If the ISP has not given any clause in the their agreement, how is this even legal? Especially if they say unlimited usage. If they feel that a usage above a certain limit is hampering their business then price it appropriately. Say that upto a certain gb its covered by a monthly payment beyond that it is a certain amount to be paid per gb of download after that.
And to those who say cable is subsidized so we should pay more, frankly that's bull. I as an end user want a certain quality at a certain price. If it is not offered I go to some other provider. If no provider offers it I look for another solution and so on. Market forces, demand, supply, consumer is king, etc.; the core principles of capitalism.
And these companies know it. Which is why none of them will state the restriction i suggested above. They are scared that they will lose their consumers. so they are trying to be decidely devious and hope that majority of their consumers will not notice. And most probably majority of them will not. But they should not be allowed to get away with this. Bandwith usage will increase in time especially if video on demand or other stuff become really popular. Its like saying that in the old days when graphical content on the web came the ISP would dock they person who browsed too much graphical content instead of just using lynx to browse text pages. If they ahd happened there would be no technological innovation no internet as we know it today, we would probably be stuck with 9.6 kbps. Restrictions like this hamper growth in technologies, by artificially restricting its usage.
And to the others who say what about the file sharers who who hog the network. Well frankly speaking it is their right. Legally the terms of contract have not indicated that there is to be a limit. By saying unlimited the ISP has accepted that the user can push it to any limits he chooses. IF HE WAS NOT PREPARED TO MEET SUCH A DEMAND HE SHOULD NOT MAKE SUCH A CLAIM.
and besides why so much animosity versus file sharers? How would u treat someone who say sets up an apt repository or something.Or somebody who just t puts up a mirror site for OSS stuff? He is perfectly within his rights according to the terms of the agreement.
It is equivalent of saying free XYZ with every purchase. (OFFER VALID ONLY TILL STOCKS of XYZ LAST). Notice the last line. If he didn't say that he would have to supply XYZ whether or not stocks are there with every purchase. And if he didn't he would get sued.
And basically the ISP hasn't added that disclaimer. But they are trying to enforce it anyway.
What the ISP must do is make it very clear there are some new regualtions and change their terms of service. They can't just decide one fine day that they will dock anyone who uses what is according them excess bandwith.
another solution may be to say ok u can use bandwith for only one purpose, but i would say who the hell are u to restrict what i use the bandwith for. I am paying for the bandwith at the terms u specified and now out of the blue u decide that what i should use it for? Uh Uh.
The water example well water is a natural resource, and natural resources are limited. Whereas if i am right cable bandwith can be increased if the ISP decides to switch to a new frequency or something. Of course the cost to him may not be worth it. But he can't complain of sour grapes just because some users decided to take his offer exactly as he offered it. You make ur bed u sleep on it. This isn't a public service a chaity or something this is a business and they are obviously making profit, or they would be pulling out of it. Instead of trying increasing their profit through what are the traditional means (technological improvements, economies of scale), they are trying to take advantage of all the fuss that has been generated by the RIAA over file swapping. I firmly believe that if this encouraged its not healthy, There is a general rot in the business world which seems to be increasing day by day. As con
If the ISP has not given any clause in the their agreement, how is this even legal? Especially if they say unlimited usage. If they feel that a usage above a certain limit is hampering their business then price it appropriately. Say that upto a certain gb its covered by a monthly payment beyond that it is a certain amount to be paid per gb of download after that.
And to those who say cable is subsidized so we should pay more, frankly that's bull. I as an end user want a certain quality at a certain price. If it is not offered I go to some other provider. If no provider offers it I look for another solution and so on. Market forces, demand, supply, consumer is king, etc.; the core principles of capitalism.
And these companies know it. Which is why none of them will state the restriction i suggested above. They are scared that they will lose their consumers. so they are trying to be decidely devious and hope that majority of their consumers will not notice. And most probably majority of them will not. But they should not be allowed to get away with this. Bandwith usage will increase in time especially if video on demand or other stuff become really popular. Its like saying that in the old days when graphical content on the web came the ISP would dock they person who browsed too much graphical content instead of just using lynx to browse text pages. If they ahd happened there would be no technological innovation no internet as we know it today, we would probably be stuck with 9.6 kbps. Restrictions like this hamper growth in technologies, by artificially restricting its usage.
