It's an amazing filesystem, and as far as I knew a few years ago, the only one capable of scaling performance reasonably for extremely large directories.
ext3 supports huge directories. Implementing a hash table to store
directories entries instead of a linked list isn't exactly rocket science.
He can appeal, of course, and as I understand it, it's a technical case that they have against him, so there's a stronger chance that an appeal could work than if there were direct evidence of his actions.
I guess if his wife turns up in Russia he'll be set free fairly quickly.
I don't rate the chances of an appeal at the moment though.
murder implies premeditation and can't be a heat of the moment act by definition.
You are deliberately I think exaggerating the word "premeditation". The
thought can be for just a moment in the heat of passion or drunkness, and
it will be called "murder". Please read: malice aforethought (Wikipedia).
I have no particular interest in offering guilty people a defense for what they've done. If you've intentionally murdered someone, please go to jail and get the hell out of our society.
I'm going to be devil's advocate and ask how this benefits society.
Most murders are heat-of-the-moment acts, or the results of drunkenness. A few
seconds of stupidity and spending the rest of your life in jail. For people
who won't obviously murder again I don't see how this does anyone any good.
you realize that most people dont have static IPs? I get a new one usually twice a day,but at least once a day
And if your ISP runs such a system, then it becomes the ISPs problem to clean up
the spam-spewing bots on their network, or else give people static IPs. (IPv6 will
make this a lot simpler, but both approaches - static IPs and ISPs filtering
malware spew, are common in the UK).
Email, for example, is only being used 5% of the time as intended, the other 95% being spam
CAPTCHAs are a strange way to solve the problem anyway. A lot of spammy accounts (particularly
wiki spam accounts) are signed up by humans.
The thing is though that spammers have to access the net from an IP address. Sure, they use
grandma's compromised computer so they effectively have thousands of IPs, but they still
access from an IP. So score the IP addresses. When spam comes from them, knock them down
one point. When something good comes from an IP address, notch it up one point.
(And score the scorers as well).
This will suck if your computer is compromised by a spammer, but so what. Fix your
computer or your server, stop running malware, and you'll be OK again.
Erm, that page says to me that it's not being offered in Europe. They prevent you from paying with a non-US credit
card and they stop your from shipping outside the US, undoubtedly because they don't want all the support and warranty issues
with Europe.
Actually in Europe consumer goods are required to last for a reasonable length of time. Two years is the minimum period mentioned in the consumer sales directive but member states are free to institute their own (longer) periods and higher consumer standards.
They are not required by law to have a three year warranty here or even a one year but I have never seen a new computer have under a one year warranty.
Actually in Europe consumer goods are required to last for a reasonable length of time. Two years is the minimum
period mentioned in the consumer sales directive
but member states are free to institute their own (longer) periods and higher consumer standards.
Perhaps this is the reason why the OLPC wasn't sold in Europe...
The problem is that the desktop experience has become, thanks to the almighty Microsoft, (whose name we speak in hushed tones, lest they smite us with their stick of smiting), have defined the desktop as being a place where even a moron can get a decent experience with minimal work, or none, in some cases.
Last time I checked, Windows out of the box couldn't create PDF files, display DivX movies, open tarballs, can display
but not edit DOC, PPT, can't display web pages properly, can't create ZIP files [maybe it can do this one now?] etc.
It doesn't have a system where you can install one of 1000s of programs just with a few clicks from a
menu (and for free). It doesn't have virtualization or a SQL database or any programming
languages at all.
It's not hard to collect fake evidence from someone else's trash, to place at the scene of a crime.
Don't bother with a particular person's trash, just go to a bar or a bus stop in
a poorer area of town and
pick up cigarette butts. Those poor people are probably on the database and
are unlikely to have good, believable alibis. They'll go to prison instead of you.
Aren't all of these boards Chinese in the first place? The factory probably just did some overtime runs to knock out several more thousand.
That would be a good scenario. A bad scenario is that these are the motherboards which
didn't pass QA or testing, in other words faulty motherboards which were liberated from
the reject bin by enterprising workers. You'd be buying a known broken motherboard
and wouldn't know about it until you got it home, or perhaps even until you'd been using
it to process your critical data for a while.
