If you're in this position, you really should ask yourself if you're not in the wrong swimming pool. Small fish get eaten in the big pool. You might want to rethink your stratagy, if you're looking at a situation where you have to essentially let someone read the book before they decide if they want to buy it.
In short, you're facing a socialogical problem, you're not going to find an acceptable technological solution for it, anymore then the BSA et all is going to solve piracy through technological means.
Lots of GUI stuff, but there's much more to a program then how it looks or what you click on. My pet peeve is network handling. Networked applications need to, at a minimum: 1) Be secure. Check for buffer overflows, check it twice. If the other computer sends you a megabyte of As, what will your application do? 2) Be ethical. I can't count the number of times an application has tried to leak confidental information out my internet connection. Unless your program has a legitiment reason to use it, it doesn't need to get my username, my owner info off my windows, the box's ID number, etc and send them out through the network connection. 3) Be efficient. Plan ahead, how will your network application be affected if your usership grows 1000x? (Gnutella) Will it work over a VPN? Test it at different bandwidths, make sure it falls back gracefully if required. There are chunks of the world, even in north america where a 9600bps internet connection is a sign of a really good day. 4) Be RFC complient. Nothing sucks more then to have your router taken out by an application that screws up and spews random info out the eth0 port. There should be no circumstances where your program can break any of the appropiate RFCs. 5) Provide hooks. Sendmail is still in use for a reason. It does its job, and hands off subsequant tasks to external programs, allowing us to change out local delivery agents as we change our ways of storing mail, for instance. 6) Include some sysadmins in your beta group. You'll sell more software if the IT dept doesn't commit ritual suicide each time a user buys a copy of your software.
Wow! Now I know why they want me to leave my cell phone off in the plane, they're afraid it'll get sucked into the engine. Gotta stop flying Ultra Cheapo Class, but the a/c is nice out there on the wing!
Did anyone else end up with "99 Red Baloons" running through their head after reading this article?
"You and I in a little toy shop buy a bag of balloons with the money we've got Set them free at the break of dawn 'Til one by one, they were gone Back at base, bugs in the software Flash the message, "Something's out there" Floating in the summer sky 99 red balloons go by."
Re:A free Denial Of Service?
on
FreeDOS
·
· Score: 2
*laughs* not really, just been awhile since I delt with Disk Operating System instead of Denial Of Service. My first real OS was MSDos 3.3 which I ran on my Fidonet node. So not really a newbie:)
Thank you, I stand corrected. My experience is (as you correctly pointed out) in the SSB/CW areas, and obviously need to bone up on it. But wouldn't the number of pulses per second be restricted by the wavelengths anyways? I would still expect that a 30m wave would not carry the information as quickly as a 3 GHz one? Although I could be talking out of my hat now. Old habits die hard:)
Why would they want this? Easy. Higher frequency = more waves per second. More waves per second, (everything else being equal) means the same amount of information can be sent in a shorter time.
On the other hand, higher frequency means shorter broadcast distance, and gets impacted by things like rain fade.
Yous get nothing for nothing. ELF signals can go around the world, through water, etc but you're bandwidth constrained, 8kHz of bandwidth (voice) is a lot when you're transmitting between 1-300Hz.
(I know, I shouldn't feed the trolls, doesn't happen often, but I couldn't resist)
I'm sure you ment to say:
Damn you're retarded.
Glad to see you managed to find the shift keys and everything though. Keep up the good work, one day you might be good enough to post as an actual user.
Were it not for access to a computer in the early years I would have been moved to a "non-academic" stream. Why? Because I'm dysgraphic and was unable to write my answers down. (Dysgraphia is a syndrome that spawns from the same physiological causes as dyslexia but primarily effects the putting of characters on paper, rather then the reading them off of paper.) My verbal IQ was over 20 points sperated from my written IQ. They worked this out after I started typing my homework, and suddenly started getting the answers right because I could concentrate on the _thought_ process, rather then the physical process of writing.
I would be horrified to think that children to come after me would be without this incredibly enabling technology.
You know you're having a bad day when the site trying to lambaste you gets listed on/.
You know you're having a worse day when the site refuses to crash under the/. effect!
So, all you people who are panning Ep2....
on
Attack of the Clones
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
How many of you will vote with your pocket book, and mindshare by not seeing it (including in the theater, pirating it, renting it on video, etc)...
Wouldn't it be a lot more quiet in here if all the rest of you would shut up?
I'll go see it. It'll have cool FX, lots of stuff will go boom, and I can pretend I'm a 12 yr old. Heck, at my age even a couple of hours of being a 12 yr old again will be worth it.