And to the others who say what about the file sharers who who hog the network. Well frankly speaking it is their right. Legally the terms of contract have not indicated that there is to be a limit. By saying unlimited the ISP has accepted that the user can push it to any limits he chooses. IF HE WAS NOT PREPARED TO MEET SUCH A DEMAND HE SHOULD NOT MAKE SUCH A CLAIM.
and besides why so much animosity versus file sharers? How would u treat someone who say sets up an apt repository or something.Or somebody who just t puts up a mirror site for OSS stuff? He is perfectly within his rights according to the terms of the agreement.
It is equivalent of saying free XYZ with every purchase. (OFFER VALID ONLY TILL STOCKS of XYZ LAST). Notice the last line. If he didn't say that he would have to supply XYZ whether or not stocks are there with every purchase. And if he didn't he would get sued.
And basically the ISP hasn't added that disclaimer. But they are trying to enforce it anyway.
What the ISP must do is make it very clear there are some new regualtions and change their terms of service. They can't just decide one fine day that they will dock anyone who uses what is according them excess bandwith.
another solution may be to say ok u can use bandwith for only one purpose, but i would say who the hell are u to restrict what i use the bandwith for. I am paying for the bandwith at the terms u specified and now out of the blue u decide that what i should use it for? Uh Uh.
The water example well water is a natural resource, and natural resources are limited. Whereas if i am right cable bandwith can be increased if the ISP decides to switch to a new frequency or something. Of course the cost to him may not be worth it. But he can't complain of sour grapes just because some users decided to take his offer exactly as he offered it. You make ur bed u sleep on it. This isn't a public service a chaity or something this is a business and they are obviously making profit, or they would be pulling out of it. Instead of trying increasing their profit through what are the traditional means (technological improvements, economies of scale), they are trying to take advantage of all the fuss that has been generated by the RIAA over file swapping. I firmly believe that if this encouraged its not healthy, There is a general rot in the business world which seems to be increasing day by day. As consumers we better do something to check this or the entire country goes dow
I think yellow dog supports it out of the box. Not sure but u had a story somewhere of a site that was offering yellow dog preinstalled along with/without OS X . I forget the link but i think it was on slashdot. There was a also some review where theguy was actaully surprised that his airport card worked just fine. I think as yellow dog optimizes their config for apple's machines, everything should work out tof the a box. And they have yum as well. It hink it should be the ultimate combination especially if u are looking for a linux laptop.
This is primarily of concern to servers. Since u are using lindows i guess ur primary objective will be to use it as a desktop. I have no idea what lindows' default config is but i would guess it should be bare minimum on the services front( essential stuff like xinetd. The thing is turn off whatever services u don't require. In this case i think u can safely turn off sshd as well. run nmap and see what ports u have open and knock off whatever u don't use. command will be something like nmap localhost. And of course create another user for ur daily work don't work as root. That should take care of most of ur problems. And if ur comp is always on the net, shut it down when not in use:). Welcome to the wonderful world of linux. If the above sounds like greek and latin, feel free to ask for clarifications, or just search the net u have enough resources. Or since u have paid for lindows u should be entitled to some user support i guess check there as well.
C/C++ are languages that were designed to be as low level as possible. Therefore, the language itself is very simplified, meaning that it expects you to take care of every detail.
Which makes this language very suitable when used by a small team of 10-20 people who know exactly what they are doing. They can design specific components relevant to their project/product and the rest 100-200 ppl can use a higher level language to link these components and build the final product.
Using C/C++ only in a team of 100-200 ppl is a recipe for disaster. It requires a great deal of discipline and expertise and also a lot of time in such cases. And humans are prone to error after all. And there is that saying too many cooks spoil a broth.
Also using only a high level language may make ur code stable for limited usage but under heavy load it will fail, and when it does you will run helter skelter wondering where the problem is. But there will be no indication in your code. I don't know if any of you java programmers have ever encountered a out of memory exception thanks to heavy object overhead and torn your hair in despair, but I have and it isn't pleasant.
And a client isn't interested in excuses. He just says get it to work in the hardware I have. Atleast a crash or a memory leak, can be traced and fixed but this??? We found a workaround eventually but it was a very painful and harrowing process after consulting a lot of documentation and certainly belied java's reputation as a easy language.
