"Has anyone legitamately filled up anything past 120 GB"
That's about an hour of storage for low-compression HDTV editing.
Even for DV editing, I have about 400GB of video from various different projects on my PC right now.
Re:Is Freenet doomed to failure by design?
on
Revamping Freenet
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"But being willing to make that tradeoff for PGP but not Freenet seems... hypocritical."
Particularly as PGP is vastly more useful to 'terrorists' than Freenet. Why take the risk of using Freenet to distribute messages when you can just PGP-encrypt them and stick them on a floppy disk for hand delivery?
No sane 'terrorist' is going to use Freenet to communicate... they don't need to.
I haven't tried Freenet in quite a while, but when I did use it now and again before (in the 0.3-0.5 days, AFAIR), the main problem was that they'd get a network that kind of worked, lots of people would start posting stuff, it would be usable for a few months, and then they'd break it to introduce the 'next big thing'. And it would stay broken for six months, during which time most people stopped using it.
Frankly, for Freenet to have any future, I think the developers need to get used to the idea of _not breaking it_ every six months. Otherwise the few people with the enthusiasm required to keep it operating are going to find better things to do with their time.
You can either have a research network or a viable, usable system, you can't have both. If it ever gets to a viable, usable network, I might give it a try again, but it's pointless when you can't insert anything and can barely retrieve anything.
Hardly. Men are genetically programmed to find teenage girls attractive, because they can have lots of kids... you can dislike that if you want, but fighting genetic programming is usually a losing battle.
I don't really have any interest in shagging fifteen-year-olds, but that's because I wouldn't have much of anything to talk to them about afterwards, not because I'm a prude.
"Tweren't me, that was the rest of the estate."
But you seem to be the one having masturbation fantasies about it.
What makes you think the father is underage? In many cases they're probably in their 20s or older: certainly the few specific cases I know of they mostly were.
"And I dunno about you but where I came from the 25 year old who knocked up the 15 year old ended up razor scarred and fleeing the province for his life."
And you talk about _decency_?
Frankly, I think you have more problems than the majority of people posting here. I sure don't watch 'Harry Potter' movies looking for panty shots, but if you've never seen a fifteen-year-old you wanted to shag then I can only presume you're deluding yourself or have no libido... and claiming that attacking someone with a razor because they shagged a fifteen-year-old is 'decent' behaviour make you look like a psychopath.
"Well, matey, she's English, and in England she's jailbait."
Barely: and if she'd been born on a council estate she'd have a couple of kids of her own by now. You're living in a fantasy world if you think that underage sex isn't a regular occurence in the UK.
In any case, it wouldn't surprise me at all if NuLab reduced the age of consent to fourteen: after all, they've already reduced the butt-shagging age for boys to sixteen, and I'm sure they'd like to reduce that further.
"Remember the drone that killed the SR-71 motherplane?"
Yes. They were seperating while flying _AT MACH 3_. Air-dropping a rocket at more conventional speeds is trivial in comparison, and has been done many times before.
"The fact is most people are not IT people. They just want it to work and forget about it."
Then why do they use Windows rather than Linux? You just defeated your own argument: they're more concerned with having someone to blame when it goes wrong than having something that 'just works'.
"The lie that Gore said "I invented the internet" was a mendatious meme that spread like wild-fire, unfortunately, fanned on by the right-wing media and their aggressive deception campaign."
But even if he didn't say it, it's the kind of thing he _would_ have said, given half a chance:).
"The vendors were had HD Cams that would film and record 1920x1080i. That somepoint is today."
I believe you'll find that all '1920x1080' recording today (with the possible exception of the really high-end cameras used by Lucas and friends) is anamorphic and actually recording 1440x1080.
Certainly the HDV 1080i cameras do that and I'm pretty sure HDCAM does too.
I've have more sympathy for his views if he didn't start off the article by demonstrating that he didn't even understand 'Starship Troopers':). Geez, how could anyone have thought it was a serious movie, rather than a comedy taking the piss out of American militarism?
"Would you rather someone be accountable for an accident or people to just go around and say "uhhh I don't know whose fault it was or what caused the problem because we didn't do any paperwork on it""
But NASA paperwork has been proven to be worthless in the past. In one famous case a few years back there were tools left in the back of the shuttle which could have gone rattling around and caused a fatal accident if they'd hit something vital during the launch.
The worker signed to say they'd taken the tools out of the shuttle. Their supervisor signed to say the tools had been taken out of the shuttle. Their supervisor signed to say the tools had been taken out of the shuttle.
Three people, lots of paperwork... but the tools were still left in the shuttle in spite of it. What's the point of paperwork if three people can sign to attest to something which is blatantly untrue?
