FFMPEG is not something that I think is targeted at the end user to use on the command line. It works great for people like you and I who can figure it out. I can't remember all those options either but I certainly can and have created some shell scripts to build correct ffmpeg commands to produce output for the various media devices I own. Its nice to have this option, as I don't know of any software front end that would let me record directly from my DTV card and convert to the obscure mov+jpegB format used by my SANSA on the fly. Its to exotic a situation and something only a small number of people want to do. That is where the ffmpeg binary is great. It lets people like me to slap what I want together in some shell scripts and not have to break out the C compiler.
Really the projects value is in libavcodec; which is used in all sorts of things like VLC, mplayer, Myth etc which are much more "usable" and target at the end user.
The point of a liquidation is to clear the remaining inventory and to get as much money as possible for the creditors. It is not supposed to be a giveaway. As time wares on the insentive to reduce prices more grows because the overhead of keeping the lights starts to become the driving force, until then you charge what the market will bare. It does not have to be a firesale, just cheeper then can be had down the street. Popular items that normally do lots of inventory turns might not need to be marked down at all.
No to be honest I don't go as far as a spearate X session. I was aware there is risk there though. At some point a trade off does need to be made between security and usablility.
I am drawing the line at having to close everything else I was using, and start a new X session. I have considered things like Xscreen but there are limits.
As to the two level problem in Unix, its not you can be a member of multiple groups you don't have to use ACLs and ~/docs/banks does not have to have write access for your default group. Oh and groups can be password protected as well. As a home user where you have total control over the system you would be free to create as many user accounts as you like as well. I for one do things like banking and taxes in a different account than I do everything else. I run those apps, browser included for banking under sudo and only use that account for those activities.
You could do much the same on Windows, even XP with its run as feature. I suspect it would be just as secure. The problem with the Microsoft world is not the software its the expectation that the user does not have to understand the tools. To get any work done at all you have to trust somebody some time.
You need to to turst your OS vendor. You need to trust you business parterners and you need to trust you know you are really dealing with each via some CA authority or similiar at some point.
Beyound that you probably need to run things unprivileged in their own sandbox. So maybe you don't use your same account for surfing the web and youtube and the like as your do for your work, and use a third account for your finacnces and record keeping. All separate with their own tokens(passwords most of the time).
If you are going to run some kind of script or install a new version of software like a browser that might get run in the accounts you care about you need to trust the provide or read the source if its something manageable like a script.
No matter what software you are using the computer does not think it only does. You will never have security as long as the user is not expected to KNOW something about how the machine works and what tools they have at their disposal to know who their dealing with. To use the car analogy would you expect a car to be safe in the hands of someone who does not know how to drive?
1. If you can make me a better game from day 1, I'd love to see it on day 1. Why should I have to wait out 3-4 years of (relatively) crappy graphics before I can actually experience of what my hardware can offer?
First rule of show biz, always leave them wanting more. In the case of a hardware console this means something has to be held back so there is more to give. You need away to market and sell the next game.
2. It also means that game developers are wasting time they could be spending adding features or improving their game on figuring out all the quirks of the hardware, documenting them for other developers, etc.
No they won't do that. Most games today are writen to an enigne not a console. Few games are exclusive to a platform these days although it might be availible on one before others. The engine is going to implement a least common denomonator set of features for the devices in your same class.
3. Games on the Xbox 360 improve graphically anyway. I mean, it'd be a really tough case to say that, for example, Soul Calibur 4 doesn't look better than Dead or Alive 4 that was a launch title.
Ok but this is in someways an example of three. Xbox360 was first to the party lots of the engines used in early Xbox360 titles were also running on PS2, which ment the newer Xbox360 was not being fully utilized.
Yes, the probably are worth less than that. Its not like its all that hard to do password recovery on most infrastructure equipment. I also have a tough time accepting that localized interruptions are intolerable to a municipality during the hours most residents are asleep. It could have be reconciled without him for that much money.
Are you sure; I am not about to go digging though technet right now but I don't think Exchange running on a DC is a supported configuration outside of SBS anyway. I fairly sure of this for e2k7 anyway perhaps 2k3 was supported on a DC.
It really is amazing how effective and powerful the brain's sorta visaul hashing is. Its also amazing how distracting and irritating collisions in that hash are and how long it takes to sort them out.
