break into coca cola's marketing department. steal all their files on external contractors. Find the idiot who figured out how to put that thing in a can without it looking different.
Then go to his house, knock down his door, and ask him for $100,000 directly, because he's probably good for it.
Suckers.
Let's unofficially make this thread be the nexus of all other good ideas. That way it can't get slashdotted. GENUIS!
I love the fact that it'll run on anything that's 6-12 months old. But at the same time, 95% of all the workarounds for bad hardware just cut out features that don't work as advertised.
I.E. the fix for bad DMA on some VIA IDE controllers was to not support UDMA66 and up, you know?
Anyway, I think that while it doesn't excuse the driver writers for Windows, I don't fault them for not wanting to only partially support hardware, because if the box SAYS DirectX 9, and you only get accelerated support for 8, who do you think the masses would direct nastygrams to?
Besides, Microsoft doesn't write hardly any drivers, they test and integrate ones the vendors give them.
Linux kernel guys have the benefit of feedback from every existing owner of some newfangled thing.
The real answer is: don't buy crappy hardware (for Windows or Linux). It makes Windows crash, and Linux kernel guys (or you) will waste time on it. You'll be much happier in the long run.
Anyone (parent included) want to write a few emails to some XFree guys asking for proper support for SAK events?
Or maybe what needs to happen is that SAK on linux sends SIGINT or SIGQUIT first to all processes on a terminal, and then if it takes too long for them to be reaped -> SIGTERM.
Does X exit "correctly" (as if Ctrl+Alt+Backspace is pressed) on SIGQUIT or SIGINT?
it's not really a clustered filesystem. It's sort of like uber-intelligent iSCSI.
A "real" GFS has multiple masters, as far as I'm concerned. This is a very specific app tied to a specific need for Google's web collection system.
So I think you're okay, even so.:-)
Also, the article was published before Sept. 17 (earliest commentary I saw), so this is moot.
But anyway, kids, listen to him, don't procrastinate! And if you do, make sure you have adequate forged documentation on your 17 grandparents gruesome deaths.
I have a funny feeling...
on
NYT on RFID
·
· Score: 1
the amount of money they'd spend on enforcing no-resale wouldn't get them to break even on the lost sales. And we all know how reliable predicting lost sales is...
"Take money from the wealthy" implies getting those who hoard money to spend it.
You know, to make them want to give it to us. To not let corporations step in and filter through what some people are capable of doing in smaller groups with focused self-interests.
Money isn't valuable when it's locked up in a rainy-day fund or being burned through by clueless VCs.
And whats' more, increased efficiency can help, as it lets a small group do what required a large, less efficient organization to fulfill 10 or 15 years ago.
If the organization gets to big, increasing efficiency means it can sop up resources that it doesn't deserve. Staying big means it can hide this. You'd think these companies might reduce in scale or stay the same (with increasing returns) as they learned their business better. But, of course, that's counterintuitive to investors.
Little organization which are smaller, tighter, more efficient need to come and nibble away at the base. Keep customers happy. Keep prices down, and wealth flowing.
1) The microwaves are lower energy waves than light. There's just "more" of them in that cavity than visible light from the appliance bulb.
2) Generally speaking, materials (esp. un-ionized gas) will have a lower refractive index as frequency decreases. Hence, microwaves will be slowed less so than visible light in the air cavity of the microwave.
3) The patterns formed in the chocolate are due to standing waves set up in the cavity. The chocolate is a thin layer at the bottom, so the nodes will not reflect standing waves set up INSIDE the chocolate, because the wavelength is too large. So the patterns reflect the wavelength of microwaves in air, which is negligably less than the speed of light in a vacuum.
Measurement error from the ruler is a much larger (orders of magnitude larger) factor here.
"stackable design" that will add on 64-bit support.
RIGHT::eye roll::
If it were true, the extra chip would a) Replace and disable the other chip (486DX anyone?) b) Act as a glorified jumper to enable a feature on the other chip.
Plus that takes care of complicated heat management issues.
And if they are really planning on using that design, every tech pundit with a working long term memory will laugh it out the door.
I can't believe Intel regards people as that naive. The market is too cost sensitive for that kind of tactic. Intel's not dumb.
solaris would not tolerate shoddily written re-entrant kernel code. I guarantee a crash so hard you can hear it.