"why do I have a feeling this might end up doing more of the latter?"
Ha-ha... you don't think you'll actually have to _download_ it, do you? They'll just get someone to email a photo of a naked seventeen-year-old to you, and then that will give them justification for a search warrant.
"Girls are still married at the age of 12 (or maybe even younger) in many parts of the world"
I believe you'll find that there are a couple of US states where marriage is still legal at 13.
"The case is much less clear when the "child" is, for example, 17 or so, of course."
Pictures of naked 17 year olds are considered 'child porn' in some parts of the world: I believe they are in the UK right now, since the law was changed a couple of years back. That's worth remembering, next time people talk about 'child porn'.
Worse than that, in the UK I can shag all the sixteen year old girls I like, but if I _take a photo_ of myself shagging them and email it to my mates, then I'm suddenly a 'child porn trafficker'. That is, quite simply, insane.
The whole 'child porn' thing has become a joke. I'm all for castrating men who film themselves gang-raping 8-year-olds, but the definition is now so wide that a vast fraction of society could be locked up for 'child porn'. Governments may love that, but it's only going to distract police from dealing with the real perverts, who are harder to find and harder to catch than guys downloading naked teen pictures.
There was also an interesting TV talk show a few years ago on the subject, back before the Internet became big: one of the guests used to work for law enforcement in America and was talking about how he estimated that at least 75% of 'child porn' distributed in the country was coming from law enforcement agencies in entrapment operations. There just wasn't enough real 'child porn trafficking' going on, so the government had to get into the business itself.
For that matter, wasn't some bulletin board busted in the early 90s by having the post office send them 'child porn' without them asking, and then the police used that as justification for a warrant?
"it cost $210 million to make and market the film, it took in $450 million from the box office ALONE"
To be fair, of that $450,000,000 at the box office, the movie company probably only get around $200,000,000. But if those numbers are correct then it must still be profitable.
"Thus, it did not make back a profit. That's the definition of a bomb."
If it made $197 million so far it will eventually be at least mildly profitable from DVD and TV sales. A movie like 'Thunderbirds' which cost $70 million and made about $5 million is a much better example of a 'bomb'.
"If you cannot reap the fruits of your innovation, why bother to innovate?"
Indeed. There was absolutely no innovation before copyright and patents were imposed on us. None whatsoever. Why, we're just _so_ lucky that those prehistoric lawyers invented 'intellectual property', or we'd still be living in caves.
The whole idea that IP encourages innovation is, of course, retarded. Software IP encourages people to _duplicate work that other people have already done_, since they can't just go and download a library which does what they want it to do, and spend their time actually doing innovative work instead of re-inventing the wheel.
"If that's what he feels most productive using, what difference does it make?"
Indeed. If he decided tomorrow that future kernels would all be compiled in Microsoft Visual C++, what would be the problem? After all, it's not as though his choices on tools affect anyone but him, is it?
Oh, except that all the other developers are forced to either use the same tools he does or find workarounds to allow them to use different tools.
Personally I've always felt that relying on a payware source control program for kernel development was a big risk, and removed much of the stimulus to create really first-class open source source control programs: I guess that's now been clearly demonstrated. And regardless of who's in the wrong here, I can't help but feel that the Bitkeeper folks are going to lose a lot of sales due to programmers regarding them poorly as a result of this action.
"Shuttle launch costs: Varied; generally believed to be 350-450m$"
LOL. The shuttle program costs around $3.5 billion a year, I believe. The average launch rate has been about four a year, so that's close to a _billion_ dollars a launch.
It's true that the fixed costs are huge, so that if you could launch an extra flight a year it would only add a couple of hundred million, but that's not going to happen often with only three orbiters.
"However, there's a problem with that: a sizable chunk of the shuttle's budget goes toward research on improvements (which will have benefits to its successors)"
What shuttle 'improvements' will benefit the CEV, which is a simple capsule on top of an expendable commercial launcher?
"You get a greater payload, almost no fatigue wear, a very simple (and cheap to maintain) TPS, greater resistance to debris damage, and many other benefits that will hugely reduce cost per kilogram."
No, that's what you _want_. What you get is likely to be something completely different... if nothing else, it almost certainly won't have wings (and if NASA build it, odds are it won't meet any of your goals).
Slashdot Mirror
"Has anyone legitamately filled up anything past 120 GB"
That's about an hour of storage for low-compression HDTV editing.
Even for DV editing, I have about 400GB of video from various different projects on my PC right now.
"But being willing to make that tradeoff for PGP but not Freenet seems... hypocritical."
