So "great service" == not telling your customers about the impending disconnection from Sprint that Cogent knew about for *months*? "great service" == not coming up with any mitigation plan for the disconnection? "great service" == releasing an early press-release that, upon first glance, appears to contain as many lies as it does half-truths?
This is quite a different definition than what i'm used to.
Pfft. I'm from Waterloo and i've lived here the last 5 years, and most of that is news to me. It's certainly the biggest corporate entity, but in no way would waterloo tank if RIM did. There are so many other companies here, from small to big (IBM/Microsoft/Sybase). Besides, it's as much as a university town as it is a tech-town: the schools aren't going to wither and die if RIM does.
IMHO companies are beating up on RIM because they are convinced RIM is the biggest threat, not because they are Canadian, but they are being so annoyingly "American" about it. I think it's outrageous that any American could be so pompous and arrogant as to assume that "U.S. patent laws override Canadian patent laws", which is the taste I get in my mouth when I read posts like "Dangerous step for Canada". If Americans don't like "foreign influence" then they can bloody well cut all trade with Canada and see what happens: we'll *both* crumble. Quit the whining, realize we're mutually good for each other, and get back to work.
As for RIM, yeah there's reason to be afraid; I worked there for a year and i'm happy to report that it is full of bright and educated people who (most importantly IMHO) actually enjoy what they are doing there.
This is a classic case of law not keeping up with technology. More importantly, this is just a specific case (crimes on the internet having badly-defined translations into a law system that is entirely geographically-based), and there are many other things that can go wrong (too many to list here) when you make old laws govern things they were never intended to! Any patent-lawyer will tell you that patent law is archaic in many ways because tech has changed so quickly; another example, my personal favourite, is an entire nation (Britain) who has a bed-time (oops I mean last-call) of 11pm, because the laws haven't bothered to keep up with the technology of a good transportation system that can get people home in decent time. And so on.
What we need to do is start being able to put trust in our politicians. I'm Canadian, and this is just becoming possible now (Liberals in charge; yes they're a bit dodgy, but not nearly as bad as some). I shudder to think how Americans are going to do this (not even Americans seem to have faith in their politicians right now?), but it's going to have to happen. Once we can trust the lawmakers again, surely we'll have laws that help govern the internet in a healthy way, not the big-brother style of the DMCA/Patriot Act/etc ? Admittedley at no point will *everyone* trust our law-makers, but at least in America things could be a lot better than they are now.
Anyways - yes, I agree that something should be done to claim damages against this individual who has ripped off many corporations by stealing their software (a lot of them American I guess, affecting Joe Blows like me in soft.eng), but it must be done in a framework that has already been established! Simply forcing non-geographical issues like internet piracy to conform to a geographical law system does NOT WORK, and is entirely unfair to defendant.
Uhhh, you must be American, lamely presuming that Canadians such as myself still live in igloos, and don't "have the internet". Or perhaps you forget we are a country, who knows...
I have a "very nearly vanilla" 2.4.26 kernel - all that's patched are some netfilter things for more targets.
This patch didn't work for me - the patch went fine (my signal.c is no different from vanilla), and the resulting kernel booted fine, but the exploit still crashed my box. I'm using gcc-2.95.4 , Debian 3.0 (Woody). No I didn't forget to run lilo or whatever (i'm using Grub).
Any ideas?
Excellent question and great points, how much IS implemented in 2.6? It'd be neat to see if they've taken the RAID to that level. I'm taking a degree in CS at University of Waterloo, we're learning about these things (hard-drive optimizations of these types) currently, it'd be neat to know how Linux works on RAID.
I run the 2.6 kernel, in a RAID1 (a partition mirrored on two drives) configuration.
How does this neato scheduling algorithm work with RAID? I suppose with RAID1 it simply makes writing on each individual disk faster, because the disks are treated as individual units, but what about RAID0/4/5 ? Or, does RAID not have any effect, because it's higher level than actual disk-writes? Yeah I suppose that's probably right..
