My only regret is that I'm not smart enough to be able to contribute directly to a project like this, but as a Mac user, who uses a Mac because "that's what he has", I say hell yes, go for it! I don't like seeing people on any platform being victimized at all. Why ask permission? Just put on the white hats out there and gun it. I could offer some cluster server space if that helps at all.
I also think that the "get the Feds on it" idea is ridiculous. This is about doing the right thing, for the right reason, and we don't need them for that... far from it, really.
I hate what we've become but I'm at a loss for how to fix it. Ideas?
Sure. Get the US to stop targeting labor organizers through covert/overt support of dictators and right-wing death squads. When there's a Universal living wage, as a "floor" from which to proceed, many of these issues will dry right up. It isn't "solely" Big Business looking for poorer and poorer (i.e., less "organized") labor pools, it's the machinations and interventions that promote low wages, no worker safety rules, unrestricted abuse of labor, etc.
It's an American Protestant thing. They had a lot of fun in the Reagan years, killing and raping Catholic socially-conscious Church people, and murdering and "disappearing" labor rights activists, all over Latin and South America. These people are operating with no sense of basic human decency whatsoever, and they need to be stopped, every last one of them, permanently. Until then? plus ca change, plus c'est la meme choses.
In a week to ten days from today, the only question remaining at Big Blue is, how many thousands? It's sad stuff. I'm not a Dell customer, but layoffs suck, it's as simple as that.
So in order for something to be timeless, it has to be under the genre of classical and predate the 20th century?
No. His "idea" was even more absurd: That "timeless" has something to do with "youth" being familiar with it.
I hate to break it to people, but the only music that "matters" wasn't necessarily performed, originally, for the entertainment of the ruling class. The Beatles, whether one loves them or not, completely turned the notion of the Pop music "model", being written by one group (the Brill Building songwriting partnerships) and recorded by "for hire" singers, on its head, forever.
The Sixties also saw new styles and whatnot in Jazz and the interpretation of "Classical" pieces (Pierre Boulez's recordings of Stravinsky, being one beautiful example).
Predicting, today, what will be "timeless" in a century or two from now is a fool's errand.
I love Mozart and Bach (and hundreds of others) also. But the idea that Lennon/McCartney's reworkings of Pop and expansion of the music will perish with the passing of the Baby Boomers?
Please.
Speaking of "timeless," the original poster reminded me that "Ignorance can be dealt with, but "stupid" is forever." There's his "timeless" after all.:)
"cumulative curiosity" wow. I'm sure that I'm probably just "out of it" but I never looked at the ads situation like that before. You have a gift, for reasoning and writing. And as a bonus, I finally have some concrete ideas about what that "Insightful" tag is about. That's some deep stuff going on with the phrasing, etc. And, at the same time, it just resonated over here. I know I'm off topic, and I'm sorry, but as I age and get closer to the Big Who Knows, I don't miss the early days of the Web nearly as much as I wonder about the future and what kids will turn into, what young people will do with access to each other and all the information and everything and it's like I "miss" the Future, rather than the past. Sorry for the ramble; carry on
So because prices haven't bounced back in a few months, you think the strategy is wrong?
Not necessarily, but, buying on "the dips," as amateurs and people like yourself have been conditioned to do (by institutions who stand to gain, whether you win or lose) in what turns out to be a long downward movement, is like catching razor blades falling out of the sky. It might not hurt much at first, or even later, but sooner or later you bleed to death.
Anyone with half a grasp of what's been going on will already know that the response to the short-sightedness of the big banks and rating agencies has been to give away hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to the very same banks that got us into this mess. With no additional oversight, no regulatory guidance as to what is done with the cash, at all, and of course, no actual systemic changes.
Meanwhile, lenders who didn't go off the deep end on shaky investments and remained essentially "healthy" are losing business to those same banks who can keep on making shitty loans that are insured by us, the taxpayers, through the funds that were dished out to them. So the healthy get punished and the sick get rewarded. That sound like an indicator of a healthy investment environment and an imminent near-term correction to the upside to you?
If it does, get some professional advice before you piss away whatever you've managed to hang on to.
The safest way to make money, long term, is to let the others "find the bottom" and when a correction to the upside gets back 10% (minimum) of the previous losses, get in. And when P/E's become screwy compared to long term averages, get out, and let the same "others" find the market top (hint: the "top "finders" generally stay invested when the market turns, in a vain effort to chase those "paper" percentages that are usually gone for good as the market "corrects" to longer term averages... just as stupid as imagining you know where the bottom is before it has actually identified itself, by turning north). Result: you skip the long, volatile slides, and take 80% of the potential profits, cycle after cycle after cycle. Have fun catching razor blades, cowboy.
If you want to avoid being seen as a threat, it might behoove you to not dress like one.
Amen, bro'. Timothy McVeigh couldn't have put it better.
Just kiddin' on the 'Amen' because, after all, we don't want to offend the everyone-should-believe-exactly-like-me crew, do we now? Of course not.
By the way, have you ever been inside the Statue of Liberty? No? Well, there's a plaque on the thing with all this, "give us your poor, your huddling masses... blah, blah, blah... something about "yearning to be free." What a load of commie bullshit, eh? I say we change all that to: "Give us your white, your white, your white and your white." Has a nice American ring to it, doesn't it? I knew you'd like that idea.
Hey, do you know why those nutsacks strap C4 and stuff to themselves or drive the family beater into police barricades, etc? It's because they don't have F-18s and Stealth bombers. Well, fun's over, for now. See ya in Oklahoma City, cowboy.
Time Warner Chief Executive Glenn Britt on Wednesday had called Viacom's demand for a 12 percent increase in fees -- an extra $39 million on top of the estimated $300 million it pays Viacom annually -- extortion and outrageous given the recession. Viacom countered that the requested increase amounted to an extra $2.76 annually per subscriber.
Details of the deal were not immediately available.
Viacom had argued that Americans spend a fifth of their TV time watching Viacom shows but its fees made up less than 2.5 percent of the Time Warner cable bill.