Do what I did next time, watch Ep 4. Watch it honestly, not in nostaliga mode. It's predictable, and geared for 12 yr olds. Gee, I seem to recall seeing commercials for Star Wars toys playing when I was 12, in between the cartoons. Maybe, just maybe, the movies aren't getting dumber, maybe we're getting older and have different tastes (I wouldn't say we're getting any smarter:)).
Just some food for thought.
Minupla
Re:There are major problems with compartmentalizat
on
HP-LX 1.0 Secure Linux
·
· Score: 2
The alternative, of course, is to ban the use of graphical interfaces on that system; but usually that is unacceptable. On a server? I never install X, too many performance and security trade offs.
Damn, that's much better then I would have guessed. Think about it, that means, one out of every 400 users is using linux as a desktop system. I'm impressed, honestly, I didn't know there were that many clued lusers out there.
1) Orbital satilites orbit (well, duh, otherwise they'd fall on your head!), and as such, they are unsuitable for stalking someone. Exception is Geosync orbit, see below)
2) (civilian) imaging sats are in LEO for a couple of reasons, first, the closer you are to the earth, the better resolution you can get with the same imaging equiptment, just like the closer you are to your object with your camera, the bigger it appears, and you don't need a zoom lens. Since the amount you can get for a sat pict varies in relation to the amount of detail you can offer, commercial sat providers have a vested interest in LEO, secondly, a LEO sat allows the company to sell pictures of everywhere (eventually), and thus a better customer base then if it's constantly pointing at Washington DC.
3) Retasking (altering a sat's orbit in order to aquire your image sooner is _expensive_. Due to atmospheric drag, meteor showers, etc, Sats shot up are equiped with manuvering thrusters to allow them to stay in orbit longer. Obviously the fuel has to be shot up there with the sat, and therefore each sat has a finite lifespan in direct relation to the amount of fuel the sat has. I would speculate that a commercial oranization (and indeed the govt too) organization would be loath to retask a sat and thus lower its lifespan.
4) 65cm is a lot of space. Realize that each 65 cm space is a pixel. So your face would be less then a pixel. Pretty hard to ID you based on that.
5) Looking through a sat is like looking through a drinking straw. Say you were looking for Bin Laden. Even assuming you were looking through a sat with arbitary resolution, you're only going to get a small swath of image. Say 10km across. If UBL is sitting at km 11, you'll never find him.
So calm down a bit folks, it's not the End Of The World As We Know It. This product is useful for people like weather forcasters, famers, builders, desaster recovery folks, etc. People whose target is big, and not going anywhere in a hurry. Noone's gonna be reading your paper over your shoulder witht his sat. If they do, they'll see 2 white pixels for the newspaper, and one black one for your hair maybe, assuming you have black hair. I think they'll have to buy their own copy of the New York Times.
Just a note, as it kind of got lost in the Sept news...
This article dated September 25th, 2001, indicates in part:
"Unanimous House Agrees To Pay U.N. Dues
The House of Representatives yesterday unanimously approved legislation that would provide $582 million to pay back dues to the United Nations, a reflection of how the political landscape has been altered by the terrorist attacks two weeks ago, according to The Washington Post.
For months, conservatives such as House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) had blocked the payment of U.N. arrears, but those lawmakers abandoned their opposition in light of the strikes in New York and Washington"
Stick with the RFC's and the tried and true TCP transport system. This company will fail.
You may be right, they may fall on their noses. Or the win with their system might be large enough that we decide that we need to rework the way we do some things. Hard to say at this point.
I do take issue though with your 'Stick with the RFCs' comment. If we stick with what we know works, we will never evolve. If the folks at CERN had had this attitude, we'd still be using GOPHER (side note: my favorate interview question for testing people who claim to have a long time Net experience, 'Explain the difference between Archie and Veronicia'.)
GOPHER was the tried and true text retrieval system. Besides, UDP has an RFC, and is a perfectly legit method of moving data, provided you accept its limitations and ensure you correct for them. TCP has a lot of overhead that is not always required. If our network breaks because someone sends UDP, its we who need to reread our RFCs.
Because H2 is the most abundant element in the universe, and much more conviently obtainable then methane or propane. Just stick a couple of leads into some water and apply electricity. More importantly, H2 is not likely to end up creating CO and killing your systems staff, which can get expensive:). (Remember, any exhaust from this thing is being vented to room atmosphere, so it has to be carbon based lifeform compliant.)
