Oh, did you already hear that the putty ssh client (== open source) was ported for the 9210? 1.0 Beta 1 was released just yesterday. I installed it and it works better than the clients I have used so far (I had some mysteries with odd key-bindings before, for example).
"I think the PDA has become more of a status symbol than a useful tool."
You think so? I think atleast here in Finland the trend is beginning to reverse - if you carry a communicator - like I do - that is a sign of you being just a workhorse:) If you have the luxury of not needing it - then that's a real status symbol:)
Anyway, I don't think just the PDA functionality would be enough a reason for me to carry it. But when it is at the same time your only phone, and a use anywhere SSH client then there is enough value.
There were "in the order of tens of millions of spiders running frantically back and forth," but they weren't interacting with each other. Since the spiders didn't seem to care if an occasional insect stumbled into their construction, Thair doesn't think it was built for trapping purposes.
Don't tell anyone, but I think I have found a secret way to control the spiders by using gnuplot...
Two high-ranking executives at Sonera Corp., Finland's main telecommunications company, were arrested Friday in an investigation into whether the company violated the privacy of its workers.
The employees are Jari Jaakkola, an executive vice-president, and Henri Harmia, who was in charge of co-ordinating Sonera's $6.2-billion merger with the Swedish company Telia. Both have been suspended from the company.
The charges of violating Finland's data-security laws come just weeks after police began holding three other Sonera employees who worked with corporate security. Police are investigating whether Sonera monitored the call records of its own employees in 2000 and 2001.
just FYI, most european mobile operators (or at least the one I know) have such systems in place (commercial ones).
Yeah - I know. I am actually from Europe myself:) The reason why I took this to instant use is that this way I can set a personal proxy for this and have full control of it. I also think it should work quicker, as the performance of the proxy is not affected by others. But surely, there is need for the commercial ones too:)
If you are like me and your mobile browser does not come with a highbandwidth access, you might benefit from this Openchallenge submission/implementation from yesterday (not originally crafted for openchallenge). I tried it, and will add it to my toolbox.
ziproxy is a forwarding (non-caching) proxy that gzips text and HTML files, and reduces the size of images by converting them to low quality JPEGs. It is intended to increase the speed for dial-up Internet connections. Most browsers support gzipped content, so Web pages appear as normal, but as they are only a fraction of their original page size, pages are much quicker to load. Even for browsers that don't support it, hints how to overcome it using SSH port forwarding are included. Images are reduced in size by an average of one third, with only marginal visible image quality loss. It should be used with inetd/xinetd, but if you can't use them, a simple replacement "netd" is provided.
And thanks for the insightful discussion - it really helped me in iterating some issues. I don't see your email in your slashdot userinfo page. If you feel like it, email me.
Thanks,
Jussi
version number management
on
PINE Releases 4.50
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Imagine that pine was first released in 1989 and yet the latest version number is reasonable. If this was something else - going to be polite and not mention it:) - you know what it would be like. I mean there's a point in it - the project is more than 10 years old but has stayed very consistent for the whole time. And talking about email clients, that's a miracle.
Have you ever read the project history linked above: " Our goal was to provide a mailer that naive users could use without fear of making mistakes. We wanted to cater to users who were less interested in learning the mechanics of using electronic mail than in doing their jobs; users who perhaps had some computer anxiety". I think they have succeeded well, even now when everyone is used to having all the graphical bells and whistles my Mom - who had never used email before, learned pine quicker than outlook (she never learnt to use it, actually).
The interface ( the server in your model ) is the least of the intellectual property when considering parallel / client server math problem platforms. The clients ( workers ) are doing the work. And the worker is why you buy the software.
Again, I have failed to say what I really mean. I am talking about licenses for software products that DO NOT SUPPORT PARALLISM and about making them support distributed processing USING 3RD party software (in this case "our" platform).