Spokeswoman Kelly McAndrew said that despite ranking high in the ratings, Viacom's cable networks' average daily license fee was 65 percent lower than that of networks run by The Walt Disney Co., News Corp.'s Fox, Time Warner Inc.'s Turner Broadcasting System and Discovery Communications Inc.
Analyst Michael Nathanson with Bernstein Research said Viacom's channels had been "underpriced relative to their peers."
Hi -- I'm the director of digital communications at Time Warner Cable.
Hey Jeff, thanks for your post. Ignore the flak, there's a lot of Slashdot readers who do appreciate it when a relevant individual participates in a controversial topic. I worked for WEA, out of Burbank, in the Eighties, and met a lot of very dedicated music-loving people near the top of the chain at WEA. To be honest, I knew the same sort of dedicated people over at Columbia, Polygram, et al, so, it wasn't a Warners-only situation. Off topic: I was, however, pretty mortified when we got rolled up into the Time merger and ended up with the AOL albatross, but, nobody's perfect.:)
For some reason, I find I can download things faster than that with USENET using.nzb files...
"For some reason?"
How about the fact that a serious USENET provider, say, Giganews, for example, has enough servers and backbone access to completely saturate 10 pipes to any one end-user client, no matter whether those 'pipes' are going into dial-up, dsl, cable, or fibre?
Do you think that situation, compared to the usually flaky upload streams that are possible on most Internet users' accounts, and the "I-got-mine-to-Hell-with-everybody-else" attitude of many torrent users might have something to do with it?
I would think so. I know p2p is very useful, and I wholeheartedly support the efforts to defend it, but I never, ever, go near p2p.
[And, although I have been a Giganews client as long as I can remember, almost (in 'computer' years), I am not endorsing them or suggesting that anyone use them, at all. There are other providers with different price points and usage levels, etc, that are worth looking into.]
Re: the steno thing: Medical transcription. I worked in a rehab and would once in a while drift into the room where 5 nurses were sitting around a tape recorder, listening to doctor's reports (coming through lickety-split, and technical) and they never got near the rewind button. It was rather astonishing.
You're posting to Slashdot, my guess is that you're *not* working. Unless you're an editor;)
I can't speak for our friend AC, but, as a matter of fact I am an editor, taking a short break now, and I worked all day yesterday (Christmas Eve) until 7am this morning, then crashed and resumed at 2 in the afternoon. It is now 2 in the morning, Boxing Day. Oh, and there is no end in sight.:)
I use dsl in Minneapolis from Qwest (no landline, but an imaginary 'number' for them to associate my account with), and had Comcast cable Internet in Dakota County without the TV part of the gear or the bill. Ironically there was an 'open' Comcast wireless point somewhere in the area that had much higher throughput than I did. Go figure, so I shuffled my downloads (300 GB/month) onto the open line and kept Comcast's crappy (but bought and paid for) service for Vonage and the more mundane stuff. (And, yes, I would check the open line through a second computer and there was always plenty of bandwidth even with 10 pipes open full tilt through Giganews, etc. I was not interested in depriving someone else of their use at all.)
Your post hits it right on the head, but Socialism? Maybe partly, but certainly not 'utter.' Not about semantics, either, because if we look at the 'model' for the redistribution of wealth, we see privatizing of the profit, socializing of the 'debt.' Little people pay, big people profit. Government on the side of the corporation-centered 'national' business model? Looks like fascism, in a way, doesn't it? Maybe not, maybe the politicians got these crazy ideas all on their own. I'd be skeptical of an analysis that depended on that.
I'm splitting hairs, I realize that, an your post was the first one, as far as I can tell, that really nailed the reality of this thing as being the opposite of the so-called raison d'etre for the law, in the first place.
I'm sorry to see this happening in Canada. I lived there for 30 years, on all three coasts, and it is just the most wonderful place. I miss it, and the people, more than you probably know.
But, you know, you folks aren't as poorly-educated as we are down here. And I've seen a few bad ideas, come.. and go, and I have faith that the Canadians will ride this out and do the right thing.
When the Canadian Content laws came out, for TV, as an American living in Canada, I was 150% for the idea of limiting US hegemony of the airwaves and eyeballs up there. All the way in on that.
The problem here and there is partly the conduits wanting to turn the whole web into a non-interactive closed circuit version of "TV" and this model that they're proposing, is like putting the cart before the horse, in a way, if you think about it. Someone needs to remind Ottawa that the web is about independent education, and having an informed populace that can make better and better decisions for the Country, AND the people in, going forward.
And going 'backward' into a 1970s TV model, is not forward, it's baloney, no matter jhow it's sliced.
I don't know. I'm kinda surprised somebody hasn't just handed a crackhead an electrical tape-wrapped.38 and said, "The guy with the briefcase, and the other 8-ball is right here". At some point, somebody's gonna wake up, and just snap.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression is that the "administrator" setting of an account allowed sudo access. That's a little different than running as root. Is there something else going on in the Mac userland?
Nope. You have it right. Admin is just a 'group' that the user/owner can be a member of, and it 'can' get privilege escalation. Sure. But the best defense against ANY process trying to piggyback onto to an admin account's escalation (during an install, etc) is to defeat the 'timestamp' on the escalation (su or sudo), itself. This is the same in Unix and all the Linuxes out there, as well as the Unix known as OS X.
With a timestamp of zero, any process polling the System with a 'do-we-have-root/access', etc is given a boolean 'no.' In combination with Little Snitch (somewhat similar to blackICE, as far as 'phoning home' goes) it keeps control in the hands of the user/owner/admin.
On the other hand, smart people make the stupidest mistakes, and if we add in a 'fatigue' factor, well, anything is possible. heheh.
But, if a script needs either Internet access or privilege escalation to do harm, then those 'conditions' can be put entirely off the table. Most Mac users, 'smug' or not, employ neither of those defenses. And all I can say is: Too bad for them.
Apple's typo in a shell script associated with one of the iTunes updates was all the proof-of-concept we needed, as far as vulnerabilities go. But that was a self-destructive (data loss) situation, and most script/botnet people aren't concerned with that, as an outcome.
