150k is about three times the normal Slashdot effect
How do you know what the "normal" traffic from a Slashdot story is? Are you committing the classic error of examining one data point (your own website) and assuming that a single sample is representative of the universal average?
It's not the amount of storage that matters here, it's the number of hits on the root servers.
The fact that so little storage is needed means that cache misses will be rare.
As you even mentioned yourself, the biggest cause of hammering root servers is when a client repeatedly asks for a TLD that doesn't exist at all.
Every time a cache server gets rebooted (i.e. has its cache flushed)
There is no reason to equate reboots with cache flushes. There's this thing called a "hard disk"- and as I just explained, because the storage needs are so tiny, 10 megabytes of disk space will be more than enough for TLD needs.
Denial may be a fact of life, but it isn't pretty.
Microsoft has not sued over Mono. As far as I can see, they're not going to.
Why don't you think so? Suppose that Microsoft did want to kill Mono- if that were the case, they still wouldn't have sued yet.
The optimum procedure to sue a competitor for patent infringement is to wait as long as possible. That way the opposition wastes the maximum amount of investment on projects that you can legally stop them from deploying.
The chief example of this is the Polaroid-Kodak patent lawsuit. Polaroid waited until Kodak had spent multiple billions of dollars building new factories for instant-cameras before sueing to block them from selling any.
The way to stop childporn has nothing to do with P2P or the internet.
The real way to stop child porn is to sit back and wait for Moore's Law.
Within 10 years tops, computer graphics will have gotten so good that there is no longer any reason to use actual human actors in porn- whether children or adults. Criminal's won't take the risk of using real children when they can just buy "3d Poser 2015" for $199 and crank out 100% fake pics.
Remember that in the USA, illegal child porn is only pictures whose production actually involved the sexual abuse of children- not just ones that look that way.
My guess would be that this is stated in the EULA or Terms of Service and failure to agree would not allow you to install the software in any case.
EULAs don't count as warning. Plenty of genuinely evil spyware (as judged by the fact that it's on the Lavasoft Adaware list) has the user click through an EULA before installing- and someplace in the "license", in very obscure lawyerly/technical terms, it tells you everything the software "may" do.
Checking "I Agree" to continue installation has become a conditioned, automatic response.
Suppose I made an installer that had a 1% probability of displaying an EULA which required the user to pay me $1000 per day for the rest of his life. If attached it to a game demo, how many people do you think would "agree" to that?
"Allow scripts to open new windows only in response to a user action." i.e. clicking a button or link -- not just for the hell of it.
The workaround there is to launch popups from within the same click that goes to the actual content the viewer desires.
For every technical hack which blocks an ad by cancelling a software feature normally only used by ads, the advertisers can fight back by simply requiring their material be integrated ever-more tightly into the actual content.
Those shouldn't be guidelines. They should be legal requirements.
No, they should be technical requirements.
Consumer OSes should protect their users from malware by sandboxing new installs, separating the priviledges of different programs, and simply not allowing any random program to sneak in via ActiveX and install DLLs to modify the system-wide GUI.
The first line of defense for any computer problem should be a technical one. Recourse to the legal system indicates a technical failure.
Other OSes and browsers have made spyware much less viable- ironically, this is a field where the supposedly "user-friendly" Microsoft trails every other competitor.
What the BBC (a taxpayer-funded entity accountable to no-one in particular) doesn't seem to understand is that GOOGLE IS NOT A PUBLIC SERVICE.
What sql*kitten doesn't seem to understand is that Google profits by being commonly treated as if it were a public service.
Any actions which the public percieves as betraying it's trust will drive traffic to other search engines.
Since being percieved as good is an important element of any public-facing company's profitability, then considering how their actions will effect the public good is actually a valid part of business planning.
I used Tabbrwoser Extensions for a while and loved the functionality of it. I eventually tracked a nasty bug back to it however. Once or twice a day my CPU would kick into overdrive, 99% used up by firefox.
I have observed similar problems, but it's not clear if there's really an error in TabBrowser causing it.
Can you really be sure that the problem is caused by tabs, and not by having too many web pages open? Tabs allow you to open ~12 times as many web pages before your desktop becomes overcluttered, so it might be simply an easier way to reproduce a problem that is caused someplace else.
Hey kids! For years, schizophrenia has been the Cadillac of mental disorders- everyone admires it, but there's just not enough to go around for everyone.