Particularly as PGP is vastly more useful to 'terrorists' than Freenet. Why take the risk of using Freenet to distribute messages when you can just PGP-encrypt them and stick them on a floppy disk for hand delivery?
No sane 'terrorist' is going to use Freenet to communicate... they don't need to.
"how do you know what was on your node?"
:).
He was probably the one downloading it
I haven't tried Freenet in quite a while, but when I did use it now and again before (in the 0.3-0.5 days, AFAIR), the main problem was that they'd get a network that kind of worked, lots of people would start posting stuff, it would be usable for a few months, and then they'd break it to introduce the 'next big thing'. And it would stay broken for six months, during which time most people stopped using it.
Frankly, for Freenet to have any future, I think the developers need to get used to the idea of _not breaking it_ every six months. Otherwise the few people with the enthusiasm required to keep it operating are going to find better things to do with their time.
You can either have a research network or a viable, usable system, you can't have both. If it ever gets to a viable, usable network, I might give it a try again, but it's pointless when you can't insert anything and can barely retrieve anything.
"No, just a sane libido."
Hardly. Men are genetically programmed to find teenage girls attractive, because they can have lots of kids... you can dislike that if you want, but fighting genetic programming is usually a losing battle.
I don't really have any interest in shagging fifteen-year-olds, but that's because I wouldn't have much of anything to talk to them about afterwards, not because I'm a prude.
"Tweren't me, that was the rest of the estate."
But you seem to be the one having masturbation fantasies about it.
"Underage with underage, fair enough"
What makes you think the father is underage? In many cases they're probably in their 20s or older: certainly the few specific cases I know of they mostly were.
"And I dunno about you but where I came from the 25 year old who knocked up the 15 year old ended up razor scarred and fleeing the province for his life."
And you talk about _decency_?
Frankly, I think you have more problems than the majority of people posting here. I sure don't watch 'Harry Potter' movies looking for panty shots, but if you've never seen a fifteen-year-old you wanted to shag then I can only presume you're deluding yourself or have no libido... and claiming that attacking someone with a razor because they shagged a fifteen-year-old is 'decent' behaviour make you look like a psychopath.
"Well, matey, she's English, and in England she's jailbait."
Barely: and if she'd been born on a council estate she'd have a couple of kids of her own by now. You're living in a fantasy world if you think that underage sex isn't a regular occurence in the UK.
In any case, it wouldn't surprise me at all if NuLab reduced the age of consent to fourteen: after all, they've already reduced the butt-shagging age for boys to sixteen, and I'm sure they'd like to reduce that further.
Bah, she'll be legal in the UK next year :).
"Remember the drone that killed the SR-71 motherplane?"
Yes. They were seperating while flying _AT MACH 3_. Air-dropping a rocket at more conventional speeds is trivial in comparison, and has been done many times before.
"The fact is most people are not IT people. They just want it to work and forget about it."
Then why do they use Windows rather than Linux? You just defeated your own argument: they're more concerned with having someone to blame when it goes wrong than having something that 'just works'.
"these people are in control of a major nuclear arsenal."
They won't be for long, once they abandon science. Or does the Bible tell you how to make nuclear bombs?
"Isnt that illegal under UN law to OWN places in space?"
So's invading countries that haven't attacked you. No government really gives a damn about what the UN thinks, unless it's acting in their favor.
"The lie that Gore said "I invented the internet" was a mendatious meme that spread like wild-fire, unfortunately, fanned on by the right-wing media and their aggressive deception campaign."
:).
But even if he didn't say it, it's the kind of thing he _would_ have said, given half a chance
"The vendors were had HD Cams that would film and record 1920x1080i. That somepoint is today."
I believe you'll find that all '1920x1080' recording today (with the possible exception of the really high-end cameras used by Lucas and friends) is anamorphic and actually recording 1440x1080.
Certainly the HDV 1080i cameras do that and I'm pretty sure HDCAM does too.
I've have more sympathy for his views if he didn't start off the article by demonstrating that he didn't even understand 'Starship Troopers' :). Geez, how could anyone have thought it was a serious movie, rather than a comedy taking the piss out of American militarism?
"Would you rather someone be accountable for an accident or people to just go around and say "uhhh I don't know whose fault it was or what caused the problem because we didn't do any paperwork on it""
But NASA paperwork has been proven to be worthless in the past. In one famous case a few years back there were tools left in the back of the shuttle which could have gone rattling around and caused a fatal accident if they'd hit something vital during the launch.
The worker signed to say they'd taken the tools out of the shuttle. Their supervisor signed to say the tools had been taken out of the shuttle. Their supervisor signed to say the tools had been taken out of the shuttle.