The healthiest attitude is to assume that everyone who is 'not me' is an adversary. Kinda like having a mindset that mirrors the default 'deny, allow' that makes Apache such a gas.
No fancy trading will ever come close to insider trading my friend.
I get your point, and agree,but...front-running will give some insider trading a run for it's money. I actually see it as a form of insider trading, but, technically, it is a different crime, or at least, 'label' for an activity leading to the same crime (fraud).
When you mentioned, early in your post, about the lunch hour 'lull', had to laugh, because that's what reminded me of front-running.
Lunch hour at Broad & Wall is the best time to see all the 'floor' people from inside, out sitting on fountains, or whatever, hammering away at their laptops. Those usually aren't 'Hi-how-ya?' notes to old Uncle Mort that are getting hammered out. If I understood real-time packet-sniffing, that's the first place I'd go.
I'm kidding, sort of. I had an opportunity to profit from ahead-of-the-Market news, once, and took a pass. I was at editor at Merrill, in St Paul (No, not ex of 'Lynch', different company), and, around 3 in the afternoon a lady dropped a rush-rush press release (wide) and a dupe, that was headed for the SEC, on 'the close.' Needed a serious rewrite, but the gist of it was, "Apple Computer, Inc announces that an internal investigation has revealed possible irregularities in the pricing of Stock Options". As soon I saw it, I thought, "That's a 5 point drop, easy."
I was way off; it was a '7' (It might have dipped further before recovering a bit, on the overnights). But the thought crossed my mind to waltz into the deserted cafeteria or outside, for a smoke, and borrow anybody's cell phone for a call to a couple guys with serious coin. But it simply was not worth the risk, to me.
On two separate occasions (a couple of years of activity) I made serious-assed money, consistently, the 'sort of' old-fashioned way: Using my head, and looking at what seemed likely to occur, and soon. That was tremendously satisfying, in a way that 'dirty' money (not to mention the risk it carries), just isn't.
I know that book, but Apple doesn't use anything like the original implementation of the BeOS file system, BFS, at all. OS X doesn't even support a drive formatted that way. BFS runs with i-nodes, and its version of the B*-tree is the original version, not the Apple-modified b-tree at all.
And Apple, as far as I know, has the only OS that, if you add or delete or even rename sa single file in a directory, will rewrite the entire list of files to simply add or delete the actual focused target.
I don't understand what you mean by this. Could you please elaborate?
I'll look into the delete/add/edit process again, before reply directly to your query.
First, before I get anyone messed up, the HFS+ creation of Apple's that is involved is the CNID not, as I wrote, cnode. The CNID is trying to accomplish the same thing as the Unix inode, so I always have misnamed the Apple creation as cnode. Sorry about that, but, except for the nomenclature, it changes nothing.
Here's the deal with my original post and your question: Unix directories (the file that has the list of included files) only contains the file names and inodes of the files. Every device (drive) has one list of all the inodes on the drive. So finding a file only requires multiplying the node times the default inode block size, and the 'result' is a pointer to the location of the file itself. One disc operation, no matter how many files or nested directories exist on the device. Simple, one search, one disk I/O.
With Apple's HFS+, this is not the case, at all. Apple uses a thing called a Binary Tree, but it's their own 'version' of the same 'tree' concept that is on windows and Unix. It has three 'nodes', with the actual file info (name, last modified, etc) at the end of each file in the 'leaf' node.
If we think of the 'tree' as it is usually portrayed graphically, as in the tree view of Windows Explorer, it is left-to-right. This comes into play in a big way. In the HFS+ file system all the folders/directories have to be pre-sorted. Why? Because the node at the top simply points 'down' to the leaf node that contains the info, and the 'pointer' for every folder/directory on the disc MUST POINT to the exact midway (middle) of the folder, so that the location process can start whittling down the location using compare half list, if located, compare next smaller half list, and on and on,until the file is actually located. That's the binary nature of the B-tree. But the huge drawback is that any time a file is deleted or added to ANY directory/folder, the B-tree for that folder and all parent folders has to be redrawn. Why? Because changing anything in the list has the effect of changing the real location of the list half-way point, and the pre-sorted requirement forces the OS to rewrite the directories to 'balance' the new reality as far as where all the halfway points are.
Obviously, that looks like trouble, so Apple came up with a that could be a crazy long search process, so Apple added another file to the drive root called a Catalog File at block 2 on the drive. The catalogFile is grouped into nodes that each have a block size that mirrors the block size of the disk's original formatting, and contains all the info as far as where node begins with a 14-byte descriptor, which contains information about what kind of node (index, leaf), how many records it has, where it is in the B-tree, where the next and previous nodes are, etc. It needs this info for two reasons: One, to cut down on the time that a B-tree only search might require on a complex drive, and two, to act as a reference when it came to balance those CNIDs and B-trees after any delete or addition of a file, anywhere.
Let's pause, because right here, even without more info, it seems obvious that a lot more steps of some kind are going to come into play, compared to the maximum one disc operation required in Unix. And it is the case. OSX X tries to cache a lot of this catalogFile info in RAM, as a helper, but a deep search, or any operation on a deeply nested file, will always result in numerous trips back and forth to the extents of the Catalog. Apple has stated that, on a drive with 500,000 files, the '
Your post is modded 'Informative', and it is. But, this isn't directed at you, not by a long-shot, because it is so common here. "Dumb" is analogous to 'stupid', and stupid is, partly, about having the info or memory of something, but acting as if that info/memory/experience didn't exist. That would be stupid, in my book.
But when someone needs to be 'informed' of something, they are in a state of 'ignorance', not 'stupid.' I realize that' ignorant' sounds like a slam or put-down, but for all persons with lack of knowledge re: x, the Default is ignorant. We cannot, as human beings, know that which is unknown to us, by design or default, take your pick.
I read many Slashdot articles, specifically, because I know my 'default' state regarding many topics, and I want to do something about that, so I get informed, and am no longer ignorant (hopefully) regarding topic x. The pre/post on that is ignorant/informed. I don't see 'stupid' or 'dumb' in there, at all, do you, does anyone?