What was that? Did someone hit my car?!
Oh wait, my Blade just froze up, hmmm...
Some of the SMP-tolerant kernel code in linux gets by on the good graces of the IO-APIC keeping interrupts from coming in too fast... heh. heh.
*cough*;-)
SMP and why client/server on same box?
on
HyperSCSI Examined
·
· Score: 1
There is a possibility that you would have a small number of machines in a clustered configuration that are serving a database or other disk intensive task, and who share a large, distributed volume.
Since HyperSCSI is supposed to help you save money by enabling cheap hardware utility, I'd expect the flexibility to realize something like that to maximize the utility of connection-rich 1U/blade servers available today.
Also, don't you think it might be useful that a member of the disk array could access the whole volume to do maintenance tasks or check for consistency? This could be quite useful for a vendor who wishes to sell self-contained NAS solutions.
And re: the SCSI/FC disconnect property... ethernet protocols are generally disconnect tolerant. I'm not saying HyperSCSI has to have that property (mostly because SCSI protocols don't allow for it), but that doesn't mean the HyperSCSI client driver should cause the system to crash. It shouldn't assume the transport layer is reliable, and there are ways to sense link state, so why not protect the user from failure? Scream at syslog, maybe the sysop will get an email, and could plug it in, umount, save the cluster, save the day.
Just in case. These Opterons get toasty when I turn off my CPU fans because I'm watching Matrix Revolutions.
j/k. Opteron (i.e. AMD64, FX) has a built-in thermal solution. It's a little late in the game, but a welcome addition.
Anyway, that video's OLD man! And since that video, AMD got on the stick and forced mainboard vendors to implement thermal detection/CPU protection otherwise they'd refuse to certify the motherboards.
Next you'll be telling me about this new amazing "ginger" thing that's going to revolutionize city design.
the article summary mentions that it is the bastard child of existing kernel modding rootkits.
So, uh, they already have this. But I doubt they'll put them up on freshmeat...
I don't think hyperscsi is for the desktop either.
on
HyperSCSI Examined
·
· Score: 1
It's not really applicable. You need a dedicated network with a high speed backbone, dedicated servers running a Unix to pimp the storage, and you'd be better off with a commercial clustering filesystem (GFS or some such).
I can see small offices, workgroups, and studios using this to get high-speed storage on line quickly with cheap components.
iSCSI has a better chance of being deployed in the home (of Unix-y types and their unsuspecting kin). I'd say, iSCSI all the way, none of this baby CIFS BS in my house!;-)
The protocol implements in it's own way...
on
HyperSCSI Examined
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
tuned for SCSI commands and data transfers. This is the particularly interesting part of the protocol. It assumes you're going to be doing bulk transfers, and lets both ends negotiate windows for performance (as opposed to using a sliding scheme).
As I see it, the real problems:
- SMP "experimentally" supported - client and server can't coexist on same box - client model is not decoupled enough from the server (a server going down can mean the client could crash)
It appears the driver software needs some work properly implementing what seems to be a nifty protocol. And they want to port it to Solaris. I think they should get the locking and stability down first.
Use loose and fast HyperSCSI on your local segment where it's possible, and use a concentrator that translates into iSCSI over IPSEC for secure WAN connectivity.
That way you only need to buy one TOE card per WAN edge. Those can get expensive!
because no one else CAN AFFORD to implement the horror that would be a state tax compliance system.
Amazon would be able to simultaneously rid themselves of smaller, less VC-infused outfits who don't have the legal and accounting exptertise to tackle such a requirement, and they could gain the ear of a state politician or too. And are you a washington-post astroturfer or what? Your particular attention to the articles' source is particularly uncharacteristic of a slashbot AC. What gives?
You'll just hammer your ISP's DNS resolver, killing it's cache; or whomever your nameserver peers with.
Instead, hit the IP addresses of sitefinder and sitefinder-idn.verisign.com directly with bogus HTTP requests instead. I can't be sure, but I'll bet they don't record the requests at the DNS server, but at the webserver because the logs are probably easier to process with existing web analysis tools.
(Does anyone know if you can directly ask a root server about a domain? I didn't think mere mortals could)
Slashdot Mirror
break into coca cola's marketing department.
steal all their files on external contractors.
Find the idiot who figured out how to put that thing in a can without it looking different.
