Microsoft entering the X market by buying up an X vendor, rebranding it as its own product, then leveraging its monopoly to make said product the de-facto X product SHOULD have run afoul of many anti-trust laws.
Now permute X across all markets including OS, office software, programming languages, databases, antivirus, full disk compression, full disk encryption, folder compression, and every other darned thing they sell. They didn't invent any of it. They buy the pot of soup, pee in the pot, then sell the soup. That's their business model and it always has been. They used to be really good at selling that watered down soup, and that's why they're where they're where they're at. Now, I'm not so sure everybody wants their soup.
Oh, and the above is not entirely correct. Sometimes they promise the pot to a chef who prepares the soup, and then kill him for the recipe before the batch is done. They even coined a name for that strategy: "Knife the baby". When people find out about that, they're less likely to be interested in working in their kitchen.
When the value of the ?IAA's back catalog multiplied by a dozen or more because they stole our commons the entire industry didn't get audited by the IRS. They just get to keep that value, and move it offshore (hello Sony!). Because they stole it fair and square. The same reason applies here.
When the state department pushes globalization of our repressive intellectual property regime, or even worse, it's the same reason: From the courthouse to the statehouse to the Whitehouse, they've sold us out. Every last one. They either know not what they do, or they don't care. We can't do much about it right now because we have bigger fish to fry with issues of security both foreign and domestic.
But eventually these greedy bastards will over reach and then they'll learn that their copyrights can be taken away, by constitutional amendment if necessary, and even monopoly and acts of congress can't save transcontinental rail when its day is done.
In a criminal trial the prosecutor would need to prove she stole a song.
In a civil trial the plaintiff must prove not only that she violated a copyright, but that she violated theirs before they can claim they were harmed and so are due relief.
The difference between a professional and a laborer is that the professional practices his profession to the best of his ability in the interest of his client, and the laborer puts the ditch where he's told to put the ditch.
Ray, do lawyers not have somebody watching over them? Some body of management with the responsibility to say, "Hey, you're developing a serious pattern of malpractice here and we've got to send you back to lawyer school before we let you work any more because you might hurt somebody"?
All you need are users who are willing to submit to invasive biometrics and can remember a few hundred pages of random one-time pad, an OS with no open ports, a data entry device that can't be subverted, a display device that projects no EMR, a single fiber from the reading device to the server protected by quantum encryption, gold shielding and armed guards for everybody involved including every developer who ever touched the code and every engineer who thought about the hardware, a whitelist both of senders and sending IP's all on a similarly secured network...
No, never mind. I don't really know how to do this. Do not use the freaking Internet for stuff that must be secure.
If they make good stuff and sell it cheap, do we not get cool new stuff for cheap? I fail to see the problem.
What happens when an economic contraction bottoms out is that the smart people who squirrelled away their cash in good times get to buy up neat stuff at fire sale prices. I think that's all that's happening here. It's a sign that we've turned the corner and the wise guys are buying up the stuff that's oversold.
Please don't read into the above that I approve of the purchase price for DataDomain. A proprietary implementation of lessfs is not worth two billion dollars. I could write that code myself and so could many of you. Whichever company gets it is going to gut it for the customer list and that's even more dumb because after you've killed their incumbent product, they don't want to buy from you. I can't wait 'till the a FOSS alternatives to that mature.
I hear that it's game on! Cisco intends nothing less than openn war with all its server vendor partners including HP, IBM and Dell.
So that's an easy short. Who wants to bet against HP, IBM and Dell? To bet one against the other is arbitrage. To bet against all of them at once is just dumb.
So: if copyright is extended why is it extended in the past tense to the benefit of licensees who create nothing rather than creators? They have paid for the right to the work or creation as it was and they'll pay no more for the increase - what is the social benefit of increasing their monopoly on it? Why do the extra years of protection not by default fall to the creators? This does not increase the incentive of an author to create -- the creator of the work or invention since licensed profits not at all from the extension. This isn't about motivating the creative to create. It's simple theft of the common wealth of culture for the benefit of people who had nothing to do with creativity or invention.
If copyright is extended then assigns and licensees ought to be excluded as a matter of course. To increase the benefit of ownership of their non-created libraries adds absolutely no motivation to creation or invention. And perhaps that's the point -- they intend no invention, creation or innovation. They only mean to increase the value of their intellectual property holdings. They have stolen from us a hundred years of culture and intend to provide nothing in return. That's not the purpose of copyright or patent.
I'm all for divesting these criminals of their ill-gotten goods immediately, and apparently the Internet is with me here.
