Do you honestly believe Microsoft would spend the money on the ads if they didn't believe it could help their goal?
One of human nature's biggest flaws is that if we hear a lie enough times, we'll believe it. This has been proven over and over throughout history. It's like chinese torture, only with words instead of drops of water.
It isn't intelligence that protects people. It's love for truth and the willingness to continue to resist believing lies no matter how tiring it can be. The line is easily crossed in the technology world because no one considers Linux a step towards getting into heaven.
I believe there's a difference between ads selling a product or service that is unpopular, and ads that deliberately spread fud to counter the purpose and energies put into the community the site supports.
Would you want to support a pro-life site that had advertisements for Planned Parenthood? How about a cancer victim support site with cigarette ads?
And Monte Davidoff. I wish I could find the details, but Billy and Paul paid someone for rights to code for BASIC, so it was probably Davidoff, since he was the only of the three that didn't get rich off it.
The concept of insatiable demand comes from economics. It basically says that people are never truly satisfied. No matter how much technology evolves, how many new gadgets cars have, and how big houses get, people will always want more. The insatiable demand applies whether it is being met by free open source or commercial sources. It has to do with the "markets" both free open source and commercial proprietary products fill.
The point I was making is that there's enough room in the universe for both, because just as the universe is forever expanding, demand for products and services, whether free or commercial, open standards based or proprietary, open or closed source, are insatiable... that is, they can never be satisfied.
When I said "there's an insatiable demand for new software, such that open source can never meet it", I could have just as accurately said "there's an insatiable demand for new software, such that commercial proprietary software can never meet it," and still been accurate. However, if you read the post that I was replying to, the poster wasn't concerned about whether or not there would be room for open source in the future. He was concerned about whether or not there would be room for proprietary development in the future, or at least development that could pay the programmer's bills. I wasn't saying that one could build higher high-rises than another. I was simply saying that he doesn't have to worry about the open source supply lines eliminating the need for commercial supply lines.
As for my statement about the basic plumbing versus high rises, that was more or less a response to his analogy and a statement about the role that open source has played to-date. Your own examples are perfect demonstrations of plumbing, or infrastructure... BIND and Apache. Other examples are MySQL, JBoss, Linux and OpenOffice.
The point I was making to him is that we use all the software you mentioned, although BIND abstractly (through use of DNS), by custom applications built by paid developers every day. Since the commercial proprietary applications are built on top of the open source foundation, the costs are greatly reduced and the economy grows faster. But, the point is that if we permit open source to do its job, the commercial applications will always be built on top of the open source foundation, and not the other way around. If Linux does it's job, building applications on Windows could become a thing of the past, because the OS has been delegated to "plumbing"... basic infrastructure necessary but easily open sourced. However, commercial applications will still be built on top open source.
A perfect example was a projet I was on last year. We were building a commercial payroll application on J2EE. We used Apache and Linux, but also built on proprietary commercial software such as WebSphere. Interestingly, though, they seriously considered running it in clusters of JBoss, which is open source that is increasingly displacing the proprietary commercial counterparts, such as WebSphere. However, the application we were building wasn't a payroll application you would ever buy off the shelf. It was specifically one designed to handle the payroll of thousands of different companies, with countless options and customizability, yet be run and managed by a single company, the payroll service provider. In other words, it's not an ERP system.
There's virtually no incentive to open source it, because individual companies can't even use it to do their own payroll. Unless you are running a payroll business, it's far to complex to touch with a ten foot pole for any other purpose. This is an example of what I meant by high rise. It's not a high rise because open source developers aren't technically capable. It's a high rise because no one would ever want to do it for free, because the only direct benefactor would be large payroll companies. Yet, it can be built on common reusable pieces... plumbing (OS, web server, database, etc,...).
So, if I understand this correctly, the ports for 4.9 are already upgrade to 4.10? If I upgrade the ports, does this mean that the OS will then report that I'm on 4.10? And heck, where does it say whether you are on 4.9 or 4.10?
Wow, didn't know the PS2 had a component video cable or a Linux setup. Does this actually use high resolution (e.g., 768x1024)? If so, then I'd get the Linux software they have and hard drive, and I'd be up and running, surfing the net on my TV with my wireless keyboard and mouse. Currently, I have my laptop next to my couch. It does the job today. But the PS2... heck, that's already plugged into my stereo.