Then go to his house, knock down his door, and ask him for $100,000 directly, because he's probably good for it.
Suckers.
Let's unofficially make this thread be the nexus of all other good ideas. That way it can't get slashdotted. GENUIS!
Come on guys. ;-)
I love the fact that it'll run on anything that's 6-12 months old. But at the same time, 95% of all the workarounds for bad hardware just cut out features that don't work as advertised.
I.E. the fix for bad DMA on some VIA IDE controllers was to not support UDMA66 and up, you know?
Anyway, I think that while it doesn't excuse the driver writers for Windows, I don't fault them for not wanting to only partially support hardware, because if the box SAYS DirectX 9, and you only get accelerated support for 8, who do you think the masses would direct nastygrams to?
Besides, Microsoft doesn't write hardly any drivers, they test and integrate ones the vendors give them.
Linux kernel guys have the benefit of feedback from every existing owner of some newfangled thing.
The real answer is: don't buy crappy hardware (for Windows or Linux). It makes Windows crash, and Linux kernel guys (or you) will waste time on it. You'll be much happier in the long run.
Anyone (parent included) want to write a few emails to some XFree guys asking for proper support for SAK events?
Or maybe what needs to happen is that SAK on linux sends SIGINT or SIGQUIT first to all processes on a terminal, and then if it takes too long for them to be reaped -> SIGTERM.
Does X exit "correctly" (as if Ctrl+Alt+Backspace is pressed) on SIGQUIT or SIGINT?
it's not really a clustered filesystem. It's sort of like uber-intelligent iSCSI.
:-)
A "real" GFS has multiple masters, as far as I'm concerned. This is a very specific app tied to a specific need for Google's web collection system.
So I think you're okay, even so.
Also, the article was published before Sept. 17 (earliest commentary I saw), so this is moot.
But anyway, kids, listen to him, don't procrastinate! And if you do, make sure you have adequate forged documentation on your 17 grandparents gruesome deaths.
It's been done before, too.
Be very afraid
the amount of money they'd spend on enforcing no-resale wouldn't get them to break even on the lost sales. And we all know how reliable predicting lost sales is...
"Take money from the wealthy" implies getting those who hoard money to spend it.
You know, to make them want to give it to us. To not let corporations step in and filter through what some people are capable of doing in smaller groups with focused self-interests.
Money isn't valuable when it's locked up in a rainy-day fund or being burned through by clueless VCs.
And whats' more, increased efficiency can help, as it lets a small group do what required a large, less efficient organization to fulfill 10 or 15 years ago.
If the organization gets to big, increasing efficiency means it can sop up resources that it doesn't deserve. Staying big means it can hide this. You'd think these companies might reduce in scale or stay the same (with increasing returns) as they learned their business better. But, of course, that's counterintuitive to investors.
Little organization which are smaller, tighter, more efficient need to come and nibble away at the base. Keep customers happy. Keep prices down, and wealth flowing.
What company was this? I'd be interested in seeing what you guys came up with.
I didn't think accounting software lent itself to anyone considering open source development, unless it was for political reasons (govt., taxes).
1) The microwaves are lower energy waves than light. There's just "more" of them in that cavity than visible light from the appliance bulb.
2) Generally speaking, materials (esp. un-ionized gas) will have a lower refractive index as frequency decreases. Hence, microwaves will be slowed less so than visible light in the air cavity of the microwave.
3) The patterns formed in the chocolate are due to standing waves set up in the cavity. The chocolate is a thin layer at the bottom, so the nodes will not reflect standing waves set up INSIDE the chocolate, because the wavelength is too large. So the patterns reflect the wavelength of microwaves in air, which is negligably less than the speed of light in a vacuum.
Measurement error from the ruler is a much larger (orders of magnitude larger) factor here.
"stackable design" that will add on 64-bit support.
::eye roll::
RIGHT
If it were true, the extra chip would
a) Replace and disable the other chip (486DX anyone?)
b) Act as a glorified jumper to enable a feature on the other chip.
Plus that takes care of complicated heat management issues.
And if they are really planning on using that design, every tech pundit with a working long term memory will laugh it out the door.
I can't believe Intel regards people as that naive. The market is too cost sensitive for that kind of tactic. Intel's not dumb.
NT Technology.
solaris would not tolerate shoddily written re-entrant kernel code. I guarantee a crash so hard you can hear it.