Slashdot Mirror
So "great service" == not telling your customers about the impending disconnection from Sprint that Cogent knew about for *months*?
"great service" == not coming up with any mitigation plan for the disconnection?
"great service" == releasing an early press-release that, upon first glance, appears to contain as many lies as it does half-truths?
This is quite a different definition than what i'm used to.
Pfft. I'm from Waterloo and i've lived here the last 5 years, and most of that is news to me. It's certainly the biggest corporate entity, but in no way would waterloo tank if RIM did. There are so many other companies here, from small to big (IBM/Microsoft/Sybase). Besides, it's as much as a university town as it is a tech-town: the schools aren't going to wither and die if RIM does.
IMHO companies are beating up on RIM because they are convinced RIM is the biggest threat, not because they are Canadian, but they are being so annoyingly "American" about it. I think it's outrageous that any American could be so pompous and arrogant as to assume that "U.S. patent laws override Canadian patent laws", which is the taste I get in my mouth when I read posts like "Dangerous step for Canada". If Americans don't like "foreign influence" then they can bloody well cut all trade with Canada and see what happens: we'll *both* crumble. Quit the whining, realize we're mutually good for each other, and get back to work.
As for RIM, yeah there's reason to be afraid; I worked there for a year and i'm happy to report that it is full of bright and educated people who (most importantly IMHO) actually enjoy what they are doing there.
This is a classic case of law not keeping up with technology. More importantly, this is just a specific case (crimes on the internet having badly-defined translations into a law system that is entirely geographically-based), and there are many other things that can go wrong (too many to list here) when you make old laws govern things they were never intended to! Any patent-lawyer will tell you that patent law is archaic in many ways because tech has changed so quickly; another example, my personal favourite, is an entire nation (Britain) who has a bed-time (oops I mean last-call) of 11pm, because the laws haven't bothered to keep up with the technology of a good transportation system that can get people home in decent time. And so on. What we need to do is start being able to put trust in our politicians. I'm Canadian, and this is just becoming possible now (Liberals in charge; yes they're a bit dodgy, but not nearly as bad as some). I shudder to think how Americans are going to do this (not even Americans seem to have faith in their politicians right now?), but it's going to have to happen. Once we can trust the lawmakers again, surely we'll have laws that help govern the internet in a healthy way, not the big-brother style of the DMCA/Patriot Act/etc ? Admittedley at no point will *everyone* trust our law-makers, but at least in America things could be a lot better than they are now. Anyways - yes, I agree that something should be done to claim damages against this individual who has ripped off many corporations by stealing their software (a lot of them American I guess, affecting Joe Blows like me in soft.eng), but it must be done in a framework that has already been established! Simply forcing non-geographical issues like internet piracy to conform to a geographical law system does NOT WORK, and is entirely unfair to defendant.
Uhhh, you must be American, lamely presuming that Canadians such as myself still live in igloos, and don't "have the internet". Or perhaps you forget we are a country, who knows...
Obviously I did that, what a silly remark...
I have a "very nearly vanilla" 2.4.26 kernel - all that's patched are some netfilter things for more targets. This patch didn't work for me - the patch went fine (my signal.c is no different from vanilla), and the resulting kernel booted fine, but the exploit still crashed my box. I'm using gcc-2.95.4 , Debian 3.0 (Woody). No I didn't forget to run lilo or whatever (i'm using Grub). Any ideas?
Excellent question and great points, how much IS implemented in 2.6? It'd be neat to see if they've taken the RAID to that level. I'm taking a degree in CS at University of Waterloo, we're learning about these things (hard-drive optimizations of these types) currently, it'd be neat to know how Linux works on RAID.
I run the 2.6 kernel, in a RAID1 (a partition mirrored on two drives) configuration. How does this neato scheduling algorithm work with RAID? I suppose with RAID1 it simply makes writing on each individual disk faster, because the disks are treated as individual units, but what about RAID0/4/5 ? Or, does RAID not have any effect, because it's higher level than actual disk-writes? Yeah I suppose that's probably right..