Similarly, if the cheaper copies are actually inferior they will soon earn a reputation for being so [...]
This is where you argument falls down.
The fakes are (allegedly -- TFA offers no facts)
being sold as "genuine DFI(TM) motherboards". Now if they were sold as
"genuine ChinaCorp Fake(TM) motherboards" then you could consider the
reputation of DFI versus the reputation of the fakes, and perhaps the fakes
would be just as good. That is not possible
if the fakes pretend to be a DFI motherboard and the consumer can't tell
when purchasing which reputation they are choosing.
This is why trademark laws are actually a mostly good sort of monopoly protection.
I'll second enta.net (via UKFSN as with the parent).
I'm on the unlimited 2 Mbps[*] package and it costs me less than my
mobile phone bill each month, but approximately twice as much as the
throttled nonsense from other providers would.
It really is unlimited
too, and believe me I've tested this extensively:-)
Windows's legacy lies in DOS, which was designed to run on commodity hardware that completely lacked these capabilities. Without hierarchical protection rings the OS had absolutely no ability to enforce any form of resource management. Even if there were enough hardware resources to allow for the OS to have more than a few resident functions in memory, every application still had full and complete control over all of the hardware, and a lot of them made the most of it for performance reasons. It didn't matter how many users there were; security was simply not an option.
While they maybe didn't enforce it at the hardware level, operating systems like Minix and Coherent
did feature all of the user-based security features of equivalent Unix systems of the time, and they
ran on 8086 (ie. 16 bit PCs) upwards. (Minix, when running on 386+, does have memory protection).
No one who wrote Minix software (as I recall) ever deliberately bypassed the
security mechanisms because they were all Unix programmers and wouldn't have
thought about writing software that way. So the DOS/performance thing was
more cultural than about the hardware itself.
In fact 8086's segmented memory model did give you some protection against
simple programming errors because unless your program accidentally changed a segment
register (pretty unlikely) it was effectively confined to the 64K of RAM
starting from its data segment. This means it would mostly overwrite only itself
and the bit of spare RAM following.
Absolutely ridiculous. I've heard this before, and I think it makes as much sense as holding the door manufacturer responsible for home break ins.
It's more like holding a lock-maker responsible if their locks are faulty.
The ultimate responsibility for what happens on someone's computer is theirs. There's a lot of hatred for Microsoft floating around here, and for good reason, but holding them responsible because people can't protect their computers in the most rudimentary ways is wrong.
It should be possible to allow someone to download and run any random program and not
allow it to take over the computer. Programs should not run by default with full
access to everything. Operating systems should summarise what a program
wants to do in plain English ("this program wants to send out 100 emails a minute over
your broadband connection", or "this program wants to log everything you type and send
it to a Russian site called cracker.ru"). This is not some sort of impossible goal, but
easily achievable today with a bit of thought.
You cannot on the other hand hold non-technical users responsible for stuff they
don't understand, and if as a result of visiting a website your computer silently downloads
malware which starts logging your credit card details, that is not something that a non-technical
user could or should be held responsible for.
Fraunhofer is
funded one third by the German government and two thirds by
contract work done for businesses. It's pretty likely that
public-funded universities would have developed this stuff (after
all, MP3 is just a minor evolution of lots of research that was being
done at the time).
However, if the technical hurdle for software patents was as high
as complex, innovative audio compression algorithms, and if the monopoly didn't
last so long, then certainly the patent system would not be so broken
as it is today.
You really ought to learn a little bit about how Forth works before making more of a fool
of yourself in public. I wrote a tutorial here
on the subject.
Slashdot Mirror
It's an amazing filesystem, and as far as I knew a few years ago, the only one capable of scaling performance reasonably for extremely large directories.
ext3 supports huge directories. Implementing a hash table to store directories entries instead of a linked list isn't exactly rocket science.
He can appeal, of course, and as I understand it, it's a technical case that they have against him, so there's a stronger chance that an appeal could work than if there were direct evidence of his actions.
I guess if his wife turns up in Russia he'll be set free fairly quickly. I don't rate the chances of an appeal at the moment though.
Rich.
murder implies premeditation and can't be a heat of the moment act by definition.