Interestingly enough, everyone has mentioned BSODs, etc, but has missed the big reason for not replacing a windshield with a monitor, probably because most of you take it for granted. You won't get depth perception with a monitor screen. It's amazing how much more difficult someone who uses depth perception day in and day out finds it when it's removed. For example, try this test. Hold your fingers pointing towards themselves at about 3/4 your total arm length at different distances away from you. Now touch them together. Now try the same trick, starting with your hands beside you, but before you hold them up, close one eye.
Kids: Don't try driving your parents' car with one eye closed.
I've never had depth perception, and I'm here to tell you I leave a lot more space when I'm driving then most people because of it.
What is it with the modern generation who think that simulations will improve their likely performance? It is all idiocy, when I was young we did things with a spanner and looked at das blinkenlights under real world conditions. This is so much nonsense, really, the sort of thing I'd expect to come out of our modern CS courses.
#include humor/sarcasm.h
Ya, and what is it with those aerospace engineers who think they can simulate anything in a wind tunnel. I mean, come on, the only way to see what will happen in realworld conditions is to build a multimillion dollar airplane and see if it crashes. When will they learn?
I find it is very handy. I use it to disabuse developers at companies for which I am responsible for the security of that buffer overflows aren't so tough to exploit that they don't have to worry about them in their code. You'd be amazed at how many otherwise excellent developers think that Buffer overflows are unlikely to ever be exploited.
Here's one. Recently while traveling, my mom fell down and broke her leg. Since I didn't know the area, I called 911 and asked for the location of the nearest hospital, figuring I could give them my exit number and have them guide me in. Interestingly enough, they had access to know the Cell node I was calling in from and after being told the highway I was traveling on, said, "OK, in about 5 seconds you should see such and such a sign, exit there..." and guided me in. I can see a situation where people in more serious situations could be benifited. Also there are times when you have an emergancy and can't talk, like a robbery. Most cell phones now have a "Push and hold" emergancy code (usually the 1 key. push and hold it for 3 seconds and it auto-dials 911). Combined with GPS, this could be very useful. Also first on the scene of an accident, instead of giving confusing, and possibly wrong location info to fire/amb/police, they can read your GPS loc. Handy.
The privacy problems are of course, left as an exercise to the/.er:)
Slashdot Mirror
Why? Because it's much easier to see Jupiter then it is Earth. Stands to reason.
If you're in this position, you really should ask yourself if you're not in the wrong swimming pool. Small fish get eaten in the big pool. You might want to rethink your stratagy, if you're looking at a situation where you have to essentially let someone read the book before they decide if they want to buy it.
In short, you're facing a socialogical problem, you're not going to find an acceptable technological solution for it, anymore then the BSA et all is going to solve piracy through technological means.
Lots of GUI stuff, but there's much more to a program then how it looks or what you click on. My pet peeve is network handling. Networked applications need to, at a minimum:
.02 Orionan credits.
1) Be secure. Check for buffer overflows, check it twice. If the other computer sends you a megabyte of As, what will your application do?
2) Be ethical. I can't count the number of times an application has tried to leak confidental information out my internet connection. Unless your program has a legitiment reason to use it, it doesn't need to get my username, my owner info off my windows, the box's ID number, etc and send them out through the network connection.
3) Be efficient. Plan ahead, how will your network application be affected if your usership grows 1000x? (Gnutella) Will it work over a VPN? Test it at different bandwidths, make sure it falls back gracefully if required. There are chunks of the world, even in north america where a 9600bps internet connection is a sign of a really good day.
4) Be RFC complient. Nothing sucks more then to have your router taken out by an application that screws up and spews random info out the eth0 port. There should be no circumstances where your program can break any of the appropiate RFCs.
5) Provide hooks. Sendmail is still in use for a reason. It does its job, and hands off subsequant tasks to external programs, allowing us to change out local delivery agents as we change our ways of storing mail, for instance.
6) Include some sysadmins in your beta group. You'll sell more software if the IT dept doesn't commit ritual suicide each time a user buys a copy of your software.
Just my
Wow! Now I know why they want me to leave my cell phone off in the plane, they're afraid it'll get sucked into the engine. Gotta stop flying Ultra Cheapo Class, but the a/c is nice out there on the wing!
Did anyone else end up with "99 Red Baloons" running through their head after reading this article?
"You and I in a little toy shop
buy a bag of balloons with the money we've got
Set them free at the break of dawn
'Til one by one, they were gone
Back at base, bugs in the software
Flash the message, "Something's out there"
Floating in the summer sky
99 red balloons go by."