Also remember some faults may be under the hood and will be there till they get fixed- beyond your control, because essentially after all these languages add a layer over the lower level, meaning more complexity. And this complexity will be very generic in nature and may not pertain to your project or your need. In contrast, C/C++ is as low as u get and so you can write components suited for ur needs.
For eg. in our project, the programmers outside the core team use java , but they will use native calls to some libs the core team prepares. We find that this way Java gives excellent performance. It is an excellent language for program structure and modules but not for coding core components as the overhead involved is significant. Significant allocations and deallocations are not done by them at all, (ya they use new in java but under the hood all allocation and deallocation is taken care of by the component, the java part is more like a wrapper and has a very low memory print so reduced work for the GC) and any module the core team develops goes through vigorous testing before it is handed over.And the others can just drop it in place. Its not as easy as it sounds, but the Boss anyway feels its a nice balance between efficiency and ease. And besides its helpful of ur boss is also a programmer and a member of the core team.:)
Again if you are a java expert you could probably minimize those overheads without needing to touch C/C++. I am not sure. Also maybe in the future JIT compilers and other stuff may make java come very close to C/C++ in terms of performance,and defacto hardware may become powerful enough to drop C/C++ altogether (for example now nobody uses a 386/486 for serious work, but here we even had problems on a P4 1 ghz having 256 mb ram, ok may not be bleeding edge but can't call it obsolete). But till then this is the model we will use. Also if we require cross platform independence, only the core libraries need to be ported. Right now the linux port is underway.
What I am trying to say is everything should be viewed in shades of gray. There is a place for everything and there is a reason for everything to exist. For example, my brother for his phd is using java to run some scientific calculations heavy number crunching stuff because it is easy to code and u don't have to worry about anything other than the logic. Plus his university has given him a dual processor P4 2.5ghz with 1GB ram just for that:))(oh it also has a radeon 9700 drool:). Bu
Then if a new CD can be released in such a way that it contains 1 byte of data (ok perhaps one bit) and can still be used to record then it ceases to applicable under this law??
Slashdot Mirror
Ummm who's the ugly chick?? :)
Sco jokes count you !!!
Sorry couldn't resist that
If the ISP has not given any clause in the their agreement, how is this even legal? Especially if they say unlimited usage. If they feel that a usage above a certain limit is hampering their business then price it appropriately. Say that upto a certain gb its covered by a monthly payment beyond that it is a certain amount to be paid per gb of download after that.
And to those who say cable is subsidized so we should pay more, frankly that's bull. I as an end user want a certain quality at a certain price. If it is not offered I go to some other provider. If no provider offers it I look for another solution and so on. Market forces, demand, supply, consumer is king, etc.; the core principles of capitalism. And these companies know it. Which is why none of them will state the restriction i suggested above. They are scared that they will lose their consumers. so they are trying to be decidely devious and hope that majority of their consumers will not notice. And most probably majority of them will not. But they should not be allowed to get away with this. Bandwith usage will increase in time especially if video on demand or other stuff become really popular. Its like saying that in the old days when graphical content on the web came the ISP would dock they person who browsed too much graphical content instead of just using lynx to browse text pages. If they ahd happened there would be no technological innovation no internet as we know it today, we would probably be stuck with 9.6 kbps. Restrictions like this hamper growth in technologies, by artificially restricting its usage.
And to the others who say what about the file sharers who who hog the network. Well frankly speaking it is their right. Legally the terms of contract have not indicated that there is to be a limit. By saying unlimited the ISP has accepted that the user can push it to any limits he chooses. IF HE WAS NOT PREPARED TO MEET SUCH A DEMAND HE SHOULD NOT MAKE SUCH A CLAIM.
and besides why so much animosity versus file sharers? How would u treat someone who say sets up an apt repository or something.Or somebody who just t puts up a mirror site for OSS stuff? He is perfectly within his rights according to the terms of the agreement.
It is equivalent of saying free XYZ with every purchase. (OFFER VALID ONLY TILL STOCKS of XYZ LAST). Notice the last line. If he didn't say that he would have to supply XYZ whether or not stocks are there with every purchase. And if he didn't he would get sued.
And basically the ISP hasn't added that disclaimer. But they are trying to enforce it anyway.