If the "calculation software" which runs the simulation is so precious then why is there real cases in where the end-user has decided to order also the "calculation code" from us replacing the code from the original product: They still use the pricy software for outputting the feed for the calculation, which is then the input for the replacement code. Doing this kinds of replacement would not be needed at all, if the software vendors for the SINGLE COMPUTER DESIGN & SIMULATION TOOLwould take this in accoun in their license terms and offer solutions to be embedded in 3RD PARTY GRIDSOLUTIONS.
Well, making you see the problem from the same view seems like similar problem than the hunt for the holy grail, but I hope in the end it is worth it:)
Yes, you fail to see the problem, because it seems I have done bad work in expressing myself. I am not talking about licensing GRID SOFTWARE. For the whole time I have been talking about enhancing the performance of existing single computer software by integrating it into a grid architecture and by this enabling it to run ONE SPESIFIC SIMULATION TYPE it provides in a distributed manner.
If this does not make you see the problem then maybe it helps realizing how bad this is by telling that companies are already developing their own software for this one spesific simulation so that they can replace the one us in the original single computer software. Do you now unerstand: everyone is loosing something.
Why do people think that extreme performance software requires a discount? Most of us in the parallel computing world understand the concept of licensing.
Because: the purpose for which many of these companies would by the license - if they could use gridcomputing for example - would utilize only a minor part - only one feature - of that product. Imagine a software which you can use to build and run simulations of 100 different types. If you would like to do the calculation for only 1 type of simulation using distributed computing, is it fair that you have to pay for the whole software package: There would be still only one computer on which the interface and the whole program is is used, the rest of the computers would utilize a piece of this software to run the calculation - WITHOUT THE USER OF THE COMPUTER EVEN NOTICING THIS. Don't you see the problem?
Based on what I understood from the article they seem to think you could record someone's life by just recording everything he outputs or sees. Then, consider hundred million people who experience exactly similar events in their life and accidentally happen to output also the same content. Is their life similar? Not in my opinion. To my map someones life you should also be able to for example know what he/she feels like, etc and that may not be reflected in the output - atleast not in a form understandable for anyone else but the person him/herself. Stupid title.
Well, you get what you pay for. Developing robust architectures for distributed enterprise-class computing is not easy or quick. That's why the licenses cost so much.
No, you misunderstood my point. The end-users have to pay for hundreds ot thousands of single-computer licenses because many of the current licensing practises in use do not understand the concept of gridcomputing and are not suitable for this case. They just understand the case where the software is run on one single machine. This is the case especially for simulation for the "old" industry.
The company I work for has some competence in grid computing, and we have a platform that we have tailored for some customers. There would be a gazillion of END-USER companies interested in utilizing grid/meta computing but a high percent of them are faced by the same problem: LICENSING methods which do not take the need for gridcomputing in account. Even if a computer only works as a processing slave providing computational resources, for many types of software from many vendors the end-user company still needs to
purchase similar licenses as when all the features of the software are used. This makes integrating existing software with a gridsolution just to enhance performance less favorable than buying huge amount of memory and CPU power for a single node: because then they survive with less license costs. A license for such software can today cost $20 000 per license for example. In my opinion, this practise should be changed and maybe the end-users should combine forces to make these changes happen and put some pressure on the software vendors. There are cases where companies could do their simulations hundreds of times quicker if they could just afford the licenses.
It is good that atleast mathematica has altered their licensing methods a bit. Maybe this licensing scheme could be used also when utilizing mathematica over 3rd party grid architecture. If someone from Mathematica is listening, I don't mind you contacting me.:)
If you really fear assassination, then lock yourself in the basement with a bottle of Scotch, and wait for your inflamed appendix to kill you itself.
I do not fear assassination - I just wanted to raise discussion hoping someone would have more details on HOW it is secured - they obviously must have thought about it and there might be something to learn. If the control console has any interface it is likely that tbere exists something that you can plug into it. And there probably is some interface for doing maintenance tasks. There's bunch of off-the-shelf gadgets which allow you (simulate running) about anything over anything, for example serial over wlan. IMHO, obfuscation is the only thing that guards the console unless someone can point otherwise.