*laughs* not really, just been awhile since I delt with Disk Operating System instead of Denial Of Service. My first real OS was MSDos 3.3 which I ran on my Fidonet node. So not really a newbie :)
Am I the only one who, to his shame, misread the title as "Free Denial Of Service" initally?
:)
Oops
Thank you, I stand corrected. My experience is (as you correctly pointed out) in the SSB/CW areas, and obviously need to bone up on it. But wouldn't the number of pulses per second be restricted by the wavelengths anyways? I would still expect that a 30m wave would not carry the information as quickly as a 3 GHz one? Although I could be talking out of my hat now. Old habits die hard :)
So, is all of /. getting invited to the wedding? :)
Why would they want this? Easy. Higher frequency = more waves per second. More waves per second, (everything else being equal) means the same amount of information can be sent in a shorter time.
On the other hand, higher frequency means shorter broadcast distance, and gets impacted by things like rain fade.
Yous get nothing for nothing. ELF signals can go around the world, through water, etc but you're bandwidth constrained, 8kHz of bandwidth (voice) is a lot when you're transmitting between 1-300Hz.
(I know, I shouldn't feed the trolls, doesn't happen often, but I couldn't resist)
I'm sure you ment to say:
Damn you're retarded.
Glad to see you managed to find the shift keys and everything though. Keep up the good work, one day you might be good enough to post as an actual user.
Were it not for access to a computer in the early years I would have been moved to a "non-academic" stream. Why? Because I'm dysgraphic and was unable to write my answers down. (Dysgraphia is a syndrome that spawns from the same physiological causes as dyslexia but primarily effects the putting of characters on paper, rather then the reading them off of paper.) My verbal IQ was over 20 points sperated from my written IQ. They worked this out after I started typing my homework, and suddenly started getting the answers right because I could concentrate on the _thought_ process, rather then the physical process of writing.
I would be horrified to think that children to come after me would be without this incredibly enabling technology.
Patent it now, it must be patentable since it's blindingly obvious, and a simple deduction from the Prisioners' Delemia. :)
You know you're having a bad day when the site trying to lambaste you gets listed on /.
/. effect!
You know you're having a worse day when the site refuses to crash under the
How many of you will vote with your pocket book, and mindshare by not seeing it (including in the theater, pirating it, renting it on video, etc)...
:)).
Wouldn't it be a lot more quiet in here if all the rest of you would shut up?
I'll go see it. It'll have cool FX, lots of stuff will go boom, and I can pretend I'm a 12 yr old. Heck, at my age even a couple of hours of being a 12 yr old again will be worth it.
Do what I did next time, watch Ep 4. Watch it honestly, not in nostaliga mode. It's predictable, and geared for 12 yr olds. Gee, I seem to recall seeing commercials for Star Wars toys playing when I was 12, in between the cartoons. Maybe, just maybe, the movies aren't getting dumber, maybe we're getting older and have different tastes (I wouldn't say we're getting any smarter
Just some food for thought.
Minupla
The alternative, of course, is to ban the use of graphical interfaces on that system; but usually that is unacceptable.
On a server? I never install X, too many performance and security trade offs.
Damn, that's much better then I would have guessed. Think about it, that means, one out of every 400 users is using linux as a desktop system. I'm impressed, honestly, I didn't know there were that many clued lusers out there.
Wow!
1) Orbital satilites orbit (well, duh, otherwise they'd fall on your head!), and as such, they are unsuitable for stalking someone. Exception is Geosync orbit, see below)
2) (civilian) imaging sats are in LEO for a couple of reasons, first, the closer you are to the earth, the better resolution you can get with the same imaging equiptment, just like the closer you are to your object with your camera, the bigger it appears, and you don't need a zoom lens. Since the amount you can get for a sat pict varies in relation to the amount of detail you can offer, commercial sat providers have a vested interest in LEO, secondly, a LEO sat allows the company to sell pictures of everywhere (eventually), and thus a better customer base then if it's constantly pointing at Washington DC.
3) Retasking (altering a sat's orbit in order to aquire your image sooner is _expensive_. Due to atmospheric drag, meteor showers, etc, Sats shot up are equiped with manuvering thrusters to allow them to stay in orbit longer. Obviously the fuel has to be shot up there with the sat, and therefore each sat has a finite lifespan in direct relation to the amount of fuel the sat has. I would speculate that a commercial oranization (and indeed the govt too) organization would be loath to retask a sat and thus lower its lifespan.
4) 65cm is a lot of space. Realize that each 65 cm space is a pixel. So your face would be less then a pixel. Pretty hard to ID you based on that.