On the other hand, if I already know that I don't know anything about topic y, and I would like to learn about it, but when seeing topic y mentioned in a list of topics inside today's Slashdot, and having time to read, don't go there to get 'informed', well, for me, personally, that would be 'dumb' and if the topic was about an issue that I needed to know about in order to accomplish a real world task, it would also be 'stupid.'
Why is it desirable to be able to drag music to a folder, but totally unacceptable to drag it to the iTunes library window?
Okay, I understand that thinking, and agree, but how about the fact that the 'import' via drag and drop becomes the foreground thread in the iTunes process, and all other threads in the same process are instantly 'bg'd' AND put on hold? Try selecting anything in your iTunes window when the 'adding to library' alert is up. What happened to multitasking there? Just asking.
And Apple, as far as I know, has the only OS that, if you add or delete or even rename sa single file in a directory, will rewrite the entire list of files to simply add or delete the actual focused target.
I don't understand what you mean by this. Could you please elaborate?
Hi. I'd be happy to. But I just woke at the crack of Noon and I want to re-verify that the same process is happening, for the same reason, in Leopard, 10.5.5,here. In the meantime, any one of us on the Mac OS can see huge discrepancies between core [Unix] and GUI management of files.
The simplest illustration is to make a duplicate of a folder containing files one wants to delete, and selecting either all of them or, in a real world situation, only the files that we actually want to delete, and using the Finder mechanism (Command-delete, followed by Command-shift-delete) to Move to Trash, and Empty. Watch what happens in the GUI.
We'll see an alert that says something about 'Preparing to Empty Trash', which is rather absurd, since the Apple default command for Empty Trash has just been invoked, by the User, and this alert is basically saying 'executing the command.' So, why don't we get a similar redundant 'alert' following each and every user-authorized process? (Don't try to answer that, of course, because logic doesn't enter into it, but a sort of 'intermittent' Apple version of logic is clearly at work here.). Then, of course, if there's a lot of files we'll see the "preparing" alert, and a graphic representation of the system 'counting' down the the number of files to delete, followed by another alert window (after the Empty Trash command is then being executed) which shows the number of files being deleted in a 'countdown' sort of manner. When the process is done, the alert window closes.
Now. Using the duplicate of the folder that you made before the test, open the Terminal, do a rm -R followed by a space, of course, and then simply drag and release the icons of the same files or folders and files to anywhere in the Terminal window, and hit the Return key. When the process completes we find ourselves back at the 'prompt' as always. Now ask yourself, why did one process take so long compared to the other, on an identical number of 'targets'?
The answer to that question is: That's the difference between using the cnode-based Finder file manager, and a bash or tcsh process, which, like every file manager in Unix/Linux, for forty years now, uses the inode for file management.
An argument can be made that what if a newbie Mac user 'accidentally' selected a bunch of files, chose move to trash and then selected Empty Trash, and didn't really want to do any of those things? Wouldn't having an alert give them a point where they could intervene and kill the process? The answer to that used to be Yes, but I'm not so sure about even THAT, these days, and besides, why should the overwhelming majority of users be hampered, time-wise, by a process that could only possibly be useful in a one-in-a-million number of process events, at best? (I heard a rumor that, to speed up their hackneyed file management, Apple has decided not to actually open and close files before clobbering the original, and THEN, writing the 'new' tmp file to disk, meaning that if anything goes wrong in the 'write', the original data is already gone, and that's a violation of Unix methods AND Apple's own API)
I'm open to answers, or, more likely, comments or opinions on this, but after years of seeing this behavior, I chose to keep a terminal open, to be used any time files needed to be moved, copied or deleted in some sort of 'bulk' number. There's always the interactive (rm -i) version of the rm process in the shell, for people who want to go and 'bulk' dump files one-by-one with a y/n choice on each and every file. I've never used that option, and in all my years I only lost data once, and that was a 72 hour session that ended when I realized I'd selected all the
iTunes doesn't use Safari, it just looks web-like. It's custom rendering.
Okay, I've been on Apple gear since '79. and I have used DEC, IBM, other big PC brands, a SPARCStation at one time, and had Linux loaded on Titanium PowerBooks, etc. I am not an expert on anything, I admit that. But, the Finder, and iTunes, are using cnodes to try to figure out where things are, and Finder, the file manager, scatters little breadcrumbs called DS_store files, that supposedly remember window position and size, and they have these huge indexes all over the place, hooked into Spotlight, and you want to know something?
A simple UNIX inode-oriented file manager (like say, Xfile from Rixstep) will absolutely slaughter the Finder and all its friends at the same tasks. It's not even close. But so what? I used Win 98 on an 8-yr old machine hooked to a server that was so ancient the single monitor for it made you think you were stone cold drunk in terms of vision, on a military project... and i could find files faster than on any Mac at the time. Period. And one other thing: That old Compaq Win98, ancient server system didn't need so much as a reboot in the 22 months I was on it. Not one.
Meanwhile, on an Aluminum PowerBook, running Leopard 10.5.5, I get a spinning ball if I so much as move the mouse within the iTunes scroll bar. And Apple, as far as I know, has the only OS that, if you add or delete or even rename sa single file in a directory, will rewrite the entire list of files to simply add or delete the actual focused target. That is nothing short of insane. They have everybody brainwashed into thinking they they need twin quadcores to do the same operations we were doing in OS 7 with a minus factor less resources and hardware back then.
I do NOT care how wonky either one of these releases is. I do NOT own an iPod, and I will never be stupid enough to buy an iPhone. All I want iTunes or any file manager related to audio tracks to do is this: Play the fucking music, and get the fuck out of the way.
How difficult is that? Answer: it's not.
I realize that, as ironic as it is, I will get modded Flamebait or whatever, just like the AC up there, that I happen to be in 100% agreement with, DESPITE having admitted to having invested more time and money in Apple gear, year-in year-out, than many of the more normal or 'smarter' people here.