;-)
What was that? Did someone hit my car?!
Oh wait, my Blade just froze up, hmmm...
Some of the SMP-tolerant kernel code in linux gets by on the good graces of the IO-APIC keeping interrupts from coming in too fast... heh. heh.
*cough*
There is a possibility that you would have a small number of machines in a clustered configuration that are serving a database or other disk intensive task, and who share a large, distributed volume.
:-)
Since HyperSCSI is supposed to help you save money by enabling cheap hardware utility, I'd expect the flexibility to realize something like that to maximize the utility of connection-rich 1U/blade servers available today.
Also, don't you think it might be useful that a member of the disk array could access the whole volume to do maintenance tasks or check for consistency? This could be quite useful for a vendor who wishes to sell self-contained NAS solutions.
And re: the SCSI/FC disconnect property... ethernet protocols are generally disconnect tolerant. I'm not saying HyperSCSI has to have that property (mostly because SCSI protocols don't allow for it), but that doesn't mean the HyperSCSI client driver should cause the system to crash. It shouldn't assume the transport layer is reliable, and there are ways to sense link state, so why not protect the user from failure? Scream at syslog, maybe the sysop will get an email, and could plug it in, umount, save the cluster, save the day.
I can only dream.
Just in case.
These Opterons get toasty when I turn off my CPU fans because I'm watching Matrix Revolutions.
j/k. Opteron (i.e. AMD64, FX) has a built-in thermal solution. It's a little late in the game, but a welcome addition.
Anyway, that video's OLD man!
And since that video, AMD got on the stick and forced mainboard vendors to implement thermal detection/CPU protection otherwise they'd refuse to certify the motherboards.
Next you'll be telling me about this new amazing "ginger" thing that's going to revolutionize city design.
but it's easier to write kernel code for linux, trust me. ::puts up hands:: All bets are off.
f they can't get that right...
Porting it to Solaris wouldn't fix it. You'd have the same issues, and a whole set of new ones.
jeez. :-)
Not off to a good start, are we now.
This post wasn't even remotely on topic! Try harder next time.
the article summary mentions that it is the bastard child of existing kernel modding rootkits.
So, uh, they already have this. But I doubt they'll put them up on freshmeat...
It's not really applicable. You need a dedicated network with a high speed backbone, dedicated servers running a Unix to pimp the storage, and you'd be better off with a commercial clustering filesystem (GFS or some such).
;-)
I can see small offices, workgroups, and studios using this to get high-speed storage on line quickly with cheap components.
iSCSI has a better chance of being deployed in the home (of Unix-y types and their unsuspecting kin). I'd say, iSCSI all the way, none of this baby CIFS BS in my house!
tuned for SCSI commands and data transfers. This is the particularly interesting part of the protocol. It assumes you're going to be doing bulk transfers, and lets both ends negotiate windows for performance (as opposed to using a sliding scheme).
As I see it, the real problems:
- SMP "experimentally" supported
- client and server can't coexist on same box
- client model is not decoupled enough from the server (a server going down can mean the client could crash)
It appears the driver software needs some work properly implementing what seems to be a nifty protocol. And they want to port it to Solaris. I think they should get the locking and stability down first.
Use loose and fast HyperSCSI on your local segment where it's possible, and use a concentrator that translates into iSCSI over IPSEC for secure WAN connectivity.
That way you only need to buy one TOE card per WAN edge. Those can get expensive!
LInux LOader.
Well, I can't take of any others. Point taken.
because no one else CAN AFFORD to implement the horror that would be a state tax compliance system.
Amazon would be able to simultaneously rid themselves of smaller, less VC-infused outfits who don't have the legal and accounting exptertise to tackle such a requirement, and they could gain the ear of a state politician or too.
And are you a washington-post astroturfer or what? Your particular attention to the articles' source is particularly uncharacteristic of a slashbot AC. What gives?
You'll just hammer your ISP's DNS resolver, killing it's cache; or whomever your nameserver peers with.
Instead, hit the IP addresses of sitefinder and sitefinder-idn.verisign.com directly with bogus HTTP requests instead. I can't be sure, but I'll bet they don't record the requests at the DNS server, but at the webserver because the logs are probably easier to process with existing web analysis tools.
(Does anyone know if you can directly ask a root server about a domain? I didn't think mere mortals could)