What the ISP must do is make it very clear there are some new regualtions and change their terms of service. They can't just decide one fine day that they will dock anyone who uses what is according them excess bandwith.
another solution may be to say ok u can use bandwith for only one purpose, but i would say who the hell are u to restrict what i use the bandwith for. I am paying for the bandwith at the terms u specified and now out of the blue u decide that what i should use it for? Uh Uh.
The water example well water is a natural resource, and natural resources are limited. Whereas if i am right cable bandwith can be increased if the ISP decides to switch to a new frequency or something. Of course the cost to him may not be worth it. But he can't complain of sour grapes just because some users decided to take his offer exactly as he offered it. You make ur bed u sleep on it. This isn't a public service a chaity or something this is a business and they are obviously making profit, or they would be pulling out of it. Instead of trying increasing their profit through what are the traditional means (technological improvements, economies of scale), they are trying to take advantage of all the fuss that has been generated by the RIAA over file swapping. I firmly believe that if this encouraged its not healthy, There is a general rot in the business world which seems to be increasing day by day. As con
If the ISP has not given any clause in the their agreement, how is this even legal? Especially if they say unlimited usage. If they feel that a usage above a certain limit is hampering their business then price it appropriately. Say that upto a certain gb its covered by a monthly payment beyond that it is a certain amount to be paid per gb of download after that. And to those who say cable is subsidized so we should pay more, frankly that's bull. I as an end user want a certain quality at a certain price. If it is not offered I go to some other provider. If no provider offers it I look for another solution and so on. Market forces, demand, supply, consumer is king, etc.; the core principles of capitalism. And these companies know it. Which is why none of them will state the restriction i suggested above. They are scared that they will lose their consumers. so they are trying to be decidely devious and hope that majority of their consumers will not notice. And most probably majority of them will not. But they should not be allowed to get away with this. Bandwith usage will increase in time especially if video on demand or other stuff become really popular. Its like saying that in the old days when graphical content on the web came the ISP would dock they person who browsed too much graphical content instead of just using lynx to browse text pages. If they ahd happened there would be no technological innovation no internet as we know it today, we would probably be stuck with 9.6 kbps. Restrictions like this hamper growth in technologies, by artificially restricting its usage. And to the others who say what about the file sharers who who hog the network. Well frankly speaking it is their right. Legally the terms of contract have not indicated that there is to be a limit. By saying unlimited the ISP has accepted that the user can push it to any limits he chooses. IF HE WAS NOT PREPARED TO MEET SUCH A DEMAND HE SHOULD NOT MAKE SUCH A CLAIM. and besides why so much animosity versus file sharers? How would u treat someone who say sets up an apt repository or something.Or somebody who just t puts up a mirror site for OSS stuff? He is perfectly within his rights according to the terms of the agreement. It is equivalent of saying free XYZ with every purchase. (OFFER VALID ONLY TILL STOCKS of XYZ LAST). Notice the last line. If he didn't say that he would have to supply XYZ whether or not stocks are there with every purchase. And if he didn't he would get sued. And basically the ISP hasn't added that disclaimer. But they are trying to enforce it anyway. What the ISP must do is make it very clear there are some new regualtions and change their terms of service. They can't just decide one fine day that they will dock anyone who uses what is according them excess bandwith. another solution may be to say ok u can use bandwith for only one purpose, but i would say who the hell are u to restrict what i use the bandwith for. I am paying for the bandwith at the terms u specified and now out of the blue u decide that what i should use it for? Uh Uh. The water example well water is a natural resource, and natural resources are limited. Whereas if i am right cable bandwith can be increased if the ISP decides to switch to a new frequency or something. Of course the cost to him may not be worth it. But he can't complain of sour grapes just because some users decided to take his offer exactly as he offered it. You make ur bed u sleep on it. This isn't a public service a chaity or something this is a business and they are obviously making profit, or they would be pulling out of it. Instead of trying increasing their profit through what are the traditional means (technological improvements, economies of scale), they are trying to take advantage of all the fuss that has been generated by the RIAA over file swapping. I firmly believe that if this encouraged its not healthy, There is a general rot in the business world which seems to be increasing day by day. As consumers we better do something to check this or the entire country goes dow
I think yellow dog supports it out of the box. Not sure but u had a story somewhere of a site that was offering yellow dog preinstalled along with/without OS X . I forget the link but i think it was on slashdot. There was a also some review where theguy was actaully surprised that his airport card worked just fine. I think as yellow dog optimizes their config for apple's machines, everything should work out tof the a box. And they have yum as well. It hink it should be the ultimate combination especially if u are looking for a linux laptop.