Apple made a decision to support carbon/OS 9 'legacy' to avoid alienating the handful of developers that were still writing for the Mac, back when 10.0.1 was released. It was an understandable [no balls] choice but it was still totally wrong wrong wrong. And today with a couple gigs of RAM, on an OS that was installed to a completely wiped, multipass-overwritten zeroed-out internal drive, I get spinning beach balls for having the audacity (no pun intended) to rename a file in the iTunes window, or click in the scroll bar, in iTunes, and I call Bullshit. Amarok? Maybe a little buggy? That sounds like a walk in the park to me. Bring it on, I'll go through the betas and write little bug reports or whatever is necessary to help them make a decent entry into the market on the Mac, no problemo. Enough is enough, and I'm in.
I apologize for typos or a missing word here or there. It's the chemo, no kidding, and I just have a limit on how much precious time I can afford to 'waste' on revisions towards turning out quality text. And that really sucks big time, when you care about quality. I don't how Apple sleeps, because I'm losing sleep, and they're costing me time on top of time.
Slashdot Mirror
My only regret is that I'm not smart enough to be able to contribute directly to a project like this, but as a Mac user, who uses a Mac because "that's what he has", I say hell yes, go for it! I don't like seeing people on any platform being victimized at all. Why ask permission? Just put on the white hats out there and gun it. I could offer some cluster server space if that helps at all.
I also think that the "get the Feds on it" idea is ridiculous. This is about doing the right thing, for the right reason, and we don't need them for that... far from it, really.
Sure. Get the US to stop targeting labor organizers through covert/overt support of dictators and right-wing death squads. When there's a Universal living wage, as a "floor" from which to proceed, many of these issues will dry right up. It isn't "solely" Big Business looking for poorer and poorer (i.e., less "organized") labor pools, it's the machinations and interventions that promote low wages, no worker safety rules, unrestricted abuse of labor, etc.
It's an American Protestant thing. They had a lot of fun in the Reagan years, killing and raping Catholic socially-conscious Church people, and murdering and "disappearing" labor rights activists, all over Latin and South America. These people are operating with no sense of basic human decency whatsoever, and they need to be stopped, every last one of them, permanently. Until then? plus ca change, plus c'est la meme choses.
In a week to ten days from today, the only question remaining at Big Blue is, how many thousands? It's sad stuff. I'm not a Dell customer, but layoffs suck, it's as simple as that.
No. His "idea" was even more absurd: That "timeless" has something to do with "youth" being familiar with it.
I hate to break it to people, but the only music that "matters" wasn't necessarily performed, originally, for the entertainment of the ruling class. The Beatles, whether one loves them or not, completely turned the notion of the Pop music "model", being written by one group (the Brill Building songwriting partnerships) and recorded by "for hire" singers, on its head, forever.
The Sixties also saw new styles and whatnot in Jazz and the interpretation of "Classical" pieces (Pierre Boulez's recordings of Stravinsky, being one beautiful example).
Predicting, today, what will be "timeless" in a century or two from now is a fool's errand.
I love Mozart and Bach (and hundreds of others) also. But the idea that Lennon/McCartney's reworkings of Pop and expansion of the music will perish with the passing of the Baby Boomers?
Please.
Speaking of "timeless," the original poster reminded me that "Ignorance can be dealt with, but "stupid" is forever." There's his "timeless" after all. :)
"cumulative curiosity" wow. I'm sure that I'm probably just "out of it" but I never looked at the ads situation like that before. You have a gift, for reasoning and writing. And as a bonus, I finally have some concrete ideas about what that "Insightful" tag is about. That's some deep stuff going on with the phrasing, etc. And, at the same time, it just resonated over here. I know I'm off topic, and I'm sorry, but as I age and get closer to the Big Who Knows, I don't miss the early days of the Web nearly as much as I wonder about the future and what kids will turn into, what young people will do with access to each other and all the information and everything and it's like I "miss" the Future, rather than the past. Sorry for the ramble; carry on
Not necessarily, but, buying on "the dips," as amateurs and people like yourself have been conditioned to do (by institutions who stand to gain, whether you win or lose) in what turns out to be a long downward movement, is like catching razor blades falling out of the sky. It might not hurt much at first, or even later, but sooner or later you bleed to death.
Anyone with half a grasp of what's been going on will already know that the response to the short-sightedness of the big banks and rating agencies has been to give away hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to the very same banks that got us into this mess. With no additional oversight, no regulatory guidance as to what is done with the cash, at all, and of course, no actual systemic changes.
Meanwhile, lenders who didn't go off the deep end on shaky investments and remained essentially "healthy" are losing business to those same banks who can keep on making shitty loans that are insured by us, the taxpayers, through the funds that were dished out to them. So the healthy get punished and the sick get rewarded. That sound like an indicator of a healthy investment environment and an imminent near-term correction to the upside to you?
If it does, get some professional advice before you piss away whatever you've managed to hang on to.
The safest way to make money, long term, is to let the others "find the bottom" and when a correction to the upside gets back 10% (minimum) of the previous losses, get in. And when P/E's become screwy compared to long term averages, get out, and let the same "others" find the market top (hint: the "top "finders" generally stay invested when the market turns, in a vain effort to chase those "paper" percentages that are usually gone for good as the market "corrects" to longer term averages ... just as stupid as imagining you know where the bottom is before it has actually identified itself, by turning north). Result: you skip the long, volatile slides, and take 80% of the potential profits, cycle after cycle after cycle. Have fun catching razor blades, cowboy.
Amen, bro'. Timothy McVeigh couldn't have put it better.
Just kiddin' on the 'Amen' because, after all, we don't want to offend the everyone-should-believe-exactly-like-me crew, do we now? Of course not.
By the way, have you ever been inside the Statue of Liberty? No? Well, there's a plaque on the thing with all this, "give us your poor, your huddling masses... blah, blah, blah... something about "yearning to be free." What a load of commie bullshit, eh? I say we change all that to: "Give us your white, your white, your white and your white." Has a nice American ring to it, doesn't it? I knew you'd like that idea.
