything that can prepare you for someone struggling to live and begging for their lives. Imagine the outrage that people on Earth would feel when the media shows a clip of this astronaut pleading for his life? It would go down as one of the darkest days of humanity.
I mean, they can't just shut off the radio and ignore the person.
The humane aspect of sending a person on a one-way death mission is the aspect that the author has completely and utterly ignored. It's easy to forget that right now, but when death is about to happen, everyone will be thinking, "Dear Lord, what have we done? How could we have done this?" and we as a species will regret the entire thing.
How can you say rewrites are bad? That is simply ridiculous. Without rewrites, there would be no progress. Sure, people get inconvenienced, but it's a minor inconvenience relative
There are some rewrites that are simply horrible and make no sense. But every single one of the examples that the author gives is an example of a GOOD rewrite!
Apache 2.0? Mozilla? Perl? This is ridiculous. I love Apache 2 and Mozilla (I don't use Perl) and find Mozilla much smoother to use than Netscape. These are platforms that people will be using going forward. If going forward is impeded by the current architecture of the software, YOU NEED A REWRITE.
A bad rewrite is when it completely breaks everything and no one migrates to the new version because there is no gain for anyone involved.
And Windows 2K -> XP -> 2K3 were not rewrites. They are evolutionary changes... now the author doesn't think that software should be improved or changed to add functionality???
I have UNIX Services 3.0 and I personally love it. I was NT-only until 4 years ago when I started adopting UNIX/Linux, and now I routinely use vi instead of notepad, just out of habit. Things like pwd are small utilities, but really useful when I need it.
I use the NFS feature to mount my W2K box to NFS mounts. That part is simple.
I also mount from Linux to NT. If you give the NT share anonymous, read-only access, then it's simple. If you want more refined security, then it gets more complicated.
You need to do mapping between NT usernames and UNIX user names via a User Name Mapping proxy. I'm sure it works well, but it's kind of hard to understand how to use, and after 30 minutes, I gave up and made the shares from NT anonymous read-only access.
I'm sure if I spent maybe 2 hours on this I could get everything to work, but since this is my home network and I don't have a whole lot of user accounts, I figured I didn't need it.
I have a major Coke habit. I loved Coke and drank it often but was relatively normal until I joined my current company that provided free soft drinks. Then I went on a major Coke binge that lasted 5 years. I would literally, literally have 6+ Cokes a day for 5 years straight.
I know I needed to stop because I was getting physiological problems from the caffeine (stomach problems, diarrhea, etc) and I gained around 40 lbs since joining this company, in part due to the massive amounts of sugar I was ingesting. So I went cold turkey and switched to Sprite, like a heroin addict going to methadone. It gave me a similar burn when I drank it but just didn't have the caffeine.
Sprite by itself didn't do the trick, but it does require a massive amount of willpower, too. There is no quick fix for a disease like what we share.
It's been over 1 year, and it has really done the trick. Oh, I still love Coke and will have it maybe once a month. I love Coke. I love Coke. I love Coke. But I don't drink it in nearly the same amounts as what I used to, and with the Sprite, I usually drink around 2-3 a day instead of 6+. I hoping to switch to either water or fruit juice soon, except those are prohibitively more expensive and more inconvenient to drink (I need to have a glass that I wash, instead of a convenient can that I can throw away). Costco water makes me piss every fifteen minutes which really sucks for a programmer.
Actually, I think in the "Chinese Lottery" scenario, there is one string/hash pair that is chosen, and all the clients try other combinations of strings. Whoever gets the same hash will "win" the lottery. Thus, the web site wouldn't have to store anything except the returned plaintext that hashed to the same MD5 value.
I think the original "Chinese Lottery" scenario was if everyone one in China had a radio that was set to do encryption, and the Chinese government broadcasted a particular ciphertext that it wanted to encrypt, every radio would do the decryption using different strings until one of them got the answer. I think it would be under the guise of a lottery, so whichever citizen came back with the winning radio would receive a prize, and the Chinese government would have their cracked ciphertext.
MD5 is a hashing algorithm. It will take an input of theoretically any size and create a 16 byte number that maps to this string. Most security algorithms use MD5 (or SHA-1 or some other hashing algorithm) to verify that the plaintext or cryptotext has not been altered during transit.
Obviously, since a string can be an almost infinite length, there has *got* to be collisions somewhere, but so far, no one has found any.
Realize that 16 bytes = 128 bits = 3.40282367e38 different outputs of MD5. Given that the half-life of a proton is 10e31 years, you need to do about 1 per second before half of the universe ends for good. Or, if you want to finish it in 100 years, you would need to 10e20 per second.
You better start some time soon!
To me, this is typical reporter-trash: all opinion and zero fact or experience.
.NET, and haven't installed anything more than W2K SP2 because of licensing terms in sp3. Despise their monopololistic behavior)
First off, calling Microsoft earnings opaque is a ridiculous proposition. Analysts pore over their numbers because they need to. To accuse Microsoft of accounting fraud by manipulating their numbers in an age of corporate accounting scandal borders on libel. I don't think you can accuse Microsoft of putting money away and manipulating their numbers without proof, and the author has offered none of this. I have followed Microsoft quarterly reports since 1995, and although they were dinged for something close to this a few years back, they do nothing along the lines of what this so-called reporter is alleging.
Secondly, as usual, this guy has no real world experience and talks from his ass, not his head. Let me shed some light on the things I came up against when working with Linux.