But now, due to insightful new research, schizophrenia is suddenly achievable! The key is Provigil / Modafinil, an exciting new prescription drug. The approved use is to treat sleep disorder, but studies suggest an off-label effect: consistent intake of 2-3 times approved dosage for a period of more than 6 days may induce the symptoms of schizophrenia.
Ask your doctor if schizophrenia is right for you!
A Beautiful Mind is less accurate then Perfect Blue
Perfect Blue was good, but not accurate. The fact that all 3 main characters just happened to suffer debilitating mental illness carried it far away from the world of reality. It's almost as if schizophrenia were a contagious disease...
Neither of those makes sense. The only reasonable choice is: 3. I was an executive who told my underlings to create the Whizbang2000. or 4. I was the basic researcher who concieved of the principles to Whizbang2000, but a separate team of engineers got the glory of building a product from my vague ideas.
If someone had intended to mean #1, the word "initiative" wouldn't have been present without an "and" following it. As written, it sounds like he was only involved in the project at the initial stages, and didn't follow through to completion.
The first of which means the exact same thing as "I invented the Internet."
No, it really doesn't. Beginning a statement with "I took the initiative " means that you were the one who decided to do something, not that you did it yourself.
For example, in the current USA leadership, Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld took the initiative in attacking Iraq. But of course, he never actually did fighting himself- that was left to people of much lower rank. Back in the 20th century, President Kennedy took the initiative in landing on the moon- but again, he had no active role at NASA.
"I took the initiative to" is a weasely phrase managers can use to take credit for the achievements of their employees. That much should be obvious.
Sorry if this sounds unpleasant. Truth is that way sometimes.
But it doesn't sound unpleasant. None of what you said suggests there's any real obstacle at all.
Today there are only 6 TLDs that get substantial use (in the US): com net org edu gov mil. That's such a tiny number that keeping them cached is absolutely trivial. If there were 60 major TLDs instead of just 6, it would still require only 500 bytes to cache them all. And I've already used more than 500 bytes writing this message!
Like most everything else in the Internet, DNS is exhibiting scaling limitations.
There are some problems with DNS scaling, but they have nothing to do with the number of TLDs.
There's no reason to think that increasing the number of TLDs by 10x or even 100x will cause a perceptible problem. DNS was designed with that "good engineering" you mentioned, and it scales fine.
(The fact that bogus TLDs cause a performance hit is true, but completely irrelevant to the question of adding more TLDs)
Re:Why is that a troll? It's a valid fucking point
on
Fedora Core 2 Review
·
· Score: 1
A cursory glance at this thread would show you pretty clearly that several people commented on the originating site being down, and a few requests were made for someone to post the full text.
"Hi, I'd like to watch Shrek2, but struggling through a packed theater will be an irritation and waste my time. Can someone post it as an AVI?"
Just because it's convenient doesn't stop it from being illegal. (Copyright infringment isn't "theft", but is still a crime)
For the past 5 years, the Slashdot team has denied suggestions to create an automatic cache of linked stories, claiming that it would be illegal for them to do so, even though they know that this will just cause users to paste it into the comments instead.
The slashdot software should automatically download a copy of any pages linked in a submission. Then, if that submission is accepted (but in the 20 minute delay before it goes live), an email should be sent to the webmaster of the linked files. Responding to that email should automatically enable Slashdot to serve a copy of her site for the next 48 hours.
Many website authors would happily permit a temporary mirror to protect their servers.
You've fallen into the modern habit of substituting "begging the question" for "raises the question".
No. His use was correct. Anyone asking "Can something be saved?" has already assumed that the answer to "Is something in danger?" was true. That's just what "begging a question" means.
You might be confusing "Beg the question" with "circular arguments". Circular arguments are an important subset of "begging the question", but they're not the same thing. If I make a statement/question about Y which only makes sense if X, then I have begged X. And if X=Y, then I have additionally argued in a circle.
No, that's just what it means. "Beg the question" means to skip over an important point and assume it's true. "Are you still beating your wife?" begs the question that you have a wife, and that you attacked her in the past. Begging questions can be an intentional rhetorical trick- by getting someone to ponder the details of step #2, she might not notice that there were options open back at step #1 that you didn't want her to decide about. Example: "How long should we wait for UN approval before invading Iraq?"
Many people, often Anonymous Cowards, have heard "Beg the question" used and wrongly decided it is a synonym for "Raises the question".
Darth Vader, the guy who blew up a billion people, was absolved of his sins and was able to enter the glowing Valhalla-state with Obi Wan and Yoda at the very end of the movie.