You're kidding, right? Wireless access to a piece of hospital equipment? What protocol do you expect it to speak, exactly?
Instead, explain me why it is impossible? If the control console has any interface it is likely that tbere exists something that you can plug into it. And there probably is some interface for doing maintenance tasks. There's bunch of off-the-shelf gadgets which allow you (simulate running) about anything over anything, for example serial over wlan. IMHO, obfuscation is the only thing that guards the console unless someone can point otherwise.
...or else we will have a new generation of assassins who hack in the hospital network and just accidentally puncture your heart. I mean really, this is a bit scary - especially because based on my experience many doctors do not exactly know what is happening on their computer and how to keep it secure - and to make sure no-one plugs any device on their network or any software on their computer during the visit....and even if the computer is not networked, do you really think it would be impossible for someone to slip in a device providing wireless access to that machine. Has anyone noticed any articles on these issues?
...if companies have to seek for a license before they can show a functional prototype of the satellite...that's just absurd.. or maybe I have just followed this badly - but this is the impression I have got.
'This makes it apparent that not all of the benefit of open source software deployment in is the form of cost savings; much of the benefit is in terms of capabilities gained. In other words, through the use of free software, I am able to do more within my budget than I could if I only had commercial solutions available.'"
I have to plug Openchallenge as this is one key part of the message to the schools & teachers: if you have some specific need for educational software - submit it to Openchallenge - maybe it builds enough effort for making that software a reality. I believe there is lots of "niche" software needed in education too - atleast I remember crafting a few pieces of software for my mom who was a teacher - there just was not the software for these purposes, and it was possible for me (with no magic skills) to craft it during a few evenings, when I was around 14-16 years old.
This is just as childish as anyone else who has a hobby on a side note, I saw these guys launch at LDRS in Amarillo, these guys rockets kicked some SERIOUS ass!! and if you happen to watch the video's rarely destroy a rocket
True. I guess it's just too hard to imagine myself in the same league of money wasting. My original point was however, that it would have been interesting to read some bit more analytical results of the experiments. I'm sure these guys have already a lot to share on the subject. Anyway, it was dull whining from me. I guess I am having a bad hair day.:)
Wouldn't it be better and more rewarding to give the money to charity than to just blow up DV camcorders. This seems enormously childish and selfish for no gain *except* the feeling of burning money for nothing but a cheap thrill.
Exactly. It is extremely bizarre in cases like this where the thrill is obtained by just burning money and no brains or hack value (which they seem to be hunting for) involved at all. I believe this experiment could have been useful too - but atleast they failed to reveal that on the site. But naturally, it is their money and they can burn it anyway they want. As it must matter for them a lot: hack-value points from the local audience: void.
What happens when the founder of Xircom and his brother bolt a DV Camcorder to the side of a 200 lb. model rocket and press the red button
Tens of thousands of USD is blown up in the air and converted into a couple of movies which can be shown on Slashdot so that we can make insightful comments like this?
Victor Yodaiken, Finite State Machine Labs
(Member of the Board)
...these guys are just the board for the 124 member companies. So yes, it is an important consortium with significance on where embedded linux is steered.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, did you already hear that the putty ssh client (== open source) was ported for the 9210? 1.0 Beta 1 was released just yesterday. I installed it and it works better than the clients I have used so far (I had some mysteries with odd key-bindings before, for example).
PuTTY for Nokia 9200 Communicator Series
You think so? I think atleast here in Finland the trend is beginning to reverse - if you carry a communicator - like I do - that is a sign of you being just a workhorse :) If you have the luxury of not needing it - then that's a real status symbol :)
Anyway, I don't think just the PDA functionality would be enough a reason for me to carry it. But when it is at the same time your only phone, and a use anywhere SSH client then there is enough value.
