Darl Mcbride lives alone in a studio apt in utah, wasting away dreaming of what might have been...
Hopefully that'll be the kind of "studio apt" where you
get your meals delivered through a small hole in
the door three times a day, and have to take a
shower with your new boyfriend
"Big Bubba" every morning.
OK, this is a good argument you're making. Basically that artists only work when they get paid.
I don't know if it's true or not. Intuitively I think it could be argued either way. We might equally make a case that artists work for their art, and don't give a toss about money.
I don't know which of these ways of looking at it is correct. But it is at least measurable. It should be possible to perform a scientific study to find out which is correct, then adjust copyright laws, or remove them, as appropriate.
Of course I'm living in a pie-in-the-sky world now, considering our current politicians!
There was a website that published original articles about sea survival as well as some other general survival topics. Well aparently some other company ripped the content, slapped it together, and put it in some book that ended up in grocery stores. If there was no copyright, whichever company that spent the most on marketing or had the greatest distribution would profit the most from original work.
You mean the book publisher showed initiative which the original website didn't. The publisher maximized the market value of the work, thus showing how the free market increases the value of the whole.
After I registered for the UK Telephone Preference Service (similar to the US DNC list), I started to receive many more calls. Currently I'm getting four or five pure marketing calls a day (I used to get one or two, which I thought was bad, and that's why I joined). The problem also is that the orgs who are now calling me are the sort of low-down just crawled out of the swamp scumbags with the "you've just won a free kitchen, call me back on [premium rate number]". Trying to find out who these people are so I can take action is paradoxically much harder than the semi-legitimate calls I was getting before.
I'm not saying this is evidence that people are ignoring, and possibly even abusing the TPS, but it certainly seems that way from here.
Having said that, I've worked out a good tactic against them. They call up and say "Is that Mr. Jones?" (you know immediately that it's a marketing waste of time call by the tone of voice and the fact that no one but a very few friends uses this number). I say "I'll just go and get him for you", and then leave the phone off the hook and go and continue what I was doing before I was rudely interrupted... Return half an hour later and put the phone back on the hook.
First, OCaml's a compiled language, not a scripting language.
Scripting languages do not make a site more efficient. They might make the developer prototype more efficiently, but they aren't going to run more efficiently than something that's compiled, and in many cases, they'll provide you with surprising results later on.
Firstly I've written mod_caml
which is, you'll be disappointed to know, an interface to the Apache API from Caml.
Secondly, OCaml isn't just a compiled language.
Thirdly, if you'd ever written a website you'd know that queries on the database dominate. Interpreted, compiled - it makes no difference.
A well-written CGI will be less efficient than a well-written servlet, especially under load.
EJBs, and Java in general, are almost always entirely the WRONG approach to producing websites.
To make an efficient site, use a scripting language like Perl [or OCaml, but I declare an interest in that], write CGIs, use mod_perl to make it run efficiently, and where you want to optimise, put your logic into stored procedures. Templating and SSIs are also useful.
Question: If the process ends catastrophically (e.g. sudden power failure), it will never close() the file. As you mentioned, the file is no longer referenced elsewhere in the file system. So does this orphan the data on the hard drive?
The fsck or implicit ext3 rebuild after boot picks this up and deletes the file.
Please. Red Hat chooses to leave certain feature [patented video codecs] out of their desktop, and it reflects on Linux desktops in general?
Red Hat would, I'm sure, love to include these in their distribution. Were it not for the fact that larger companies have made sure it's illegal for them to do so.
Linus may have de facto final say, but anyone is free to fork the 2.2 source and start a "Richard'sLinux 2.2" project. Of course the rest of the world would be free to ignore it too...
</nitpicking>
Persistent cached data? So ocaml values can be instantiated once and then shared for the whole application like with a Java appserver?
Yes. There's two ways to do this - either just
create the value at the top level of the script. Top level functions in a script get called once when the script is first loaded. The run function (which you have to register) gets called on each invocation.
Thus:
(* foo is evaluated just once: *)
let foo = expensive_function ()
let run r =... (* generate the page each time - see examples in manual*)
let () = Registry.register_script run
How far along is it? Does it have any kind of session support or is that up to the application programmer?
It's still in beta, but please play with it! Without people playing with it it will be perpetually beta software.
Rich.
PS. You might want to continue this conversation by email because Slashcode sucks for posting code snippets....
Does this mean that each request does not spawn an own process (as CGI usually does) but that the "script" is linked into apache?
Yes, that's right. This avoids a fork and the overhead of starting up the bytecode interpreter each time.
I don't have figures on how much of a speed increase this is, although it undoubtedly has some benefit. However the main reason for doing it is so you can have persistent cached data, and persistent database handles, and that's a much greater win than just avoiding a fork.
Where possible I've gone for reducing the amount of code that you have to write in the common cases, based on a large amount of experience writing CGI scripts in Perl.
At the moment we're missing a fully integrated database layer, but that's coming soon (the code is already out there, I just need to pull it in and do the persistent database connection stuff).
Unfortunately I only get to work on this at weekends, but hope to have a Savannah page up soon so others can more easily contribute.