The Slackware standard for init scripts and other system utils done is shell is that it should run on ash. If it runs on ash it will run on bash. The installation media used to, and still does? use ash while an installed system uses bash as the interpreter. So I agree with you its reasonable to code to ash for shell scripts if portability to othe *NIX like systems or running in striped down cases like installation environments is any concern.
I have seen bugges in spanning-tree do similar things on my network. This seems to be a recuring problem with "HA systems". Losts of stories like this out there. Its a hard problem to solve though.
The parent does seem to be speaking about things he knows nothing about but to be entirely fair....
*Its probably the case that anything programmable device you were going to mass produce you could probably do the computation it needs to do more cheaply by using off the self MIPS products then if you used a FPGA in some configuration of your own design.
*He is probably correct that there is a hard limit on the amount of logic operations you can do with a given number of joules of input energy and a given size of silicon surface you have to implement your circuit. Eventually we will get to the point where no matter what novel doping and etching methods we develop we can't make a transistor any smaller, and can't stable output with less input power.
When are people going to wake up and realize the proponents of global warming have no credibility whatsoever and its all "BAD SCIENCE". It might or might not be happen but we don't know enough to be making public policy around it. These people need to shut up and find some real proof. Poof that will actually hold up to analysis by others.
The hockey stick report was fake, this ice melt data is wrong.
You can still run your own mail server and use someone else's server as a smart host. That what I am asking about, becuase this is what I do and i get the best of both worlds.
I have never really understood why this is an issue. I do think ISPs should be upfront about it before you sign up and if they change what ports they block and how they police their network you should be allowed out of the contract. I don't think its fair for them to write terms that say we can limit what you do in any way we like.
That aside I would like to ask my fellow slashdots running their own mail servers, (I do speakeasy actaully allows this under their tos) why its a problem for you to use your ISP as a smart host?
Personaly I like it. Unlike at work I don't have to worry about keeping the mail server off the black lists, contacting post masters at other domains to get mistakes corrected etc etc. The ISP does msot of that for me. Now speakeasy will relay for my domain, but I think most ISPs will probably trust whatever is coming from their own network to their relay, I hope they pass it through some outbound filter.
On the inbound side, the MX record points directly at my ip address so I get to handle the mail coming in a filter/black list etc according to my own needs. TLS works too if things need ot stay private.
I suppose the only arugment I can think of is even if you are using TLS your ISP can still read your outboand mail, and if I was using version or comcast I might be more concerned about that....
Yes, isn't funny how we always like to sit and think people of the past were standing around a cave beating their chests all day. Its not like peoples of the past had no technology. They had was of preserving and storing food. Lots of them. They knew for instance how to make salami that basically did not rot (at least not before you could consume it).
We might do well to rediscover some of these useful little tid bits from our past.
No extra CO2 is being released into the atmosphere
Not to nitpick but this is a common problem with lots of "green think" its not system think. You might be right but we don't know enough to say that. Is this extraction process exothermic or indothermic? If it requires input energy where does come from, and does that source produce carbon emmissions?
I have done a good bit of reading on the subject of enviornmental economics. I even took a few classes as electives years ago while at university. I am not pretending to be an expert on this stuff by any standard. I do know a little more then the averge guy walking down the street though. Its been my experince in studing this subject that most "solutions" in use today really just shift the problem some place else.
Again, I am not one of those oil is evil types but consider your argument from their prespective.
As long as we are making things we need from oil or powing stuff we will be needed to extract and consume oil. If you want to stop useing oil(sill IMHO) then you need to find substitutes for all or almost all its applications. This is one of those substitutes possibly.
Let me say all of this with the caveate that I remain highly skeptical of global warming and our understanding of the carbon cycle. Still its good to know all sides of the argument.
The principle response to what you suggest is that it take decades for that tree to gather up that carbon out of the system as it growns. We then release all that carbon back into the atomosphere in moments as we burn the thing. You would have to plant a metric assloade of tress to suck up the carbon at a rate released by burning just one.
I for one am still inclined to think there are other larger drivers of the carbon cycle than us buring things as ice corse show very clearly CO2 levels have been this high before but the above is the common argument.
Correlation is meaningful, it tells us we might want to look and see if causation is there. No matter how big your sample of dead plants gets until we do some more investigation and deepen our understanding of how plants live we could just as easily say:
Dead plants lead to drought and darkness.