With networking, it could play movies on another computer's HD, too. As long as the PS2 can network, the composite cable can provide the resolution to provide crip clean text on the TV, and everything is fast enough, then the PS2 could be all you'd need for some time. I wonder how quickly it can decode video.
By the way, have you ever hooked up your optical audio from either a computer or PS with Linux to your stereo? Does it play all audio? Or does the audio have to be especially encoded, like in DVDs? I'd think, since its the only hookup I have for my DVD player, and not all DVDs support Dolby Digital 5.1, but it still plays the stereo sound, that it should play all audio output.
Actually, it wouldn't take much to turn a PS2 into a PC. Because of its USB interface, you can plug a hard drive and keyboard into it, and Final Fantasy XI currently requires both. You just need an OS you can boot up in to have a PC.
The only real limitation is the graphics, as it uses composite video. The primary problem with using a regular TV for PC viewing is displaying of text. In video games, the text is usually large enough to hide this problem. Thus, the only reason the PS2 wouldn't be practical is because it doesn't have an HDTV port. That's about the only thing I see the XBox Next having that gives it an advantage. I presume, of course, that PS3 will have one.
I currently have a USB keyboard as well as a USB network adapter plugged into my PS2. I use them for EverQuest Online Adventures (EQOA).
That's a good question. Thanks for asking it because I just looked, and apparantly I forgot to enable InnoDB on the server and never even noticed, LOL. With InnoDB, I have to specify the location, and the files it creates off the bat can be huge, because they are basically tablespaces. I often allocate 500 MB just for the first one.
Thanks to your info, I now have a survival plan to cope with the meteor shower. I'd drive to a park and park my truck under a solid pavillion. I'd wait inside the truck. If the pavillion collapsed and didn't crush me inside the truck, then I'd go over the nearby hill, and hide in a concrete street water drain that's at least 20 feet under ground. But, rats live in there, so I'd try the truck and pavillion first.
Scientific studies have proven that if there was a nuclear holocaust, or a giant asteroid like the one that wiped out the dinosaurs, that the RIAA would continue to survive.
The city I grew up in always had a curfew for young people. I think it applies to anyone under 18, but the time varies. I think for ages 16 or 17, it's 1am.
They never actually arrest youth, though. They simply take them home. Usually, it's to keep young kids off the streets without parents at night. Also, it's always legal for a child to be out with an adult.
I didn't read the article, but based on what you said, if he had partitioning issues, I understand what he went through. Of course, I read the handbook, but had a hard time understanding the full long-term implications of some of the partitioning decisions I had to make. Since it was an old computer, I didn't have 120GB that I could easily waste a few gig on a safe schema. I had to do a lot of trial and error to get it to both work, and where I felt it was save, particularly with regard to the size of/var. I believe I made/opt its own partition as well. On my development box, that fills up fast as some commercial development tools install in it.
The bottom line is the one of the fundamental differences between partitioning in BSD vs Linux is the philosophy of using more physical partitions to protect certain critical data from/usr file system corruption. This is wise, but just a bit of a surprise for someone used to installing Linux.
Or any user with a live server. To upgrade, you'd have to take the server down, and hope you can get it back up and fully operational in time.
Does anyone have recommendations for the best way to upgrade from 4.9 to 4.10? I'm guessing that 4.10 will expedite 4.9's EOL. That's about the only reason I'd consider it.
The CPU usage is a major issue here. The database tier is the least scalable tier. CPU bloat in the database can be a become a very difficult problem to solve if your database manages to use up 100% of its CPU usage.
The application tier, in contrast, is much more scalable. Clustering application components is tantamount to creating lots of digital workers. You can punch out a theoretical unlimitted number of workers, but your bottleneck are the resources used as inputs and outputs in your process... the data. You need one computer to hold the "master copy", or authority, of any piece of data.
It's very likely that since SQL Server doesn't run on the mainframe, and isn't easily scaled in most production environments today, that businesses will use this only for very essential requirements, such as social security, credit card numbers and passwords. In its logical progression, some sort of hardware acceleration option will be required to ensure this can be used on a larger scale without impacting the performance of the database server to do its basic tasks.