5) Looking through a sat is like looking through a drinking straw. Say you were looking for Bin Laden. Even assuming you were looking through a sat with arbitary resolution, you're only going to get a small swath of image. Say 10km across. If UBL is sitting at km 11, you'll never find him.
So calm down a bit folks, it's not the End Of The World As We Know It. This product is useful for people like weather forcasters, famers, builders, desaster recovery folks, etc. People whose target is big, and not going anywhere in a hurry. Noone's gonna be reading your paper over your shoulder witht his sat. If they do, they'll see 2 white pixels for the newspaper, and one black one for your hair maybe, assuming you have black hair. I think they'll have to buy their own copy of the New York Times.
Just a note, as it kind of got lost in the Sept news...
This article dated September 25th, 2001, indicates in part:
"Unanimous House Agrees To Pay U.N. Dues
The House of Representatives yesterday unanimously approved legislation that would provide $582 million to pay back dues to the United Nations, a reflection of how the political landscape has been altered by the terrorist attacks two weeks ago, according to The Washington Post.
For months, conservatives such as House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) had blocked the payment of U.N. arrears, but those lawmakers abandoned their opposition in light of the strikes in New York and Washington"
Stick with the RFC's and the tried and true TCP transport system. This company will fail.
You may be right, they may fall on their noses. Or the win with their system might be large enough that we decide that we need to rework the way we do some things. Hard to say at this point.
I do take issue though with your 'Stick with the RFCs' comment. If we stick with what we know works, we will never evolve. If the folks at CERN had had this attitude, we'd still be using GOPHER (side note: my favorate interview question for testing people who claim to have a long time Net experience, 'Explain the difference between Archie and Veronicia'.)
GOPHER was the tried and true text retrieval system. Besides, UDP has an RFC, and is a perfectly legit method of moving data, provided you accept its limitations and ensure you correct for them. TCP has a lot of overhead that is not always required. If our network breaks because someone sends UDP, its we who need to reread our RFCs.
'Nuff Said.
Because H2 is the most abundant element in the universe, and much more conviently obtainable then methane or propane. Just stick a couple of leads into some water and apply electricity. More importantly, H2 is not likely to end up creating CO and killing your systems staff, which can get expensive :). (Remember, any exhaust from this thing is being vented to room atmosphere, so it has to be carbon based lifeform compliant.)
Interestingly enough, everyone has mentioned BSODs, etc, but has missed the big reason for not replacing a windshield with a monitor, probably because most of you take it for granted. You won't get depth perception with a monitor screen. It's amazing how much more difficult someone who uses depth perception day in and day out finds it when it's removed. For example, try this test. Hold your fingers pointing towards themselves at about 3/4 your total arm length at different distances away from you. Now touch them together. Now try the same trick, starting with your hands beside you, but before you hold them up, close one eye.
Kids: Don't try driving your parents' car with one eye closed.
I've never had depth perception, and I'm here to tell you I leave a lot more space when I'm driving then most people because of it.
What is it with the modern generation who think that simulations will improve their likely performance? It is all idiocy, when I was young we did things with a spanner and looked at das blinkenlights under real world conditions. This is so much nonsense, really, the sort of thing I'd expect to come out of our modern CS courses.
#include humor/sarcasm.h
Ya, and what is it with those aerospace engineers who think they can simulate anything in a wind tunnel. I mean, come on, the only way to see what will happen in realworld conditions is to build a multimillion dollar airplane and see if it crashes. When will they learn?
I find it is very handy. I use it to disabuse developers at companies for which I am responsible for the security of that buffer overflows aren't so tough to exploit that they don't have to worry about them in their code. You'd be amazed at how many otherwise excellent developers think that Buffer overflows are unlikely to ever be exploited.
Here's one. Recently while traveling, my mom fell down and broke her leg. Since I didn't know the area, I called 911 and asked for the location of the nearest hospital, figuring I could give them my exit number and have them guide me in. Interestingly enough, they had access to know the Cell node I was calling in from and after being told the highway I was traveling on, said, "OK, in about 5 seconds you should see such and such a sign, exit there..." and guided me in. I can see a situation where people in more serious situations could be benifited. Also there are times when you have an emergancy and can't talk, like a robbery. Most cell phones now have a "Push and hold" emergancy code (usually the 1 key. push and hold it for 3 seconds and it auto-dials 911). Combined with GPS, this could be very useful. Also first on the scene of an accident, instead of giving confusing, and possibly wrong location info to fire/amb/police, they can read your GPS loc. Handy.
/.er :)
The privacy problems are of course, left as an exercise to the