Hey, do you know why those nutsacks strap C4 and stuff to themselves or drive the family beater into police barricades, etc? It's because they don't have F-18s and Stealth bombers. Well, fun's over, for now. See ya in Oklahoma City, cowboy.
This, from http://www.salon.com/wires/ap/business/2008/12/31/D95E5EIG1_viacom_time_warner_cable/index.html [salon.com] (and AP Wire, probably):
Hey Jeff, thanks for your post. Ignore the flak, there's a lot of Slashdot readers who do appreciate it when a relevant individual participates in a controversial topic. I worked for WEA, out of Burbank, in the Eighties, and met a lot of very dedicated music-loving people near the top of the chain at WEA. To be honest, I knew the same sort of dedicated people over at Columbia, Polygram, et al, so, it wasn't a Warners-only situation. Off topic: I was, however, pretty mortified when we got rolled up into the Time merger and ended up with the AOL albatross, but, nobody's perfect. :)
"For some reason?"
How about the fact that a serious USENET provider, say, Giganews, for example, has enough servers and backbone access to completely saturate 10 pipes to any one end-user client, no matter whether those 'pipes' are going into dial-up, dsl, cable, or fibre?
Do you think that situation, compared to the usually flaky upload streams that are possible on most Internet users' accounts, and the "I-got-mine-to-Hell-with-everybody-else" attitude of many torrent users might have something to do with it?
I would think so. I know p2p is very useful, and I wholeheartedly support the efforts to defend it, but I never, ever, go near p2p.
[And, although I have been a Giganews client as long as I can remember, almost (in 'computer' years), I am not endorsing them or suggesting that anyone use them, at all. There are other providers with different price points and usage levels, etc, that are worth looking into.]
Re: the steno thing: Medical transcription. I worked in a rehab and would once in a while drift into the room where 5 nurses were sitting around a tape recorder, listening to doctor's reports (coming through lickety-split, and technical) and they never got near the rewind button. It was rather astonishing.
I can't speak for our friend AC, but, as a matter of fact I am an editor, taking a short break now, and I worked all day yesterday (Christmas Eve) until 7am this morning, then crashed and resumed at 2 in the afternoon. It is now 2 in the morning, Boxing Day. Oh, and there is no end in sight. :)
a company gets its advice from one of those IANAL guys.
I use dsl in Minneapolis from Qwest (no landline, but an imaginary 'number' for them to associate my account with), and had Comcast cable Internet in Dakota County without the TV part of the gear or the bill. Ironically there was an 'open' Comcast wireless point somewhere in the area that had much higher throughput than I did. Go figure, so I shuffled my downloads (300 GB/month) onto the open line and kept Comcast's crappy (but bought and paid for) service for Vonage and the more mundane stuff. (And, yes, I would check the open line through a second computer and there was always plenty of bandwidth even with 10 pipes open full tilt through Giganews, etc. I was not interested in depriving someone else of their use at all.)
Your post hits it right on the head, but Socialism? Maybe partly, but certainly not 'utter.' Not about semantics, either, because if we look at the 'model' for the redistribution of wealth, we see privatizing of the profit, socializing of the 'debt.' Little people pay, big people profit. Government on the side of the corporation-centered 'national' business model? Looks like fascism, in a way, doesn't it? Maybe not, maybe the politicians got these crazy ideas all on their own. I'd be skeptical of an analysis that depended on that.
I'm splitting hairs, I realize that, an your post was the first one, as far as I can tell, that really nailed the reality of this thing as being the opposite of the so-called raison d'etre for the law, in the first place.
I'm sorry to see this happening in Canada. I lived there for 30 years, on all three coasts, and it is just the most wonderful place. I miss it, and the people, more than you probably know.
But, you know, you folks aren't as poorly-educated as we are down here. And I've seen a few bad ideas, come.. and go, and I have faith that the Canadians will ride this out and do the right thing.
When the Canadian Content laws came out, for TV, as an American living in Canada, I was 150% for the idea of limiting US hegemony of the airwaves and eyeballs up there. All the way in on that.
The problem here and there is partly the conduits wanting to turn the whole web into a non-interactive closed circuit version of "TV" and this model that they're proposing, is like putting the cart before the horse, in a way, if you think about it. Someone needs to remind Ottawa that the web is about independent education, and having an informed populace that can make better and better decisions for the Country, AND the people in, going forward.
And going 'backward' into a 1970s TV model, is not forward, it's baloney, no matter jhow it's sliced.
That, or maybe an Apple Aluminum keyboard.
I don't know. I'm kinda surprised somebody hasn't just handed a crackhead an electrical tape-wrapped .38 and said, "The guy with the briefcase, and the other 8-ball is right here". At some point, somebody's gonna wake up, and just snap.
Nope. You have it right. Admin is just a 'group' that the user/owner can be a member of, and it 'can' get privilege escalation. Sure. But the best defense against ANY process trying to piggyback onto to an admin account's escalation (during an install, etc) is to defeat the 'timestamp' on the escalation (su or sudo), itself. This is the same in Unix and all the Linuxes out there, as well as the Unix known as OS X.
With a timestamp of zero, any process polling the System with a 'do-we-have-root/access', etc is given a boolean 'no.' In combination with Little Snitch (somewhat similar to blackICE, as far as 'phoning home' goes) it keeps control in the hands of the user/owner/admin.
On the other hand, smart people make the stupidest mistakes, and if we add in a 'fatigue' factor, well, anything is possible. heheh.
But, if a script needs either Internet access or privilege escalation to do harm, then those 'conditions' can be put entirely off the table. Most Mac users, 'smug' or not, employ neither of those defenses. And all I can say is: Too bad for them.
Apple's typo in a shell script associated with one of the iTunes updates was all the proof-of-concept we needed, as far as vulnerabilities go. But that was a self-destructive (data loss) situation, and most script/botnet people aren't concerned with that, as an outcome.
The healthiest attitude is to assume that everyone who is 'not me' is an adversary. Kinda like having a mindset that mirrors the default 'deny, allow' that makes Apache such a gas.