As the article notes, this is a requirement of a lot of applications. I've personally had to encrypt selected pieces of the data, such as the social security numbers or user passwords, in order to meet privacy requirements. This isn't a bandaid for anything. This is customer demand and required a lot to ensure companies follow privacy laws. It simply ensures that those that users, including DBAs, cannot view privacy protected data unless they have been explicity given permission. The concept of encrypting pieces of data that need to be protected is not new, and certainly not invented by Microsoft. What's new here is having the database do it rather than requiring applications to encrypt the data before sending it to the database.
I do believe this should be developed through an open standards body, though, at least if applications are to have any control over the process. If Microsoft implements it in the backend, so it's transparent to applications, then perhaps it's not a real issue, since there would be no application API.
Due to the demand for this, and the issues that need to be resolved, such as ways of managing performance and having plugable secrutiy options, I'd like to see an open standard developed that the database vendors could implement together.
I believe the concept of building encryption in the database is a good thing. However, it needs to be done through an open standards body. Vendor specific extensions like this reduce the use of the technology for a majority of applications that demand portability, or rely on technology such as JDBC or ODBC to provide portability and open connectivity.
Until it becomes an open standard, I believe the encryption should continue to be done at the application level where database vendor independence can continue to be maintained.
I agree with you 100%. I don't even use P2P to download music, yet I am against what the RIAA is doing because I believe you are absolutely right. I believe a great music renaissance is trying to burst out of the bottle, and the RIAA is doing anything and everything in its power to stop it. It's hard to believe that people forgot the role the RIAA played in shutting down free independent Internet radio. The fees they imposed shut down web casters that didn't even play a single RIAA represented song! Clearly, the RIAA successfully attacked the competition, primarily targeting the people you described, small shops run out of people's homes.
Although an artist can sign a letter to waive the fees for his song, he'd have to send that letter to every web caster, and the web casters would have to receive enough letters to actually be able to play a variety of songs in the genre. It's not realistic, so both web casters and Independents that want the promo lose out. The only winners are the RIAA record companies.
You didn't seriously expect that the music industry would not have figured out a way to charge the musicians for EVERYTHING that would be a cost for the record companies, did you?
But if you only select CDs from musicians that joined record companies that are RIAA members, then perhaps they need to hear the message as well.
I don't think too many people, given Metallica's great wealth and position in suing Napster, would feel guilty for depriving them. If we all bought and returned Metallica's CDs, then I believe the message would be clear.
Very true. I haven't purchased a single CD from an RIAA affiliated record company in years because of their tactics. I also don't download music without the artist's permission. I choose non-RIAA labels and music being offered freely by the artists. I boycott, don't infringe, and listen to music that is a heck of a lot better than "Britney Spears".
The purpose of the Act is, according to a letter Hatch wrote to gain support for this bill, is to permit the FBI to go after "thousands" of file sharers. The rationale is that federal criminal prosecution is too strong, and that's why NET hasn't been used much to prosecute. All federal crimes are felonies, and they don't want to look bad felonizing or imprisoning thousands of America's teenagers and college kids. They are passing this bill so the FBI can pursue traders in mass droves, and become a corporate Armstrong in the battle ton contain those freedom loving consumers.
In Hatch's words, this bill will address the limitations that NET had, because large scale use of NET would end up "putting thousands of otherwise law-abiding teenagers and college students in jail and branding them with the lifelong stigma of a felony criminal conviction". I guess what Hatch is saying is that it's ok to sue "thousands of otherwise law-abiding teenagers and college students" for thousands of dollars, driving them out of school so they can pay for their lawyer and then pay any settlement or court imposed fines.
The point is don't think that because NET was hardly used this bill will pass and be forgotten. Its sole purpose is to ensure that the government can go after thousands of people. It is addressing the reason NET wasn't used on a large scale, as well as officially putting our tax-funded resources of the FBI on the side of the corporations in the war to control consumers. (Just a side note, guess who pays most of our US taxes? Corporations or people?)
Slashdot covered this story before, with a link to Hatch's letter on his website. People need to know that this is not an idle threat. It is, by far, the most dramatic and relevant move in the RIAA file-sharing debacle. If this bill passes, the result will be the Tiananmen Square of America, taught in history classes to our children.