Three people, lots of paperwork... but the tools were still left in the shuttle in spite of it. What's the point of paperwork if three people can sign to attest to something which is blatantly untrue?
"As a result, we may see VERY strong novel AI algorithms"
Hardly. It's much cheaper to hire Mexicans to play the game than to develop AI to do so.
"why do I have a feeling this might end up doing more of the latter?"
Ha-ha... you don't think you'll actually have to _download_ it, do you? They'll just get someone to email a photo of a naked seventeen-year-old to you, and then that will give them justification for a search warrant.
"Girls are still married at the age of 12 (or maybe even younger) in many parts of the world"
I believe you'll find that there are a couple of US states where marriage is still legal at 13.
"The case is much less clear when the "child" is, for example, 17 or so, of course."
Pictures of naked 17 year olds are considered 'child porn' in some parts of the world: I believe they are in the UK right now, since the law was changed a couple of years back. That's worth remembering, next time people talk about 'child porn'.
Worse than that, in the UK I can shag all the sixteen year old girls I like, but if I _take a photo_ of myself shagging them and email it to my mates, then I'm suddenly a 'child porn trafficker'. That is, quite simply, insane.
The whole 'child porn' thing has become a joke. I'm all for castrating men who film themselves gang-raping 8-year-olds, but the definition is now so wide that a vast fraction of society could be locked up for 'child porn'. Governments may love that, but it's only going to distract police from dealing with the real perverts, who are harder to find and harder to catch than guys downloading naked teen pictures.
There was also an interesting TV talk show a few years ago on the subject, back before the Internet became big: one of the guests used to work for law enforcement in America and was talking about how he estimated that at least 75% of 'child porn' distributed in the country was coming from law enforcement agencies in entrapment operations. There just wasn't enough real 'child porn trafficking' going on, so the government had to get into the business itself.
For that matter, wasn't some bulletin board busted in the early 90s by having the post office send them 'child porn' without them asking, and then the police used that as justification for a warrant?
"it cost $210 million to make and market the film, it took in $450 million from the box office ALONE"
To be fair, of that $450,000,000 at the box office, the movie company probably only get around $200,000,000. But if those numbers are correct then it must still be profitable.
"Thus, it did not make back a profit. That's the definition of a bomb."
If it made $197 million so far it will eventually be at least mildly profitable from DVD and TV sales. A movie like 'Thunderbirds' which cost $70 million and made about $5 million is a much better example of a 'bomb'.
"If you cannot reap the fruits of your innovation, why bother to innovate?"
Indeed. There was absolutely no innovation before copyright and patents were imposed on us. None whatsoever. Why, we're just _so_ lucky that those prehistoric lawyers invented 'intellectual property', or we'd still be living in caves.
The whole idea that IP encourages innovation is, of course, retarded. Software IP encourages people to _duplicate work that other people have already done_, since they can't just go and download a library which does what they want it to do, and spend their time actually doing innovative work instead of re-inventing the wheel.
"If that's what he feels most productive using, what difference does it make?"
Indeed. If he decided tomorrow that future kernels would all be compiled in Microsoft Visual C++, what would be the problem? After all, it's not as though his choices on tools affect anyone but him, is it?
Oh, except that all the other developers are forced to either use the same tools he does or find workarounds to allow them to use different tools.
Personally I've always felt that relying on a payware source control program for kernel development was a big risk, and removed much of the stimulus to create really first-class open source source control programs: I guess that's now been clearly demonstrated. And regardless of who's in the wrong here, I can't help but feel that the Bitkeeper folks are going to lose a lot of sales due to programmers regarding them poorly as a result of this action.
Steve Roberts has been doing this kind of thing (admittedly with bikes and boats rather than RVs) for about fifteen years now...
http://www.microship.org/
"Shuttle launch costs: Varied; generally believed to be 350-450m$"
LOL. The shuttle program costs around $3.5 billion a year, I believe. The average launch rate has been about four a year, so that's close to a _billion_ dollars a launch.
It's true that the fixed costs are huge, so that if you could launch an extra flight a year it would only add a couple of hundred million, but that's not going to happen often with only three orbiters.
"However, there's a problem with that: a sizable chunk of the shuttle's budget goes toward research on improvements (which will have benefits to its successors)"
What shuttle 'improvements' will benefit the CEV, which is a simple capsule on top of an expendable commercial launcher?
"You get a greater payload, almost no fatigue wear, a very simple (and cheap to maintain) TPS, greater resistance to debris damage, and many other benefits that will hugely reduce cost per kilogram."
No, that's what you _want_. What you get is likely to be something completely different... if nothing else, it almost certainly won't have wings (and if NASA build it, odds are it won't meet any of your goals).