I get your point, and agree,but...front-running will give some insider trading a run for it's money. I actually see it as a form of insider trading, but, technically, it is a different crime, or at least, 'label' for an activity leading to the same crime (fraud).
When you mentioned, early in your post, about the lunch hour 'lull', had to laugh, because that's what reminded me of front-running.
Lunch hour at Broad & Wall is the best time to see all the 'floor' people from inside, out sitting on fountains, or whatever, hammering away at their laptops. Those usually aren't 'Hi-how-ya?' notes to old Uncle Mort that are getting hammered out. If I understood real-time packet-sniffing, that's the first place I'd go.
I'm kidding, sort of. I had an opportunity to profit from ahead-of-the-Market news, once, and took a pass. I was at editor at Merrill, in St Paul (No, not ex of 'Lynch', different company), and, around 3 in the afternoon a lady dropped a rush-rush press release (wide) and a dupe, that was headed for the SEC, on 'the close.' Needed a serious rewrite, but the gist of it was, "Apple Computer, Inc announces that an internal investigation has revealed possible irregularities in the pricing of Stock Options". As soon I saw it, I thought, "That's a 5 point drop, easy."
I was way off; it was a '7' (It might have dipped further before recovering a bit, on the overnights). But the thought crossed my mind to waltz into the deserted cafeteria or outside, for a smoke, and borrow anybody's cell phone for a call to a couple guys with serious coin. But it simply was not worth the risk, to me.
On two separate occasions (a couple of years of activity) I made serious-assed money, consistently, the 'sort of' old-fashioned way: Using my head, and looking at what seemed likely to occur, and soon. That was tremendously satisfying, in a way that 'dirty' money (not to mention the risk it carries), just isn't.
I know that book, but Apple doesn't use anything like the original implementation of the BeOS file system, BFS, at all. OS X doesn't even support a drive formatted that way. BFS runs with i-nodes, and its version of the B*-tree is the original version, not the Apple-modified b-tree at all.
First, before I get anyone messed up, the HFS+ creation of Apple's that is involved is the CNID not, as I wrote, cnode. The CNID is trying to accomplish the same thing as the Unix inode, so I always have misnamed the Apple creation as cnode. Sorry about that, but, except for the nomenclature, it changes nothing.
Here's the deal with my original post and your question: Unix directories (the file that has the list of included files) only contains the file names and inodes of the files. Every device (drive) has one list of all the inodes on the drive. So finding a file only requires multiplying the node times the default inode block size, and the 'result' is a pointer to the location of the file itself. One disc operation, no matter how many files or nested directories exist on the device. Simple, one search, one disk I/O.
With Apple's HFS+, this is not the case, at all. Apple uses a thing called a Binary Tree, but it's their own 'version' of the same 'tree' concept that is on windows and Unix. It has three 'nodes', with the actual file info (name, last modified, etc) at the end of each file in the 'leaf' node.
If we think of the 'tree' as it is usually portrayed graphically, as in the tree view of Windows Explorer, it is left-to-right. This comes into play in a big way. In the HFS+ file system all the folders/directories have to be pre-sorted. Why? Because the node at the top simply points 'down' to the leaf node that contains the info, and the 'pointer' for every folder/directory on the disc MUST POINT to the exact midway (middle) of the folder, so that the location process can start whittling down the location using compare half list, if located, compare next smaller half list, and on and on,until the file is actually located. That's the binary nature of the B-tree. But the huge drawback is that any time a file is deleted or added to ANY directory/folder, the B-tree for that folder and all parent folders has to be redrawn. Why? Because changing anything in the list has the effect of changing the real location of the list half-way point, and the pre-sorted requirement forces the OS to rewrite the directories to 'balance' the new reality as far as where all the halfway points are.
Obviously, that looks like trouble, so Apple came up with a that could be a crazy long search process, so Apple added another file to the drive root called a Catalog File at block 2 on the drive. The catalogFile is grouped into nodes that each have a block size that mirrors the block size of the disk's original formatting, and contains all the info as far as where node begins with a 14-byte descriptor, which contains information about what kind of node (index, leaf), how many records it has, where it is in the B-tree, where the next and previous nodes are, etc. It needs this info for two reasons: One, to cut down on the time that a B-tree only search might require on a complex drive, and two, to act as a reference when it came to balance those CNIDs and B-trees after any delete or addition of a file, anywhere.
Let's pause, because right here, even without more info, it seems obvious that a lot more steps of some kind are going to come into play, compared to the maximum one disc operation required in Unix. And it is the case. OSX X tries to cache a lot of this catalogFile info in RAM, as a helper, but a deep search, or any operation on a deeply nested file, will always result in numerous trips back and forth to the extents of the Catalog. Apple has stated that, on a drive with 500,000 files, the '
Your post is modded 'Informative', and it is. But, this isn't directed at you, not by a long-shot, because it is so common here. "Dumb" is analogous to 'stupid', and stupid is, partly, about having the info or memory of something, but acting as if that info/memory/experience didn't exist. That would be stupid, in my book.
But when someone needs to be 'informed' of something, they are in a state of 'ignorance', not 'stupid.' I realize that' ignorant' sounds like a slam or put-down, but for all persons with lack of knowledge re: x, the Default is ignorant. We cannot, as human beings, know that which is unknown to us, by design or default, take your pick.
I read many Slashdot articles, specifically, because I know my 'default' state regarding many topics, and I want to do something about that, so I get informed, and am no longer ignorant (hopefully) regarding topic x. The pre/post on that is ignorant/informed. I don't see 'stupid' or 'dumb' in there, at all, do you, does anyone?
On the other hand, if I already know that I don't know anything about topic y, and I would like to learn about it, but when seeing topic y mentioned in a list of topics inside today's Slashdot, and having time to read, don't go there to get 'informed', well, for me, personally, that would be 'dumb' and if the topic was about an issue that I needed to know about in order to accomplish a real world task, it would also be 'stupid.'