I have no hope that our publicly-funded-campaign politicians will achieve the goal of restoring reason to copyright and patent. What's left is the anarchy of an oppressed people: they will take what's theirs, regardless of an unfair law. So it is that the only effect of the ??AA is to push us further toward anarchy in their pursuit of profits.
Somebody is going to reply that I want to divest the creator of his creation immediately, but I don't. I want to restore the respect that innovation and authorship used to have -- where the common man paid for his book or movie to the benefit of the creator, rather than evading the dire requirements of his publisher and hence escaping his due fee.
Cool. It turns out that this data is software, which according to the statute represent a set of coded instructions designed to cause a computer to perform the task of producing a particular sound. Who knew?
(2) "Computer software" means a set of coded instructions designed to cause a computer or automatic data processing equipment to perform a task. All software is classified as either prewritten or custom. Consistent with this definition "computer software" includes only those sets of coded instructions intended for use by an end user and specifically excludes retained rights in software and master copies of software.
I'm not Bill Gates. 640K might have been enough for anybody back then, but if he had only said "for now", we wouldn't be having this talk. I have opinions and I'll share them. Most of the time after a few years the market agrees with me.
We're in the technology singularity. Stuff has already gotten silly and it's about to get absurd.
Long before the aforementioned RAM quantity becomes a bottleneck for 99.9% of uses you're going to need faster RAM, a faster CPU (or more CPUs) to talk to it, more channels to talk to it with. We're half a year away from 8 cores per CPU, and 9 months away from 12 cores at most and those platforms are going to come with more RAM channels, and hence even more RAM per server, even without considering that DIMMs are going to hit 16GB soon. Likely it will be much sooner. Between now and then we'll need faster interconnects for inter-node communications, faster storage like this, and faster networking like FCoE (tomorrow, literally). As much as I hate the waste of throwing out year old servers, software makers are making it an imperative by insisting on licensing that defeats the technology value proposition. It may not even be wasteful as each server increment does twice as much with half the power. People who use this stuff are well paid to replace the hardware that lives under these limits frequently because the software costs at least 4 times as much as the hardware.
/and yes, if you use open software you don't have this problem - but you're usually paying per server for support, and that amplifies the incentive to throw out your old gear every year.
The economic contraction has turned out to be the harsh winter that brings forth a summer of great fruit. Everybody in the trade is emptying their cupboard of innovation in the hope of gaining market share, rather than holding it in reserve for a rainy day. Because it's raining now.
What we need now is services that need this extra gear. If somebody doesn't come up with it soon Google's going to shrink down to 90 individual racks in somebody else's datacenters - three per geographic area.
//And no, we're not dumb enough to burn these cycles running the server version of Vista. We get paid to be useful.
There's a graph here somewhere. It's probably a complex 5D curve.
What is the value of Beowulf? As a part of English literature it's a priceless treasure. As a movie plot it seems to be worth a good bit. As a secret? About the $0 you refer to.
Art is supposed to become culture. That's its job. Laws like this one prevent prevent our culture from being useful to all of us when stuff like this happens.
Does the RIAA have to pay capital gains taxes on the appreciation of their rights that came with the theft of the commons in their copyright extension? That's a profit, right? It was the untold wealth of a hundred years of culture - it ought to be worth a good bit.
If they claim it's worth nothing, well, then we want it back.
Actually, usually these virtual power buttons are connected to a very low power embedded computer system on the motherboard that provides a web interface and contains some logs and sensors. It runs on "Standby power", which is always available if the computer is plugged in. It shares video memory in the traditional text console as well as VGA with the main processor, and passes through serial events for mouse and keyboard. It can also map an.iso over the network as a boot device for installing operating systems. So you can not only hit the remote power button, you can wake the system up and watch it POST, and as the OS comes up you can manipulate it as if it were in front of you -- even if you don't actually know where it is, which is becoming more common lately. Typically this is handled on a separate network or VLAN (the management has its own port) which is called the "server management network".
Technically, this embedded system is a computer with it's own OS and BIOS, so you're both right.
/At least that's the way it works with HP gear. And of course theres a central management server that aggregates the sensor logs, presents the datacenter as a single website graphical diagram where you can drill down to individual servers or image vast sets of them, manage power by server, rack, row, room or site, etc, etc.
English is such a slippery langage. People have appropriated the term reorganization to include mass layoffs. That's not a reorganization - it's a layoff.
I meant the classical reorganization - a fundamental change in the organizational structure that moves people around.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm going to fix that for you.
Microsoft entering the X market by buying up an X vendor, rebranding it as its own product, then leveraging its monopoly to make said product the de-facto X product SHOULD have run afoul of many anti-trust laws.