Now yes any first grader could tell you thats backwards but you get the point. Does the popularity of a new medium lead to use by porn or does being used by porn make a new medium popular. I think you have to dig a little deeper to answer that.
So you realize that the structure you are suggesting can be easily built in a traditional RDB, using a star-schema or cluster design right?
Next you suggest doing the sorting on the client, and then say that if there is more data then a client can handle the server can be asked to send chunks according to the clients sort order. That means the server has to have all the sort logic the client has and probably in all but the most trival applications do all the sorting anyway... Seems to me a star schema and indexing the fact table on the attributes that are most comonly going to be used for sorting makes much more sense; because as I said the serve is going to be sorting anyway.
Now there are data sets that non relational structers do make some more sense, but we have hierarchy , and navigational designes for those, yours is not one of them.
I am certain that I have has much disdain for Obama as anyone else you might find here. Nothing would make me happier then seening O leave office in 2012 head hung in disgrace. Oh and yea I do want him to make it to 2012 because otherwise that probably means Bidden is president and that is one of the few leaders I can image being worse than Nobama.
Still by suggesting he is like FDR and then suggesting his term will be sort I am not sure I understand. Last I checked FDR was our only Unconstitutionally long office holder in the presidency....
I still think their should be a super user. It should be the only shared account, and only shared between a small group of people in the org that are both willing and by need trust each other entirely anyway.
The other options generally don't make sense because: * You never can have total separation of powers someone always has to have the ability to get access to someone else fife should something happen to that person. Continued..
*If multiple accounts exist that can grant themselves new privileges at will they might just as well have had that access in the first place.
*Multiple super user accounts are worthless. Nobody should be using the account except when the are, that is to say admins should not be reading e-mail from the privileged account for example.
*Multiple super users does not provide a better audit trail because that user is privileged enough to alter the audits anyway. At the top of the tree trust has to be implicit.
*Multiple super accounts could pose a risk of making it unclear who can actually get into what. Old accounts might go unnoticed. Better to have one account where the password changes often and *anytime* *anything* happens those people also get together and change the password.
Slashdot Mirror
FFMPEG is not something that I think is targeted at the end user to use on the command line. It works great for people like you and I who can figure it out. I can't remember all those options either but I certainly can and have created some shell scripts to build correct ffmpeg commands to produce output for the various media devices I own. Its nice to have this option, as I don't know of any software front end that would let me record directly from my DTV card and convert to the obscure mov+jpegB format used by my SANSA on the fly. Its to exotic a situation and something only a small number of people want to do. That is where the ffmpeg binary is great. It lets people like me to slap what I want together in some shell scripts and not have to break out the C compiler.
Really the projects value is in libavcodec; which is used in all sorts of things like VLC, mplayer, Myth etc which are much more "usable" and target at the end user.
The point of a liquidation is to clear the remaining inventory and to get as much money as possible for the creditors. It is not supposed to be a giveaway. As time wares on the insentive to reduce prices more grows because the overhead of keeping the lights starts to become the driving force, until then you charge what the market will bare. It does not have to be a firesale, just cheeper then can be had down the street. Popular items that normally do lots of inventory turns might not need to be marked down at all.
No to be honest I don't go as far as a spearate X session. I was aware there is risk there though. At some point a trade off does need to be made between security and usablility.
I am drawing the line at having to close everything else I was using, and start a new X session. I have considered things like Xscreen but there are limits.
As to the two level problem in Unix, its not you can be a member of multiple groups you don't have to use ACLs and ~/docs/banks does not have to have write access for your default group. Oh and groups can be password protected as well. As a home user where you have total control over the system you would be free to create as many user accounts as you like as well. I for one do things like banking and taxes in a different account than I do everything else. I run those apps, browser included for banking under sudo and only use that account for those activities.
You could do much the same on Windows, even XP with its run as feature. I suspect it would be just as secure. The problem with the Microsoft world is not the software its the expectation that the user does not have to understand the tools. To get any work done at all you have to trust somebody some time.
You need to to turst your OS vendor.
You need to trust you business parterners
and you need to trust you know you are really dealing with each via some CA authority or similiar at some point.
Beyound that you probably need to run things unprivileged in their own sandbox. So maybe you don't use your same account for surfing the web and youtube and the like as your do for your work, and use a third account for your finacnces and record keeping. All separate with their own tokens(passwords most of the time).