If it helps, consider that "blue Jedi ghosts" aren't still alive or concious in any way. All three of them were just figments of Luke's active imagination which he uses to boost his self-confidence. Vader's "redemption" only extended to the eyes of his own son.
The Ewoks really killed it for me. They served no purpose in the movie other than commercial tie-ins.
The Ewoks weren't all bad (although their ability to turn giant trees into hundreds of robot-crushing traps was far, far out of bounds). If you remember that Star Wars is an homage to adventure serials, then Ewoks fit in well. Every hero needs to occasionally get captured by suspicious locals before resolving misunderstandings and ralling them to battle their common enemy.
What Lucas needs to do is open up the license like Sunset did with the Gundam series, and allow new directors and writers to create new storylines based in the universe Lucas created.
That's one of the best visceral arguments for restoring Founder's Copyright. Because if copyright expired after 28 years as it once was meant to, Star Wars would be public-domain by now.
Star Wars is concrete evidence that copyright periods greater than 30 years do more harm than good for public culture.
But I certainly load up the page and scan for vulnerability/worm/etc headlines because slashdot is the one place that generally covers all the majors fairly fast
I've never gotten an impression that Slashdot even tries to publish stories quickly. If you really want to scan for new exploits, can't you go to securityfocus.com or someplace?
The US Constitution specifies a peaceful "overthrow" of the government every two years:
Actually, the ability to amend the Constitution is better as a proxy for government overthrow- as that's the only approved way to cause changes similar in scope to what happen in a revolutionary war. The executive and legislative branches just don't have that degree of power.
And even more finally, why are you people whinging about this? The lady is a journalist, which means she can invoke Source Protection laws, if applicable, and refuse to turn over any information....
That's the point, eh. The Grand Jury alread knows she's a journalist, so why would they try to subpeona this stuff, unless they are trying to erode "Source Protection" rights?
Why do you think we keep sending up shuttle flights to repair the Hubble, instead of just replacing it with a new satellite? It's because we CAN'T make a new Hubble, because we DIDN'T make the first one!
The inside of that "telescope" is really a powerful alien artifact whose runes have only recently been desciphered. The age of the Kalgerian Star Gem can't be measured, and likely pre-dates the very formation of the Earth.
Slashdot Mirror
150k is about three times the normal Slashdot effect
How do you know what the "normal" traffic from a Slashdot story is? Are you committing the classic error of examining one data point (your own website) and assuming that a single sample is representative of the universal average?
It's not the amount of storage that matters here, it's the number of hits on the root servers.
The fact that so little storage is needed means that cache misses will be rare.
As you even mentioned yourself, the biggest cause of hammering root servers is when a client repeatedly asks for a TLD that doesn't exist at all.
Every time a cache server gets rebooted (i.e. has its cache flushed)
There is no reason to equate reboots with cache flushes. There's this thing called a "hard disk"- and as I just explained, because the storage needs are so tiny, 10 megabytes of disk space will be more than enough for TLD needs.
Denial may be a fact of life, but it isn't pretty.
Introspective I see...
Microsoft has not sued over Mono. As far as I can see, they're not going to.
Why don't you think so? Suppose that Microsoft did want to kill Mono- if that were the case, they still wouldn't have sued yet.
The optimum procedure to sue a competitor for patent infringement is to wait as long as possible. That way the opposition wastes the maximum amount of investment on projects that you can legally stop them from deploying.
The chief example of this is the Polaroid-Kodak patent lawsuit. Polaroid waited until Kodak had spent multiple billions of dollars building new factories for instant-cameras before sueing to block them from selling any.
The way to stop childporn has nothing to do with P2P or the internet.
The real way to stop child porn is to sit back and wait for Moore's Law.
Within 10 years tops, computer graphics will have gotten so good that there is no longer any reason to use actual human actors in porn- whether children or adults. Criminal's won't take the risk of using real children when they can just buy "3d Poser 2015" for $199 and crank out 100% fake pics.
Remember that in the USA, illegal child porn is only pictures whose production actually involved the sexual abuse of children- not just ones that look that way.
My guess would be that this is stated in the EULA or Terms of Service and failure to agree would not allow you to install the software in any case.
EULAs don't count as warning. Plenty of genuinely evil spyware (as judged by the fact that it's on the Lavasoft Adaware list) has the user click through an EULA before installing- and someplace in the "license", in very obscure lawyerly/technical terms, it tells you everything the software "may" do.
Checking "I Agree" to continue installation has become a conditioned, automatic response.
Suppose I made an installer that had a 1% probability of displaying an EULA which required the user to pay me $1000 per day for the rest of his life. If attached it to a game demo, how many people do you think would "agree" to that?