Okay, I understand that thinking, and agree, but how about the fact that the 'import' via drag and drop becomes the foreground thread in the iTunes process, and all other threads in the same process are instantly 'bg'd' AND put on hold? Try selecting anything in your iTunes window when the 'adding to library' alert is up. What happened to multitasking there? Just asking.
Hi. I'd be happy to. But I just woke at the crack of Noon and I want to re-verify that the same process is happening, for the same reason, in Leopard, 10.5.5,here. In the meantime, any one of us on the Mac OS can see huge discrepancies between core [Unix] and GUI management of files.
The simplest illustration is to make a duplicate of a folder containing files one wants to delete, and selecting either all of them or, in a real world situation, only the files that we actually want to delete, and using the Finder mechanism (Command-delete, followed by Command-shift-delete) to Move to Trash, and Empty. Watch what happens in the GUI.
We'll see an alert that says something about 'Preparing to Empty Trash', which is rather absurd, since the Apple default command for Empty Trash has just been invoked, by the User, and this alert is basically saying 'executing the command.' So, why don't we get a similar redundant 'alert' following each and every user-authorized process? (Don't try to answer that, of course, because logic doesn't enter into it, but a sort of 'intermittent' Apple version of logic is clearly at work here.). Then, of course, if there's a lot of files we'll see the "preparing" alert, and a graphic representation of the system 'counting' down the the number of files to delete, followed by another alert window (after the Empty Trash command is then being executed) which shows the number of files being deleted in a 'countdown' sort of manner. When the process is done, the alert window closes.
Now. Using the duplicate of the folder that you made before the test, open the Terminal, do a rm -R followed by a space, of course, and then simply drag and release the icons of the same files or folders and files to anywhere in the Terminal window, and hit the Return key. When the process completes we find ourselves back at the 'prompt' as always. Now ask yourself, why did one process take so long compared to the other, on an identical number of 'targets'?
The answer to that question is: That's the difference between using the cnode-based Finder file manager, and a bash or tcsh process, which, like every file manager in Unix/Linux, for forty years now, uses the inode for file management.
An argument can be made that what if a newbie Mac user 'accidentally' selected a bunch of files, chose move to trash and then selected Empty Trash, and didn't really want to do any of those things? Wouldn't having an alert give them a point where they could intervene and kill the process? The answer to that used to be Yes, but I'm not so sure about even THAT, these days, and besides, why should the overwhelming majority of users be hampered, time-wise, by a process that could only possibly be useful in a one-in-a-million number of process events, at best? (I heard a rumor that, to speed up their hackneyed file management, Apple has decided not to actually open and close files before clobbering the original, and THEN, writing the 'new' tmp file to disk, meaning that if anything goes wrong in the 'write', the original data is already gone, and that's a violation of Unix methods AND Apple's own API)
I'm open to answers, or, more likely, comments or opinions on this, but after years of seeing this behavior, I chose to keep a terminal open, to be used any time files needed to be moved, copied or deleted in some sort of 'bulk' number. There's always the interactive (rm -i) version of the rm process in the shell, for people who want to go and 'bulk' dump files one-by-one with a y/n choice on each and every file. I've never used that option, and in all my years I only lost data once, and that was a 72 hour session that ended when I realized I'd selected all the
Okay, I've been on Apple gear since '79. and I have used DEC, IBM, other big PC brands, a SPARCStation at one time, and had Linux loaded on Titanium PowerBooks, etc. I am not an expert on anything, I admit that. But, the Finder, and iTunes, are using cnodes to try to figure out where things are, and Finder, the file manager, scatters little breadcrumbs called DS_store files, that supposedly remember window position and size, and they have these huge indexes all over the place, hooked into Spotlight, and you want to know something?
A simple UNIX inode-oriented file manager (like say, Xfile from Rixstep) will absolutely slaughter the Finder and all its friends at the same tasks. It's not even close. But so what? I used Win 98 on an 8-yr old machine hooked to a server that was so ancient the single monitor for it made you think you were stone cold drunk in terms of vision, on a military project... and i could find files faster than on any Mac at the time. Period. And one other thing: That old Compaq Win98, ancient server system didn't need so much as a reboot in the 22 months I was on it. Not one.
Meanwhile, on an Aluminum PowerBook, running Leopard 10.5.5, I get a spinning ball if I so much as move the mouse within the iTunes scroll bar. And Apple, as far as I know, has the only OS that, if you add or delete or even rename sa single file in a directory, will rewrite the entire list of files to simply add or delete the actual focused target. That is nothing short of insane. They have everybody brainwashed into thinking they they need twin quadcores to do the same operations we were doing in OS 7 with a minus factor less resources and hardware back then.
I do NOT care how wonky either one of these releases is. I do NOT own an iPod, and I will never be stupid enough to buy an iPhone. All I want iTunes or any file manager related to audio tracks to do is this: Play the fucking music, and get the fuck out of the way.
How difficult is that? Answer: it's not.
I realize that, as ironic as it is, I will get modded Flamebait or whatever, just like the AC up there, that I happen to be in 100% agreement with, DESPITE having admitted to having invested more time and money in Apple gear, year-in year-out, than many of the more normal or 'smarter' people here.
Apple made a decision to support carbon/OS 9 'legacy' to avoid alienating the handful of developers that were still writing for the Mac, back when 10.0.1 was released. It was an understandable [no balls] choice but it was still totally wrong wrong wrong. And today with a couple gigs of RAM, on an OS that was installed to a completely wiped, multipass-overwritten zeroed-out internal drive, I get spinning beach balls for having the audacity (no pun intended) to rename a file in the iTunes window, or click in the scroll bar, in iTunes, and I call Bullshit. Amarok? Maybe a little buggy? That sounds like a walk in the park to me. Bring it on, I'll go through the betas and write little bug reports or whatever is necessary to help them make a decent entry into the market on the Mac, no problemo. Enough is enough, and I'm in.
I apologize for typos or a missing word here or there. It's the chemo, no kidding, and I just have a limit on how much precious time I can afford to 'waste' on revisions towards turning out quality text. And that really sucks big time, when you care about quality. I don't how Apple sleeps, because I'm losing sleep, and they're costing me time on top of time.