Now permute X across all markets including OS, office software, programming languages, databases, antivirus, full disk compression, full disk encryption, folder compression, and every other darned thing they sell. They didn't invent any of it. They buy the pot of soup, pee in the pot, then sell the soup. That's their business model and it always has been. They used to be really good at selling that watered down soup, and that's why they're where they're where they're at. Now, I'm not so sure everybody wants their soup.
Oh, and the above is not entirely correct. Sometimes they promise the pot to a chef who prepares the soup, and then kill him for the recipe before the batch is done. They even coined a name for that strategy: "Knife the baby". When people find out about that, they're less likely to be interested in working in their kitchen.
Do they meet once a decade or something? Is it not almost time?
Between the ??AA and the SCO thing I have to believe either that or that their rules are incredibly lax.
Oh, and it's a good thing slashdot karma isn't a 16 bit integer, or you would be in danger of overflowing it.
When the value of the ?IAA's back catalog multiplied by a dozen or more because they stole our commons the entire industry didn't get audited by the IRS. They just get to keep that value, and move it offshore (hello Sony!). Because they stole it fair and square. The same reason applies here.
When the state department pushes globalization of our repressive intellectual property regime, or even worse, it's the same reason: From the courthouse to the statehouse to the Whitehouse, they've sold us out. Every last one. They either know not what they do, or they don't care. We can't do much about it right now because we have bigger fish to fry with issues of security both foreign and domestic.
But eventually these greedy bastards will over reach and then they'll learn that their copyrights can be taken away, by constitutional amendment if necessary, and even monopoly and acts of congress can't save transcontinental rail when its day is done.
In a criminal trial the prosecutor would need to prove she stole a song.
In a civil trial the plaintiff must prove not only that she violated a copyright, but that she violated theirs before they can claim they were harmed and so are due relief.
The difference between a professional and a laborer is that the professional practices his profession to the best of his ability in the interest of his client, and the laborer puts the ditch where he's told to put the ditch.
Ray, do lawyers not have somebody watching over them? Some body of management with the responsibility to say, "Hey, you're developing a serious pattern of malpractice here and we've got to send you back to lawyer school before we let you work any more because you might hurt somebody"?
All you need are users who are willing to submit to invasive biometrics and can remember a few hundred pages of random one-time pad, an OS with no open ports, a data entry device that can't be subverted, a display device that projects no EMR, a single fiber from the reading device to the server protected by quantum encryption, gold shielding and armed guards for everybody involved including every developer who ever touched the code and every engineer who thought about the hardware, a whitelist both of senders and sending IP's all on a similarly secured network...
No, never mind. I don't really know how to do this. Do not use the freaking Internet for stuff that must be secure.
If they make good stuff and sell it cheap, do we not get cool new stuff for cheap? I fail to see the problem.
What happens when an economic contraction bottoms out is that the smart people who squirrelled away their cash in good times get to buy up neat stuff at fire sale prices. I think that's all that's happening here. It's a sign that we've turned the corner and the wise guys are buying up the stuff that's oversold.
Please don't read into the above that I approve of the purchase price for DataDomain. A proprietary implementation of lessfs is not worth two billion dollars. I could write that code myself and so could many of you. Whichever company gets it is going to gut it for the customer list and that's even more dumb because after you've killed their incumbent product, they don't want to buy from you. I can't wait 'till the a FOSS alternatives to that mature.
Think Moorestown and Larrabee more likely.
Intel has finally realized that they own their whole box and they need to get out of that box in order to get growth, especially in a down market.
4GB ddr3 sticks are only just becoming affordable and 8G ddr3 sticks are hugely expensive!
And 72GB for 8 cores is a good bit for now. In a year the new platforms will have more slots, and the big stick will be 16GB, so no worries.
I hear that it's game on! Cisco intends nothing less than openn war with all its server vendor partners including HP, IBM and Dell.
So that's an easy short. Who wants to bet against HP, IBM and Dell? To bet one against the other is arbitrage. To bet against all of them at once is just dumb.
Have divorced themselves from reason. Gartner's purpose is to tell us what Microsoft wants us to think.
The purpose of copyright according to the US Constitution is: [emphasis mine]
to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by securing for limited times to inventors the exclusive right to their respective discoveries
-USPTO US Constitution Article 1, Section 8
So: if copyright is extended why is it extended in the past tense to the benefit of licensees who create nothing rather than creators? They have paid for the right to the work or creation as it was and they'll pay no more for the increase - what is the social benefit of increasing their monopoly on it? Why do the extra years of protection not by default fall to the creators? This does not increase the incentive of an author to create -- the creator of the work or invention since licensed profits not at all from the extension. This isn't about motivating the creative to create. It's simple theft of the common wealth of culture for the benefit of people who had nothing to do with creativity or invention.