If you are going to run some kind of script or install a new version of software like a browser that might get run in the accounts you care about you need to trust the provide or read the source if its something manageable like a script.
No matter what software you are using the computer does not think it only does. You will never have security as long as the user is not expected to KNOW something about how the machine works and what tools they have at their disposal to know who their dealing with. To use the car analogy would you expect a car to be safe in the hands of someone who does not know how to drive?
1. If you can make me a better game from day 1, I'd love to see it on day 1. Why should I have to wait out 3-4 years of (relatively) crappy graphics before I can actually experience of what my hardware can offer?
First rule of show biz, always leave them wanting more. In the case of a hardware console this means something has to be held back so there is more to give. You need away to market and sell the next game.
2. It also means that game developers are wasting time they could be spending adding features or improving their game on figuring out all the quirks of the hardware, documenting them for other developers, etc.
No they won't do that. Most games today are writen to an enigne not a console. Few games are exclusive to a platform these days although it might be availible on one before others. The engine is going to implement a least common denomonator set of features for the devices in your same class.
3. Games on the Xbox 360 improve graphically anyway. I mean, it'd be a really tough case to say that, for example, Soul Calibur 4 doesn't look better than Dead or Alive 4 that was a launch title.
Ok but this is in someways an example of three. Xbox360 was first to the party lots of the engines used in early Xbox360 titles were also running on PS2, which ment the newer Xbox360 was not being fully utilized.
because the s***'s so deep you can't run away
I beg to differ and on the contray
a victim of catch 22....
OTRS is what we use. Google it. Its great and its FOSS. If you know a little perl you can make it look and act anyway you want.
Yes, the probably are worth less than that. Its not like its all that hard to do password recovery on most infrastructure equipment. I also have a tough time accepting that localized interruptions are intolerable to a municipality during the hours most residents are asleep. It could have be reconciled without him for that much money.
Are you sure; I am not about to go digging though technet right now but I don't think Exchange running on a DC is a supported configuration outside of SBS anyway. I fairly sure of this for e2k7 anyway perhaps 2k3 was supported on a DC.
It really is amazing how effective and powerful the brain's sorta visaul hashing is. Its also amazing how distracting and irritating collisions in that hash are and how long it takes to sort them out.
The Slackware standard for init scripts and other system utils done is shell is that it should run on ash. If it runs on ash it will run on bash. The installation media used to, and still does? use ash while an installed system uses bash as the interpreter. So I agree with you its reasonable to code to ash for shell scripts if portability to othe *NIX like systems or running in striped down cases like installation environments is any concern.
I have seen bugges in spanning-tree do similar things on my network. This seems to be a recuring problem with "HA systems". Losts of stories like this out there. Its a hard problem to solve though.
The parent does seem to be speaking about things he knows nothing about but to be entirely fair....
*Its probably the case that anything programmable device you were going to mass produce you could probably do the computation it needs to do more cheaply by using off the self MIPS products then if you used a FPGA in some configuration of your own design.
*He is probably correct that there is a hard limit on the amount of logic operations you can do with a given number of joules of input energy and a given size of silicon surface you have to implement your circuit. Eventually we will get to the point where no matter what novel doping and etching methods we develop we can't make a transistor any smaller, and can't stable output with less input power.
When are people going to wake up and realize the proponents of global warming have no credibility whatsoever and its all "BAD SCIENCE". It might or might not be happen but we don't know enough to be making public policy around it. These people need to shut up and find some real proof. Poof that will actually hold up to analysis by others.
The hockey stick report was fake, this ice melt data is wrong.
Wow, I love my cat and all but giving it power of attorney does not seem like a good plan.
You can still run your own mail server and use someone else's server as a smart host. That what I am asking about, becuase this is what I do and i get the best of both worlds.
I have never really understood why this is an issue. I do think ISPs should be upfront about it before you sign up and if they change what ports they block and how they police their network you should be allowed out of the contract. I don't think its fair for them to write terms that say we can limit what you do in any way we like.
That aside I would like to ask my fellow slashdots running their own mail servers, (I do speakeasy actaully allows this under their tos) why its a problem for you to use your ISP as a smart host?
Personaly I like it. Unlike at work I don't have to worry about keeping the mail server off the black lists, contacting post masters at other domains to get mistakes corrected etc etc. The ISP does msot of that for me. Now speakeasy will relay for my domain, but I think most ISPs will probably trust whatever is coming from their own network to their relay, I hope they pass it through some outbound filter.