Don't tell anyone, but I think I have found a secret way to control the spiders by using gnuplot...
This is the same stuff, in more serious package:
Finnish police arrest Sonera telecom executives in privacy investigation
Two high-ranking executives at Sonera Corp., Finland's main telecommunications company, were arrested Friday in an investigation into whether the company violated the privacy of its workers.
The employees are Jari Jaakkola, an executive vice-president, and Henri Harmia, who was in charge of co-ordinating Sonera's $6.2-billion merger with the Swedish company Telia. Both have been suspended from the company. The charges of violating Finland's data-security laws come just weeks after police began holding three other Sonera employees who worked with corporate security. Police are investigating whether Sonera monitored the call records of its own employees in 2000 and 2001.
Yeah - I know. I am actually from Europe myself :) The reason why I took this to instant use is that this way I can set a personal proxy for this and have full control of it. I also think it should work quicker, as the performance of the proxy is not affected by others. But surely, there is need for the commercial ones too :)
ziproxy is a forwarding (non-caching) proxy that gzips text and HTML files, and reduces the size of images by converting them to low quality JPEGs. It is intended to increase the speed for dial-up Internet connections. Most browsers support gzipped content, so Web pages appear as normal, but as they are only a fraction of their original page size, pages are much quicker to load. Even for browsers that don't support it, hints how to overcome it using SSH port forwarding are included. Images are reduced in size by an average of one third, with only marginal visible image quality loss. It should be used with inetd/xinetd, but if you can't use them, a simple replacement "netd" is provided.
And thanks for the insightful discussion - it really helped me in iterating some issues. I don't see your email in your slashdot userinfo page. If you feel like it, email me.
Thanks,
Jussi
Have you ever read the project history linked above: " Our goal was to provide a mailer that naive users could use without fear of making mistakes. We wanted to cater to users who were less interested in learning the mechanics of using electronic mail than in doing their jobs; users who perhaps had some computer anxiety". I think they have succeeded well, even now when everyone is used to having all the graphical bells and whistles my Mom - who had never used email before, learned pine quicker than outlook (she never learnt to use it, actually).
scp * account@somewhere.else.than.your.neighborhood.
Again, I have failed to say what I really mean. I am talking about licenses for software products that DO NOT SUPPORT PARALLISM and about making them support distributed processing USING 3RD party software (in this case "our" platform).
If the "calculation software" which runs the simulation is so precious then why is there real cases in where the end-user has decided to order also the "calculation code" from us replacing the code from the original product: They still use the pricy software for outputting the feed for the calculation, which is then the input for the replacement code. Doing this kinds of replacement would not be needed at all, if the software vendors for the SINGLE COMPUTER DESIGN & SIMULATION TOOLwould take this in accoun in their license terms and offer solutions to be embedded in 3RD PARTY GRIDSOLUTIONS.
Well, making you see the problem from the same view seems like similar problem than the hunt for the holy grail, but I hope in the end it is worth it :)
Yes, you fail to see the problem, because it seems I have done bad work in expressing myself. I am not talking about licensing GRID SOFTWARE. For the whole time I have been talking about enhancing the performance of existing single computer software by integrating it into a grid architecture and by this enabling it to run ONE SPESIFIC SIMULATION TYPE it provides in a distributed manner.
If this does not make you see the problem then maybe it helps realizing how bad this is by telling that companies are already developing their own software for this one spesific simulation so that they can replace the one us in the original single computer software. Do you now unerstand: everyone is loosing something.
100 Processors = 100 Licenses.
Why do people think that extreme performance software requires a discount? Most of us in the parallel computing world understand the concept of licensing.
Because: the purpose for which many of these companies would by the license - if they could use gridcomputing for example - would utilize only a minor part - only one feature - of that product. Imagine a software which you can use to build and run simulations of 100 different types. If you would like to do the calculation for only 1 type of simulation using distributed computing, is it fair that you have to pay for the whole software package: There would be still only one computer on which the interface and the whole program is is used, the rest of the computers would utilize a piece of this software to run the calculation - WITHOUT THE USER OF THE COMPUTER EVEN NOTICING THIS. Don't you see the problem?