This is primarily of concern to servers. Since u are using lindows i guess ur primary objective will be to use it as a desktop. I have no idea what lindows' default config is but i would guess it should be bare minimum on the services front( essential stuff like xinetd. The thing is turn off whatever services u don't require. In this case i think u can safely turn off sshd as well. run nmap and see what ports u have open and knock off whatever u don't use. command will be something like nmap localhost. And of course create another user for ur daily work don't work as root. That should take care of most of ur problems. And if ur comp is always on the net, shut it down when not in use :). Welcome to the wonderful world of linux. If the above sounds like greek and latin, feel free to ask for clarifications, or just search the net u have enough resources. Or since u have paid for lindows u should be entitled to some user support i guess check there as well.
C/C++ are languages that were designed to be as low level as possible. Therefore, the language itself is very simplified, meaning that it expects you to take care of every detail.
:))(oh it also has a radeon 9700 drool:). Bu
Which makes this language very suitable when used by a small team of 10-20 people who know exactly what they are doing. They can design specific components relevant to their project/product and the rest 100-200 ppl can use a higher level language to link these components and build the final product.
Using C/C++ only in a team of 100-200 ppl is a recipe for disaster. It requires a great deal of discipline and expertise and also a lot of time in such cases. And humans are prone to error after all. And there is that saying too many cooks spoil a broth.
Also using only a high level language may make ur code stable for limited usage but under heavy load it will fail, and when it does you will run helter skelter wondering where the problem is. But there will be no indication in your code. I don't know if any of you java programmers have ever encountered a out of memory exception thanks to heavy object overhead and torn your hair in despair, but I have and it isn't pleasant.
And a client isn't interested in excuses. He just says get it to work in the hardware I have. Atleast a crash or a memory leak, can be traced and fixed but this??? We found a workaround eventually but it was a very painful and harrowing process after consulting a lot of documentation and certainly belied java's reputation as a easy language.
Also remember some faults may be under the hood and will be there till they get fixed- beyond your control, because essentially after all these languages add a layer over the lower level, meaning more complexity. And this complexity will be very generic in nature and may not pertain to your project or your need. In contrast, C/C++ is as low as u get and so you can write components suited for ur needs.
For eg. in our project, the programmers outside the core team use java , but they will use native calls to some libs the core team prepares. We find that this way Java gives excellent performance. It is an excellent language for program structure and modules but not for coding core components as the overhead involved is significant. Significant allocations and deallocations are not done by them at all, (ya they use new in java but under the hood all allocation and deallocation is taken care of by the component, the java part is more like a wrapper and has a very low memory print so reduced work for the GC) and any module the core team develops goes through vigorous testing before it is handed over.And the others can just drop it in place. Its not as easy as it sounds, but the Boss anyway feels its a nice balance between efficiency and ease. And besides its helpful of ur boss is also a programmer and a member of the core team.:)
Again if you are a java expert you could probably minimize those overheads without needing to touch C/C++. I am not sure. Also maybe in the future JIT compilers and other stuff may make java come very close to C/C++ in terms of performance,and defacto hardware may become powerful enough to drop C/C++ altogether (for example now nobody uses a 386/486 for serious work, but here we even had problems on a P4 1 ghz having 256 mb ram, ok may not be bleeding edge but can't call it obsolete). But till then this is the model we will use. Also if we require cross platform independence, only the core libraries need to be ported. Right now the linux port is underway.
What I am trying to say is everything should be viewed in shades of gray. There is a place for everything and there is a reason for everything to exist. For example, my brother for his phd is using java to run some scientific calculations heavy number crunching stuff because it is easy to code and u don't have to worry about anything other than the logic. Plus his university has given him a dual processor P4 2.5ghz with 1GB ram just for that
Then if a new CD can be released in such a way that it contains 1 byte of data (ok perhaps one bit) and can still be used to record then it ceases to applicable under this law??