"Allow scripts to open new windows only in response to a user action." i.e. clicking a button or link -- not just for the hell of it.
The workaround there is to launch popups from within the same click that goes to the actual content the viewer desires.
For every technical hack which blocks an ad by cancelling a software feature normally only used by ads, the advertisers can fight back by simply requiring their material be integrated ever-more tightly into the actual content.
Those shouldn't be guidelines. They should be legal requirements.
No, they should be technical requirements.
Consumer OSes should protect their users from malware by sandboxing new installs, separating the priviledges of different programs, and simply not allowing any random program to sneak in via ActiveX and install DLLs to modify the system-wide GUI.
The first line of defense for any computer problem should be a technical one. Recourse to the legal system indicates a technical failure.
Other OSes and browsers have made spyware much less viable- ironically, this is a field where the supposedly "user-friendly" Microsoft trails every other competitor.
What the BBC (a taxpayer-funded entity accountable to no-one in particular) doesn't seem to understand is that GOOGLE IS NOT A PUBLIC SERVICE.
What sql*kitten doesn't seem to understand is that Google profits by being commonly treated as if it were a public service.
Any actions which the public percieves as betraying it's trust will drive traffic to other search engines.
Since being percieved as good is an important element of any public-facing company's profitability, then considering how their actions will effect the public good is actually a valid part of business planning.
I used Tabbrwoser Extensions for a while and loved the functionality of it. I eventually tracked a nasty bug back to it however. Once or twice a day my CPU would kick into overdrive, 99% used up by firefox.
I have observed similar problems, but it's not clear if there's really an error in TabBrowser causing it.
Can you really be sure that the problem is caused by tabs, and not by having too many web pages open? Tabs allow you to open ~12 times as many web pages before your desktop becomes overcluttered, so it might be simply an easier way to reproduce a problem that is caused someplace else.
Hey kids! For years, schizophrenia has been the Cadillac of mental disorders- everyone admires it, but there's just not enough to go around for everyone.
But now, due to insightful new research, schizophrenia is suddenly achievable! The key is Provigil / Modafinil, an exciting new prescription drug. The approved use is to treat sleep disorder, but studies suggest an off-label effect: consistent intake of 2-3 times approved dosage for a period of more than 6 days may induce the symptoms of schizophrenia.
Ask your doctor if schizophrenia is right for you!
A Beautiful Mind is less accurate then Perfect Blue
Perfect Blue was good, but not accurate. The fact that all 3 main characters just happened to suffer debilitating mental illness carried it far away from the world of reality. It's almost as if schizophrenia were a contagious disease...
Neither of those makes sense. The only reasonable choice is:
3. I was an executive who told my underlings to create the Whizbang2000. or
4. I was the basic researcher who concieved of the principles to Whizbang2000, but a separate team of engineers got the glory of building a product from my vague ideas.
If someone had intended to mean #1, the word "initiative" wouldn't have been present without an "and" following it. As written, it sounds like he was only involved in the project at the initial stages, and didn't follow through to completion.
The first of which means the exact same thing as "I invented the Internet."
No, it really doesn't. Beginning a statement with "I took the initiative " means that you were the one who decided to do something, not that you did it yourself.
For example, in the current USA leadership, Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld took the initiative in attacking Iraq. But of course, he never actually did fighting himself- that was left to people of much lower rank. Back in the 20th century, President Kennedy took the initiative in landing on the moon- but again, he had no active role at NASA.
"I took the initiative to" is a weasely phrase managers can use to take credit for the achievements of their employees. That much should be obvious.
Sorry if this sounds unpleasant. Truth is that way sometimes.
But it doesn't sound unpleasant. None of what you said suggests there's any real obstacle at all.
Today there are only 6 TLDs that get substantial use (in the US): com net org edu gov mil. That's such a tiny number that keeping them cached is absolutely trivial. If there were 60 major TLDs instead of just 6, it would still require only 500 bytes to cache them all. And I've already used more than 500 bytes writing this message!
Like most everything else in the Internet, DNS is exhibiting scaling limitations.
There are some problems with DNS scaling, but they have nothing to do with the number of TLDs.
There's no reason to think that increasing the number of TLDs by 10x or even 100x will cause a perceptible problem. DNS was designed with that "good engineering" you mentioned, and it scales fine.
(The fact that bogus TLDs cause a performance hit is true, but completely irrelevant to the question of adding more TLDs)
A cursory glance at this thread would show you pretty clearly that several people commented on the originating site being down, and a few requests were made for someone to post the full text.