You are deliberately I think exaggerating the word "premeditation". The thought can be for just a moment in the heat of passion or drunkness, and it will be called "murder". Please read: malice aforethought (Wikipedia).
Rich.
I have no particular interest in offering guilty people a defense for what they've done. If you've intentionally murdered someone, please go to jail and get the hell out of our society.
I'm going to be devil's advocate and ask how this benefits society.
Most murders are heat-of-the-moment acts, or the results of drunkenness. A few seconds of stupidity and spending the rest of your life in jail. For people who won't obviously murder again I don't see how this does anyone any good.
Rich.
For those wondering, the original spam (nee Hormel spiced ham) turned 70 last year.
That explains the taste ...
"hoi polloi" means "the many", so "the hoi polloi" means "the the many".
</pendant mode>
Rich.
you realize that most people dont have static IPs? I get a new one usually twice a day,but at least once a day
And if your ISP runs such a system, then it becomes the ISPs problem to clean up the spam-spewing bots on their network, or else give people static IPs. (IPv6 will make this a lot simpler, but both approaches - static IPs and ISPs filtering malware spew, are common in the UK).
Rich.
Email, for example, is only being used 5% of the time as intended, the other 95% being spam
CAPTCHAs are a strange way to solve the problem anyway. A lot of spammy accounts (particularly wiki spam accounts) are signed up by humans.
The thing is though that spammers have to access the net from an IP address. Sure, they use grandma's compromised computer so they effectively have thousands of IPs, but they still access from an IP. So score the IP addresses. When spam comes from them, knock them down one point. When something good comes from an IP address, notch it up one point. (And score the scorers as well).
This will suck if your computer is compromised by a spammer, but so what. Fix your computer or your server, stop running malware, and you'll be OK again.
Rich.
Erm, that page says to me that it's not being offered in Europe. They prevent you from paying with a non-US credit card and they stop your from shipping outside the US, undoubtedly because they don't want all the support and warranty issues with Europe.
Rich.
(Replying to my own posting ...)
Actually in Europe consumer goods are required to last for a reasonable length of time. Two years is the minimum period mentioned in the consumer sales directive but member states are free to institute their own (longer) periods and higher consumer standards.
In the UK, the period is six years, under the Sale of Goods Act 1979
Rich.
They are not required by law to have a three year warranty here or even a one year but I have never seen a new computer have under a one year warranty.
Actually in Europe consumer goods are required to last for a reasonable length of time. Two years is the minimum period mentioned in the consumer sales directive but member states are free to institute their own (longer) periods and higher consumer standards.
Perhaps this is the reason why the OLPC wasn't sold in Europe ...
Rich.
The problem is that the desktop experience has become, thanks to the almighty Microsoft, (whose name we speak in hushed tones, lest they smite us with their stick of smiting), have defined the desktop as being a place where even a moron can get a decent experience with minimal work, or none, in some cases.
Last time I checked, Windows out of the box couldn't create PDF files, display DivX movies, open tarballs, can display but not edit DOC, PPT, can't display web pages properly, can't create ZIP files [maybe it can do this one now?] etc. It doesn't have a system where you can install one of 1000s of programs just with a few clicks from a menu (and for free). It doesn't have virtualization or a SQL database or any programming languages at all.
Rich.
It's not hard to collect fake evidence from someone else's trash, to place at the scene of a crime.
Don't bother with a particular person's trash, just go to a bar or a bus stop in a poorer area of town and pick up cigarette butts. Those poor people are probably on the database and are unlikely to have good, believable alibis. They'll go to prison instead of you.
Rich.
The ultimate form of revolution is tax cuts. The more you cut taxes, the more the government will collapse.
Yeah, that's worked really well over in the US for the last 8 years.
Rich.
Java is pretty neat, too.
Java is the COBOL of the naughties - verbose, bloated and full of horribly bad design choices.
Rich.
Aren't all of these boards Chinese in the first place? The factory probably just did some overtime runs to knock out several more thousand.
That would be a good scenario. A bad scenario is that these are the motherboards which didn't pass QA or testing, in other words faulty motherboards which were liberated from the reject bin by enterprising workers. You'd be buying a known broken motherboard and wouldn't know about it until you got it home, or perhaps even until you'd been using it to process your critical data for a while.