Whether or not you believe it is OK to trade copyrighted songs, do you honestly believe a large scale tax funded war on our citizens, most of which, in Hatch's own words, are "otherwise law-abiding teenagers and college students", is justifiable? I personally don't even listen to RIAA affiliated music, and never download songs without the permission of the author; but, I am repulsed that our congress even thinks this is remotely the role of our government that was "created by the people, for the people". If the crackdown comes as planned, then that will be the day I'll it will be official that our congress no longer represents the people.
In order to try to salvage democracy before it is too late, I believe we need to start a campaign to support Hatch's next opponent for re-election. If Hatch can get re-elected, then I'll believe that democracy in the US is purely an illusion.
Thank you. Unfortunately, MS is still learning how to tighten down security:
Server Error in '/' Application. Access is denied Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.
Exception Details: System.ComponentModel.Win32Exception: Access is denied
[InvalidOperationException: Cannot open log for source {0}. You may not have write access.] System.Diagnostics.EventLog.OpenForWrite() +368 System.Diagnostics.EventLog.WriteEvent(Int32 eventID, Int16 category, EventLogEntryType type, String[] strings, Byte[] rawData) +280 System.Diagnostics.EventLog.WriteEntry(Strin g message, EventLogEntryType type, Int32 eventID, Int16 category, Byte[] rawData) +463 System.Diagnostics.EventLog.WriteEntry(Strin g message, EventLogEntryType type, Int32 eventID, Int16 category) +21 System.Diagnostics.EventLog.WriteEntry(Strin g message, EventLogEntryType type, Int32 eventID) +15 System.Diagnostics.EventLog.WriteEntry(Strin g message, EventLogEntryType type) +11 clsMSUserConfig.LogConfiguration() +734 clsMSUserConfig..cctor() +983
[TypeInitializationException: The type initializer for "clsMSUserConfig" threw an exception.] MSUser.clsMSUser.get_MSID() +36 MSUser.clsMSUser..ctor(HttpRequest Request, HttpResponse Response) +40 MHACoreLib.App.CpApp.GetMSID(Boolean bCreate) +430 MHACoreLib.App.CpApp.GetMSID() +10 MSNHomesControls.PageUI.Header.Render(HtmlTextWri ter writer) +154 System.Web.UI.Control.RenderControl(HtmlTextWrite r writer) +243 ASP.TroubleshootMainLineValves0_aspx.__Render__co ntrol1(HtmlTextWriter __output, Control parameterContainer) in e:\webroot\home80\content\Improve\TroubleshootMain LineValves0.aspx:47 System.Web.UI.Control.RenderChildren(HtmlTextWrit er writer) +27 System.Web.UI.Control.Render(HtmlTextWriter writer) +7 System.Web.UI.Control.RenderControl(HtmlTextWrite r writer) +243 System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain() +1918
Version Information: Microsoft.NET Framework Version:1.1.4322.573; ASP.NET Version:1.1.4322.910
Slashdot Mirror
One of human nature's biggest flaws is that if we hear a lie enough times, we'll believe it. This has been proven over and over throughout history. It's like chinese torture, only with words instead of drops of water.
It isn't intelligence that protects people. It's love for truth and the willingness to continue to resist believing lies no matter how tiring it can be. The line is easily crossed in the technology world because no one considers Linux a step towards getting into heaven.
Would you want to support a pro-life site that had advertisements for Planned Parenthood? How about a cancer victim support site with cigarette ads?
Boycotting is speech and democracy combined.
And Monte Davidoff. I wish I could find the details, but Billy and Paul paid someone for rights to code for BASIC, so it was probably Davidoff, since he was the only of the three that didn't get rich off it.
If I remember, Microsoft bought BASIC dirt cheap, for around $30k or something like that, in the 70s.
The point I was making is that there's enough room in the universe for both, because just as the universe is forever expanding, demand for products and services, whether free or commercial, open standards based or proprietary, open or closed source, are insatiable... that is, they can never be satisfied.