Based on what I understood from the article they seem to think you could record someone's life by just recording everything he outputs or sees. Then, consider hundred million people who experience exactly similar events in their life and accidentally happen to output also the same content. Is their life similar? Not in my opinion. To my map someones life you should also be able to for example know what he/she feels like, etc and that may not be reflected in the output - atleast not in a form understandable for anyone else but the person him/herself. Stupid title.
No, you misunderstood my point. The end-users have to pay for hundreds ot thousands of single-computer licenses because many of the current licensing practises in use do not understand the concept of gridcomputing and are not suitable for this case. They just understand the case where the software is run on one single machine. This is the case especially for simulation for the "old" industry.
It is good that atleast mathematica has altered their licensing methods a bit. Maybe this licensing scheme could be used also when utilizing mathematica over 3rd party grid architecture. If someone from Mathematica is listening, I don't mind you contacting me. :)
I do not fear assassination - I just wanted to raise discussion hoping someone would have more details on HOW it is secured - they obviously must have thought about it and there might be something to learn. If the control console has any interface it is likely that tbere exists something that you can plug into it. And there probably is some interface for doing maintenance tasks. There's bunch of off-the-shelf gadgets which allow you (simulate running) about anything over anything, for example serial over wlan. IMHO, obfuscation is the only thing that guards the console unless someone can point otherwise.
Instead, explain me why it is impossible? If the control console has any interface it is likely that tbere exists something that you can plug into it. And there probably is some interface for doing maintenance tasks. There's bunch of off-the-shelf gadgets which allow you (simulate running) about anything over anything, for example serial over wlan. IMHO, obfuscation is the only thing that guards the console unless someone can point otherwise.
...or else we will have a new generation of assassins who hack in the hospital network and just accidentally puncture your heart. I mean really, this is a bit scary - especially because based on my experience many doctors do not exactly know what is happening on their computer and how to keep it secure - and to make sure no-one plugs any device on their network or any software on their computer during the visit....and even if the computer is not networked, do you really think it would be impossible for someone to slip in a device providing wireless access to that machine. Has anyone noticed any articles on these issues?
...if companies have to seek for a license before they can show a functional prototype of the satellite...that's just absurd.. or maybe I have just followed this badly - but this is the impression I have got.
I have to plug Openchallenge as this is one key part of the message to the schools & teachers: if you have some specific need for educational software - submit it to Openchallenge - maybe it builds enough effort for making that software a reality. I believe there is lots of "niche" software needed in education too - atleast I remember crafting a few pieces of software for my mom who was a teacher - there just was not the software for these purposes, and it was possible for me (with no magic skills) to craft it during a few evenings, when I was around 14-16 years old.
Beats me ;)
This is just as childish as anyone else who has a hobby on a side note, I saw these guys launch at LDRS in Amarillo, these guys rockets kicked some SERIOUS ass!! and if you happen to watch the video's rarely destroy a rocket
True. I guess it's just too hard to imagine myself in the same league of money wasting. My original point was however, that it would have been interesting to read some bit more analytical results of the experiments. I'm sure these guys have already a lot to share on the subject. Anyway, it was dull whining from me. I guess I am having a bad hair day. :)
Exactly. It is extremely bizarre in cases like this where the thrill is obtained by just burning money and no brains or hack value (which they seem to be hunting for) involved at all. I believe this experiment could have been useful too - but atleast they failed to reveal that on the site. But naturally, it is their money and they can burn it anyway they want. As it must matter for them a lot: hack-value points from the local audience: void.
Yeah, but where's the minesweeper icon?
Tens of thousands of USD is blown up in the air and converted into a couple of movies which can be shown on Slashdot so that we can make insightful comments like this?