Rich.
[1] It's not really "scripting" as such. OCaml programs are bytecode compiled and dynamically linked into the bytecode interpreter which runs inside Apache. We also hope to get natively compiled loading working at some point.
Unfortunately it's when you see the video that you realise that the technology has, shall we say, some way to go before we'll all be using it in dull business meetings.
Slashdot Mirror
Rich.
Hopefully that'll be the kind of "studio apt" where you get your meals delivered through a small hole in the door three times a day, and have to take a shower with your new boyfriend "Big Bubba" every morning.
Rich.
I don't know if it's true or not. Intuitively I think it could be argued either way. We might equally make a case that artists work for their art, and don't give a toss about money.
I don't know which of these ways of looking at it is correct. But it is at least measurable. It should be possible to perform a scientific study to find out which is correct, then adjust copyright laws, or remove them, as appropriate.
Of course I'm living in a pie-in-the-sky world now, considering our current politicians!
Rich.
Rich.
You mean the book publisher showed initiative which the original website didn't. The publisher maximized the market value of the work, thus showing how the free market increases the value of the whole.
This is bad how?
Rich.
I'm not saying this is evidence that people are ignoring, and possibly even abusing the TPS, but it certainly seems that way from here.
Having said that, I've worked out a good tactic against them. They call up and say "Is that Mr. Jones?" (you know immediately that it's a marketing waste of time call by the tone of voice and the fact that no one but a very few friends uses this number). I say "I'll just go and get him for you", and then leave the phone off the hook and go and continue what I was doing before I was rudely interrupted ... Return half an hour later and put the phone back on the hook.
Rich.
(Obviously? Surely no one in 2003 would be advocating forking and connecting to the database?)
Rich.
Firstly I've written mod_caml which is, you'll be disappointed to know, an interface to the Apache API from Caml.
Secondly, OCaml isn't just a compiled language.
Thirdly, if you'd ever written a website you'd know that queries on the database dominate. Interpreted, compiled - it makes no difference.
A well-written CGI will be less efficient than a well-written servlet, especially under load.
This is plainly wrong.
Rich.
Evidently nothing, since Perl has plenty of very good templating libraries.
Rich.
Mod the parent up please.
EJBs, and Java in general, are almost always entirely the WRONG approach to producing websites.
To make an efficient site, use a scripting language like Perl [or OCaml, but I declare an interest in that], write CGIs, use mod_perl to make it run efficiently, and where you want to optimise, put your logic into stored procedures. Templating and SSIs are also useful.
Rich.
The fsck or implicit ext3 rebuild after boot picks this up and deletes the file.
Rich.
The definitive periodic table.
http://tubes.ominix.com/art/a/rec/soccer-ball.png
Red Hat would, I'm sure, love to include these in their distribution. Were it not for the fact that larger companies have made sure it's illegal for them to do so.
Rich.
So what?
Why didn't they form a company and compete in the normal way to exploit their idea, rather than sitting on their arses waiting for a pay back?
Rich.
This is the only screenshot that Google turns up, but it truly was a groundbreaking game, and it predated Wolf3D/Doom by at least 10 years.
Rich.
Rich.
CamlLoad /path/to/my/module.cmo
Then all scripts can access functions/values in Module.
Rich.
Yes. There's two ways to do this - either just create the value at the top level of the script. Top level functions in a script get called once when the script is first loaded. The run function (which you have to register) gets called on each invocation.
Thus:
(* foo is evaluated just once: *)let foo = expensive_function ()
let run r = ... (* generate the page each time - see examples in manual*)
let () = Registry.register_script run
How far along is it? Does it have any kind of session support or is that up to the application programmer?
It's still in beta, but please play with it! Without people playing with it it will be perpetually beta software.
Rich.
PS. You might want to continue this conversation by email because Slashcode sucks for posting code snippets ....
Yes, that's right. This avoids a fork and the overhead of starting up the bytecode interpreter each time.
I don't have figures on how much of a speed increase this is, although it undoubtedly has some benefit. However the main reason for doing it is so you can have persistent cached data, and persistent database handles, and that's a much greater win than just avoiding a fork.
Rich.
http://www.merjis.com/developers/mod_caml/docs.sht ml
Where possible I've gone for reducing the amount of code that you have to write in the common cases, based on a large amount of experience writing CGI scripts in Perl.
At the moment we're missing a fully integrated database layer, but that's coming soon (the code is already out there, I just need to pull it in and do the persistent database connection stuff).
Unfortunately I only get to work on this at weekends, but hope to have a Savannah page up soon so others can more easily contribute.
Rich.
[1] It's not really "scripting" as such. OCaml programs are bytecode compiled and dynamically linked into the bytecode interpreter which runs inside Apache. We also hope to get natively compiled loading working at some point.
Rich.
Rich.
Unfortunately it's when you see the video that you realise that the technology has, shall we say, some way to go before we'll all be using it in dull business meetings.
Rich.
Sounds cool. In the ZX81 version, "New York" was made up out of inverse video double-quote characters. Pretty realistic!
Rich.