When I said "there's an insatiable demand for new software, such that open source can never meet it", I could have just as accurately said "there's an insatiable demand for new software, such that commercial proprietary software can never meet it," and still been accurate. However, if you read the post that I was replying to, the poster wasn't concerned about whether or not there would be room for open source in the future. He was concerned about whether or not there would be room for proprietary development in the future, or at least development that could pay the programmer's bills. I wasn't saying that one could build higher high-rises than another. I was simply saying that he doesn't have to worry about the open source supply lines eliminating the need for commercial supply lines.
As for my statement about the basic plumbing versus high rises, that was more or less a response to his analogy and a statement about the role that open source has played to-date. Your own examples are perfect demonstrations of plumbing, or infrastructure... BIND and Apache. Other examples are MySQL, JBoss, Linux and OpenOffice.
The point I was making to him is that we use all the software you mentioned, although BIND abstractly (through use of DNS), by custom applications built by paid developers every day. Since the commercial proprietary applications are built on top of the open source foundation, the costs are greatly reduced and the economy grows faster. But, the point is that if we permit open source to do its job, the commercial applications will always be built on top of the open source foundation, and not the other way around. If Linux does it's job, building applications on Windows could become a thing of the past, because the OS has been delegated to "plumbing"... basic infrastructure necessary but easily open sourced. However, commercial applications will still be built on top open source.
A perfect example was a projet I was on last year. We were building a commercial payroll application on J2EE. We used Apache and Linux, but also built on proprietary commercial software such as WebSphere. Interestingly, though, they seriously considered running it in clusters of JBoss, which is open source that is increasingly displacing the proprietary commercial counterparts, such as WebSphere. However, the application we were building wasn't a payroll application you would ever buy off the shelf. It was specifically one designed to handle the payroll of thousands of different companies, with countless options and customizability, yet be run and managed by a single company, the payroll service provider. In other words, it's not an ERP system.
There's virtually no incentive to open source it, because individual companies can't even use it to do their own payroll. Unless you are running a payroll business, it's far to complex to touch with a ten foot pole for any other purpose. This is an example of what I meant by high rise. It's not a high rise because open source developers aren't technically capable. It's a high rise because no one would ever want to do it for free, because the only direct benefactor would be large payroll companies. Yet, it can be built on common reusable pieces... plumbing (OS, web server, database, etc,...).
The "high ris
Thanks for your help!
Will I have to rebuild Java? I can say that it takes awhile on this server. Rebuilding for Gnome 2.6 took a long time as well.
With networking, it could play movies on another computer's HD, too. As long as the PS2 can network, the composite cable can provide the resolution to provide crip clean text on the TV, and everything is fast enough, then the PS2 could be all you'd need for some time. I wonder how quickly it can decode video.
By the way, have you ever hooked up your optical audio from either a computer or PS with Linux to your stereo? Does it play all audio? Or does the audio have to be especially encoded, like in DVDs? I'd think, since its the only hookup I have for my DVD player, and not all DVDs support Dolby Digital 5.1, but it still plays the stereo sound, that it should play all audio output.
The only real limitation is the graphics, as it uses composite video. The primary problem with using a regular TV for PC viewing is displaying of text. In video games, the text is usually large enough to hide this problem. Thus, the only reason the PS2 wouldn't be practical is because it doesn't have an HDTV port. That's about the only thing I see the XBox Next having that gives it an advantage. I presume, of course, that PS3 will have one.
I currently have a USB keyboard as well as a USB network adapter plugged into my PS2. I use them for EverQuest Online Adventures (EQOA).
That's a good question. Thanks for asking it because I just looked, and apparantly I forgot to enable InnoDB on the server and never even noticed, LOL. With InnoDB, I have to specify the location, and the files it creates off the bat can be huge, because they are basically tablespaces. I often allocate 500 MB just for the first one.
Thanks to your info, I now have a survival plan to cope with the meteor shower. I'd drive to a park and park my truck under a solid pavillion. I'd wait inside the truck. If the pavillion collapsed and didn't crush me inside the truck, then I'd go over the nearby hill, and hide in a concrete street water drain that's at least 20 feet under ground. But, rats live in there, so I'd try the truck and pavillion first.
Scientific studies have proven that if there was a nuclear holocaust, or a giant asteroid like the one that wiped out the dinosaurs, that the RIAA would continue to survive.