"Hi, I'd like to watch Shrek2, but struggling through a packed theater will be an irritation and waste my time. Can someone post it as an AVI?"
Just because it's convenient doesn't stop it from being illegal. (Copyright infringment isn't "theft", but is still a crime)
For the past 5 years, the Slashdot team has denied suggestions to create an automatic cache of linked stories, claiming that it would be illegal for them to do so, even though they know that this will just cause users to paste it into the comments instead.
The slashdot software should automatically download a copy of any pages linked in a submission. Then, if that submission is accepted (but in the 20 minute delay before it goes live), an email should be sent to the webmaster of the linked files. Responding to that email should automatically enable Slashdot to serve a copy of her site for the next 48 hours.
Many website authors would happily permit a temporary mirror to protect their servers.
We don't run that website. Outsourced to another company.
If Semantic Web isn't good enough for your own website, how can you expect a customer to pay for it?
Dogfood! I'm not just the president, I'm also a client.
You've fallen into the modern habit of substituting "begging the question" for "raises the question".
No. His use was correct. Anyone asking "Can something be saved?" has already assumed that the answer to "Is something in danger?" was true. That's just what "begging a question" means.
You might be confusing "Beg the question" with "circular arguments". Circular arguments are an important subset of "begging the question", but they're not the same thing. If I make a statement/question about Y which only makes sense if X, then I have begged X. And if X=Y, then I have additionally argued in a circle.
this is not what "to beg the question" means.
No, that's just what it means. "Beg the question" means to skip over an important point and assume it's true. "Are you still beating your wife?" begs the question that you have a wife, and that you attacked her in the past. Begging questions can be an intentional rhetorical trick- by getting someone to ponder the details of step #2, she might not notice that there were options open back at step #1 that you didn't want her to decide about. Example: "How long should we wait for UN approval before invading Iraq?"
Many people, often Anonymous Cowards, have heard "Beg the question" used and wrongly decided it is a synonym for "Raises the question".
Darth Vader, the guy who blew up a billion people, was absolved of his sins and was able to enter the glowing Valhalla-state with Obi Wan and Yoda at the very end of the movie.
If it helps, consider that "blue Jedi ghosts" aren't still alive or concious in any way. All three of them were just figments of Luke's active imagination which he uses to boost his self-confidence. Vader's "redemption" only extended to the eyes of his own son.
The Ewoks really killed it for me. They served no purpose in the movie other than commercial tie-ins.
The Ewoks weren't all bad (although their ability to turn giant trees into hundreds of robot-crushing traps was far, far out of bounds). If you remember that Star Wars is an homage to adventure serials, then Ewoks fit in well. Every hero needs to occasionally get captured by suspicious locals before resolving misunderstandings and ralling them to battle their common enemy.
What Lucas needs to do is open up the license like Sunset did with the Gundam series, and allow new directors and writers to create new storylines based in the universe Lucas created.
That's one of the best visceral arguments for restoring Founder's Copyright. Because if copyright expired after 28 years as it once was meant to, Star Wars would be public-domain by now.
Star Wars is concrete evidence that copyright periods greater than 30 years do more harm than good for public culture.
Funny, I first saw the Star Wars films as the Special Editions in late high school.
Meaning that you never saw them at all...
But I certainly load up the page and scan for vulnerability/worm/etc headlines because slashdot is the one place that generally covers all the majors fairly fast
I've never gotten an impression that Slashdot even tries to publish stories quickly. If you really want to scan for new exploits, can't you go to securityfocus.com or someplace?
The US Constitution specifies a peaceful "overthrow" of the government every two years:
Actually, the ability to amend the Constitution is better as a proxy for government overthrow- as that's the only approved way to cause changes similar in scope to what happen in a revolutionary war. The executive and legislative branches just don't have that degree of power.
And even more finally, why are you people whinging about this? The lady is a journalist, which means she can invoke Source Protection laws, if applicable, and refuse to turn over any information....
That's the point, eh. The Grand Jury alread knows she's a journalist, so why would they try to subpeona this stuff, unless they are trying to erode "Source Protection" rights?
The telescope wasn't even built back then...
Why do you think we keep sending up shuttle flights to repair the Hubble, instead of just replacing it with a new satellite? It's because we CAN'T make a new Hubble, because we DIDN'T make the first one!
The inside of that "telescope" is really a powerful alien artifact whose runes have only recently been desciphered. The age of the Kalgerian Star Gem can't be measured, and likely pre-dates the very formation of the Earth.