(Full disclosure: I am no Microsoft fan, but I do like some of their products, namely the NT family, and MS VC 6.0. Hate
I work for a company that develops enterprise software. I single-handedly ported it to Linux over the Xmas holidays a few years back. But then, when it came to actually selling this to customers, we ran into issues, namely support. I chose Red Hat at the time because they were a name brand and I could get support if I wanted (or so I thought). We needed database support and Red Hat supported Oracle which was great. But then, Oracle shifted gears and now wanted to only support Red Hat's Advanced Server product, which was fine, except it cost $1000+. Then, we tried to buy support from Red Hat, and that ended up costing us >$10K. Now, they have dropped support for their free distro, which means that our customers who will use it will need to pay $1000+ for their version of Linux, which is probably a huge showstopper. This is supposed to be free?
I looked into switching over to SUSE, but they offer no developer support. This is critical because as an ISV, we need someone we can go to if we run into Linux problems that we can't figure out or that we don't have the experience to solve. We can't possibly sell a product to customers and then have them go to the internet to figure out how to solve their problems.
So the article is totally off-base is claiming the benefits of Linux being free. Linux is not free for corporations, and definitely not free for ISVs that want to sell products to customers. It is as expensive, if not more expensive than Microsoft solutions. Red Hat AS is $1000 but W2k3 is $799. What gives???
As for the X-box, I like it, although the PS2 is superior in many ways, especially the joystick and no f'n x-box live which i refuse to pay for. But the graphics are nicer, and having a hard drive to store data is so much faster and convenient than a memory card. I can see x-box being a formidable competitor for years to come. Yes, it may be losing money, but Microsoft can afford to make an investment, espcailly since the gaming industry is growing faster than the movie industry. It's easy to poke at it like this article does, but frankly its something that can really help the company in the long run and is a smart investment of their $50 billion.
I don't know if there's a connection, but links on this site go to www.downhillbattle.org, which was co-created by a developer for MUTE
Who would have guessed the X-men 2 would be so great?
I literally shed tears when I saw the way they did Nightcrawler... it was perfect. The attack at the beginning of the movie was perfect... I just wish that I hadn't seen the previews so that I would have been completely caught offguard.
The portrayal especially his religiousness was amazing.
The only minor problems that I overlooked:
1) He wasn't fuzzy (ie. Fuzzy Elf)
2) In the attack scene, he was clearly teleporting behind walls and such, something that he wouldn't be able to do properly. The only reason that I could think of that he would do that was because he was under the mind control and that forced him to do crazy things.
The rest of the world needs a different US. You might not care, tho - but I for one hope you do.
The rest of the world might want a different U.S., but the President acts strictly for the interests of his own country. I, for one, think Bush has done an amazingly good job with foreign policy. Not one citizen has died from foreign terrorism on U.S. soil since 9/11...that is a tremendous track record for the Bush administration. I shudder to think where we'd be today if Gore had won in 2000.
Good point about how the President should be looking out for the best interests of his own country.
However, your point of U.S. citizens not dying from terrorism is extremely weak.
No US citizens have died from foreign terrorism on U.S. soil EVER... until GWB. So, that means, according to your logic, since George Washington, it was a tremendous track record for every single president of the US to avoid this... except for Bush because he was the only president to ever allow U.S. citizens to die from a foreign terrorist act on U.S. soil.
A single-sided die... so depending on what you wanted to roll and how it was worded, you would always or never get it.
I've already reported him to Microsoft.... waiting for the check any day now!
I wonder if I report every single researcher that I can collect $250K per researcher?
1. Turn in virus researcher
2. ???
3. Profit!!!
I understand the business reasons why you would discontinue Red Hat Linux... namely because it doesn't pay. But don't you think you will lose a lot of grassroots support for Red Hat because regular people like me won't be able to "play before you buy"? You will only lose more and more mindshare in the up-and-coming Linux market as time goes on if Red Hat becomes a business-only OS.
I was solely responsible for pushing and implementing the port of our company's product to Linux. I specifically chose Red Hat because of brand-name recognition, and because it was a distro I could play around with before I actually committed to porting our software to it.
Now that RH is going completely in the Advanced Server route, I no longer have the ability to play with the OS before I do my development. My company balked at the prices AS was being sold at, as well as our customers, and we are now re-evaluating our push into Linux, at least using Red Hat. The whole point was that Linux was supposed to be CHEAP. Once they start going up in price, why wouldn't I go with a more established vendor with a more mature product like Solaris X86?
And please don't say that Fedora is the same as Red Hat. It isn't. It will have a different look and feel, different marketing, and different demographics especially as time goes on. People will not pick up Fedora and say, "Oh this is really just Red Hat Advanced Server".
I know it's not something that pays, but having Red Hat's name out there as one of the premier distros with exceptional quality was one of the things that kept Red Hat's name in the spotlight.
It's the same reason why Microsoft is pushing for the education market... they want to have the kids already have experience with their products. If you stop the up-and-coming kids who are interested in computers not able to use your distro, you have already lost mindshare.
Getting rid of the publically accessible distro will relegate Red Hat to the same status and mindset of SCO (before the lawsuit crap), where it was a business version of UNIX but regular people didn't play around with it. It won't be the first thing people will think of when it comes to Linux.
Please reconsider this disasterous decision because I actually do like Red Hat a lot.
I hope Lucas has come to his senses and will offer the original, non-CGI version of Star Wars!
You mean removing tattoos. I thought that people used lasers to remove them. Maybe you can do both, depending on what color you use with CorelDraw!