They never actually arrest youth, though. They simply take them home. Usually, it's to keep young kids off the streets without parents at night. Also, it's always legal for a child to be out with an adult.
The bottom line is the one of the fundamental differences between partitioning in BSD vs Linux is the philosophy of using more physical partitions to protect certain critical data from /usr file system corruption. This is wise, but just a bit of a surprise for someone used to installing Linux.
Does anyone have recommendations for the best way to upgrade from 4.9 to 4.10? I'm guessing that 4.10 will expedite 4.9's EOL. That's about the only reason I'd consider it.
The application tier, in contrast, is much more scalable. Clustering application components is tantamount to creating lots of digital workers. You can punch out a theoretical unlimitted number of workers, but your bottleneck are the resources used as inputs and outputs in your process... the data. You need one computer to hold the "master copy", or authority, of any piece of data.
It's very likely that since SQL Server doesn't run on the mainframe, and isn't easily scaled in most production environments today, that businesses will use this only for very essential requirements, such as social security, credit card numbers and passwords. In its logical progression, some sort of hardware acceleration option will be required to ensure this can be used on a larger scale without impacting the performance of the database server to do its basic tasks.
I do believe this should be developed through an open standards body, though, at least if applications are to have any control over the process. If Microsoft implements it in the backend, so it's transparent to applications, then perhaps it's not a real issue, since there would be no application API.
Due to the demand for this, and the issues that need to be resolved, such as ways of managing performance and having plugable secrutiy options, I'd like to see an open standard developed that the database vendors could implement together.
Until it becomes an open standard, I believe the encryption should continue to be done at the application level where database vendor independence can continue to be maintained.
It depends on the political contributions of Scientology vs. the RIAA.
Although an artist can sign a letter to waive the fees for his song, he'd have to send that letter to every web caster, and the web casters would have to receive enough letters to actually be able to play a variety of songs in the genre. It's not realistic, so both web casters and Independents that want the promo lose out. The only winners are the RIAA record companies.
But if you only select CDs from musicians that joined record companies that are RIAA members, then perhaps they need to hear the message as well.
I don't think too many people, given Metallica's great wealth and position in suing Napster, would feel guilty for depriving them. If we all bought and returned Metallica's CDs, then I believe the message would be clear.
Very true. I haven't purchased a single CD from an RIAA affiliated record company in years because of their tactics. I also don't download music without the artist's permission. I choose non-RIAA labels and music being offered freely by the artists. I boycott, don't infringe, and listen to music that is a heck of a lot better than "Britney Spears".
In Hatch's words, this bill will address the limitations that NET had, because large scale use of NET would end up "putting thousands of otherwise law-abiding teenagers and college students in jail and branding them with the lifelong stigma of a felony criminal conviction". I guess what Hatch is saying is that it's ok to sue "thousands of otherwise law-abiding teenagers and college students" for thousands of dollars, driving them out of school so they can pay for their lawyer and then pay any settlement or court imposed fines.
The point is don't think that because NET was hardly used this bill will pass and be forgotten. Its sole purpose is to ensure that the government can go after thousands of people. It is addressing the reason NET wasn't used on a large scale, as well as officially putting our tax-funded resources of the FBI on the side of the corporations in the war to control consumers. (Just a side note, guess who pays most of our US taxes? Corporations or people?)
Slashdot covered this story before, with a link to Hatch's letter on his website. People need to know that this is not an idle threat. It is, by far, the most dramatic and relevant move in the RIAA file-sharing debacle. If this bill passes, the result will be the Tiananmen Square of America, taught in history classes to our children.
Whether or not you believe it is OK to trade copyrighted songs, do you honestly believe a large scale tax funded war on our citizens, most of which, in Hatch's own words, are "otherwise law-abiding teenagers and college students", is justifiable? I personally don't even listen to RIAA affiliated music, and never download songs without the permission of the author; but, I am repulsed that our congress even thinks this is remotely the role of our government that was "created by the people, for the people". If the crackdown comes as planned, then that will be the day I'll it will be official that our congress no longer represents the people.
In order to try to salvage democracy before it is too late, I believe we need to start a campaign to support Hatch's next opponent for re-election. If Hatch can get re-elected, then I'll believe that democracy in the US is purely an illusion.