On the inbound side, the MX record points directly at my ip address so I get to handle the mail coming in a filter/black list etc according to my own needs. TLS works too if things need ot stay private.
I suppose the only arugment I can think of is even if you are using TLS your ISP can still read your outboand mail, and if I was using version or comcast I might be more concerned about that....
What are other peoples reasons?
Yes, isn't funny how we always like to sit and think people of the past were standing around a cave beating their chests all day. Its not like peoples of the past had no technology. They had was of preserving and storing food. Lots of them. They knew for instance how to make salami that basically did not rot (at least not before you could consume it).
We might do well to rediscover some of these useful little tid bits from our past.
No extra CO2 is being released into the atmosphere
Not to nitpick but this is a common problem with lots of "green think" its not system think. You might be right but we don't know enough to say that. Is this extraction process exothermic or indothermic? If it requires input energy where does come from, and does that source produce carbon emmissions?
I have done a good bit of reading on the subject of enviornmental economics. I even took a few classes as electives years ago while at university. I am not pretending to be an expert on this stuff by any standard. I do know a little more then the averge guy walking down the street though. Its been my experince in studing this subject that most "solutions" in use today really just shift the problem some place else.
Again, I am not one of those oil is evil types but consider your argument from their prespective.
As long as we are making things we need from oil or powing stuff we will be needed to extract and consume oil. If you want to stop useing oil(sill IMHO) then you need to find substitutes for all or almost all its applications. This is one of those substitutes possibly.
Let me say all of this with the caveate that I remain highly skeptical of global warming and our understanding of the carbon cycle. Still its good to know all sides of the argument.
The principle response to what you suggest is that it take decades for that tree to gather up that carbon out of the system as it growns. We then release all that carbon back into the atomosphere in moments as we burn the thing. You would have to plant a metric assloade of tress to suck up the carbon at a rate released by burning just one.
I for one am still inclined to think there are other larger drivers of the carbon cycle than us buring things as ice corse show very clearly CO2 levels have been this high before but the above is the common argument.
Correlation is meaningful, it tells us we might want to look and see if causation is there. No matter how big your sample of dead plants gets until we do some more investigation and deepen our understanding of how plants live we could just as easily say:
Dead plants lead to drought and darkness.
Now yes any first grader could tell you thats backwards but you get the point. Does the popularity of a new medium lead to use by porn or does being used by porn make a new medium popular. I think you have to dig a little deeper to answer that.
Wow, um where to being really....
So you realize that the structure you are suggesting can be easily built in a traditional RDB, using a star-schema or cluster design right?
Next you suggest doing the sorting on the client, and then say that if there is more data then a client can handle the server can be asked to send chunks according to the clients sort order. That means the server has to have all the sort logic the client has and probably in all but the most trival applications do all the sorting anyway... Seems to me a star schema and indexing the fact table on the attributes that are most comonly going to be used for sorting makes much more sense; because as I said the serve is going to be sorting anyway.
Now there are data sets that non relational structers do make some more sense, but we have hierarchy , and navigational designes for those, yours is not one of them.
I am certain that I have has much disdain for Obama as anyone else you might find here. Nothing would make me happier then seening O leave office in 2012 head hung in disgrace. Oh and yea I do want him to make it to 2012 because otherwise that probably means Bidden is president and that is one of the few leaders I can image being worse than Nobama.
Still by suggesting he is like FDR and then suggesting his term will be sort I am not sure I understand. Last I checked FDR was our only Unconstitutionally long office holder in the presidency....
I still think their should be a super user. It should be the only shared account, and only shared between a small group of people in the org that are both willing and by need trust each other entirely anyway.
The other options generally don't make sense because:
* You never can have total separation of powers someone always has to have the ability to get access to someone else fife should something happen to that person. Continued..
*If multiple accounts exist that can grant themselves new privileges at will they might just as well have had that access in the first place.
*Multiple super user accounts are worthless. Nobody should be using the account except when the are, that is to say admins should not be reading e-mail from the privileged account for example.
*Multiple super users does not provide a better audit trail because that user is privileged enough to alter the audits anyway. At the top of the tree trust has to be implicit.
*Multiple super accounts could pose a risk of making it unclear who can actually get into what. Old accounts might go unnoticed. Better to have one account where the password changes often and *anytime* *anything* happens those people also get together and change the password.