Rich.
Similarly, if the cheaper copies are actually inferior they will soon earn a reputation for being so [...]
This is where you argument falls down.
The fakes are (allegedly -- TFA offers no facts) being sold as "genuine DFI(TM) motherboards". Now if they were sold as "genuine ChinaCorp Fake(TM) motherboards" then you could consider the reputation of DFI versus the reputation of the fakes, and perhaps the fakes would be just as good. That is not possible if the fakes pretend to be a DFI motherboard and the consumer can't tell when purchasing which reputation they are choosing.
This is why trademark laws are actually a mostly good sort of monopoly protection.
Rich.
I'll second enta.net (via UKFSN as with the parent).
I'm on the unlimited 2 Mbps[*] package and it costs me less than my mobile phone bill each month, but approximately twice as much as the throttled nonsense from other providers would.
It really is unlimited too, and believe me I've tested this extensively :-)
The only emails I'm getting from enta.net are to announce that they're lighting up yet more capacity on their central network. That's a nice sort of email to get from your ISP.
Rich.
[*] But my ADSL line syncs at around 6 Mbps and I can burst up to this.
They never came close to being in Earth orbit either. That requires 20 times the speed and 60 times the energy than they achieved.
Rich.
Windows's legacy lies in DOS, which was designed to run on commodity hardware that completely lacked these capabilities. Without hierarchical protection rings the OS had absolutely no ability to enforce any form of resource management. Even if there were enough hardware resources to allow for the OS to have more than a few resident functions in memory, every application still had full and complete control over all of the hardware, and a lot of them made the most of it for performance reasons. It didn't matter how many users there were; security was simply not an option.
While they maybe didn't enforce it at the hardware level, operating systems like Minix and Coherent did feature all of the user-based security features of equivalent Unix systems of the time, and they ran on 8086 (ie. 16 bit PCs) upwards. (Minix, when running on 386+, does have memory protection).
No one who wrote Minix software (as I recall) ever deliberately bypassed the security mechanisms because they were all Unix programmers and wouldn't have thought about writing software that way. So the DOS/performance thing was more cultural than about the hardware itself.
In fact 8086's segmented memory model did give you some protection against simple programming errors because unless your program accidentally changed a segment register (pretty unlikely) it was effectively confined to the 64K of RAM starting from its data segment. This means it would mostly overwrite only itself and the bit of spare RAM following.
Rich.
Absolutely ridiculous. I've heard this before, and I think it makes as much sense as holding the door manufacturer responsible for home break ins.
It's more like holding a lock-maker responsible if their locks are faulty.
The ultimate responsibility for what happens on someone's computer is theirs. There's a lot of hatred for Microsoft floating around here, and for good reason, but holding them responsible because people can't protect their computers in the most rudimentary ways is wrong.
It should be possible to allow someone to download and run any random program and not allow it to take over the computer. Programs should not run by default with full access to everything. Operating systems should summarise what a program wants to do in plain English ("this program wants to send out 100 emails a minute over your broadband connection", or "this program wants to log everything you type and send it to a Russian site called cracker.ru"). This is not some sort of impossible goal, but easily achievable today with a bit of thought.
You cannot on the other hand hold non-technical users responsible for stuff they don't understand, and if as a result of visiting a website your computer silently downloads malware which starts logging your credit card details, that is not something that a non-technical user could or should be held responsible for.
Rich.
Fraunhofer is funded one third by the German government and two thirds by contract work done for businesses. It's pretty likely that public-funded universities would have developed this stuff (after all, MP3 is just a minor evolution of lots of research that was being done at the time).
However, if the technical hurdle for software patents was as high as complex, innovative audio compression algorithms, and if the monopoly didn't last so long, then certainly the patent system would not be so broken as it is today.
Rich.
And Red Hat are currently the leading company/organization contributing to the Linux kernel.
Rich.
You really ought to learn a little bit about how Forth works before making more of a fool of yourself in public. I wrote a tutorial here on the subject.
Rich.
Trouble with that is most politicians are stupid, ill-informed, rabble-rousers who actually believe the BS they come out with.
Rich.
Moderators, where is the "+1 Sad-but-true" option?