If copyright is extended then assigns and licensees ought to be excluded as a matter of course. To increase the benefit of ownership of their non-created libraries adds absolutely no motivation to creation or invention. And perhaps that's the point -- they intend no invention, creation or innovation. They only mean to increase the value of their intellectual property holdings. They have stolen from us a hundred years of culture and intend to provide nothing in return. That's not the purpose of copyright or patent.
I'm all for divesting these criminals of their ill-gotten goods immediately, and apparently the Internet is with me here.
I have no hope that our publicly-funded-campaign politicians will achieve the goal of restoring reason to copyright and patent. What's left is the anarchy of an oppressed people: they will take what's theirs, regardless of an unfair law. So it is that the only effect of the ??AA is to push us further toward anarchy in their pursuit of profits.
Somebody is going to reply that I want to divest the creator of his creation immediately, but I don't. I want to restore the respect that innovation and authorship used to have -- where the common man paid for his book or movie to the benefit of the creator, rather than evading the dire requirements of his publisher and hence escaping his due fee.
Cool. It turns out that this data is software, which according to the statute represent a set of coded instructions designed to cause a computer to perform the task of producing a particular sound. Who knew?
(2) "Computer software" means a set of coded instructions designed to cause a computer or automatic data processing equipment to perform a task. All software is classified as either prewritten or custom. Consistent with this definition "computer software" includes only those sets of coded instructions intended for use by an end user and specifically excludes retained rights in software and master copies of software.
/Unless you represent your data in this format that is.
I'm thinking that based on the Fair Market Value of free software you're good for a moon landing at least, if not an interstellar ark.
Can you write a check for that, or would you prefer the payment plan?
"172GB ought to be enough for anybody!"
"for now"
Please... don't try that hard to get out of context.
I'm not Bill Gates. 640K might have been enough for anybody back then, but if he had only said "for now", we wouldn't be having this talk. I have opinions and I'll share them. Most of the time after a few years the market agrees with me.
We're in the technology singularity. Stuff has already gotten silly and it's about to get absurd.
Long before the aforementioned RAM quantity becomes a bottleneck for 99.9% of uses you're going to need faster RAM, a faster CPU (or more CPUs) to talk to it, more channels to talk to it with. We're half a year away from 8 cores per CPU, and 9 months away from 12 cores at most and those platforms are going to come with more RAM channels, and hence even more RAM per server, even without considering that DIMMs are going to hit 16GB soon. Likely it will be much sooner. Between now and then we'll need faster interconnects for inter-node communications, faster storage like this, and faster networking like FCoE (tomorrow, literally). As much as I hate the waste of throwing out year old servers, software makers are making it an imperative by insisting on licensing that defeats the technology value proposition. It may not even be wasteful as each server increment does twice as much with half the power. People who use this stuff are well paid to replace the hardware that lives under these limits frequently because the software costs at least 4 times as much as the hardware.
/and yes, if you use open software you don't have this problem - but you're usually paying per server for support, and that amplifies the incentive to throw out your old gear every year.
The economic contraction has turned out to be the harsh winter that brings forth a summer of great fruit. Everybody in the trade is emptying their cupboard of innovation in the hope of gaining market share, rather than holding it in reserve for a rainy day. Because it's raining now.
What we need now is services that need this extra gear. If somebody doesn't come up with it soon Google's going to shrink down to 90 individual racks in somebody else's datacenters - three per geographic area.
//And no, we're not dumb enough to burn these cycles running the server version of Vista. We get paid to be useful.
There's a graph here somewhere. It's probably a complex 5D curve.
What is the value of Beowulf? As a part of English literature it's a priceless treasure. As a movie plot it seems to be worth a good bit. As a secret? About the $0 you refer to.
Art is supposed to become culture. That's its job. Laws like this one prevent prevent our culture from being useful to all of us when stuff like this happens.
Does the RIAA have to pay capital gains taxes on the appreciation of their rights that came with the theft of the commons in their copyright extension? That's a profit, right? It was the untold wealth of a hundred years of culture - it ought to be worth a good bit.
If they claim it's worth nothing, well, then we want it back.
More RAM isn't a big deal - the 5500 series from everybody else goes up to 172GB now, and will be at least double that soon. That's plenty for now.
The density is only 1/4th that of HP's new DL1000 (video).
Interconnect is what gives these Cisco servers their shine.
Actually, usually these virtual power buttons are connected to a very low power embedded computer system on the motherboard that provides a web interface and contains some logs and sensors. It runs on "Standby power", which is always available if the computer is plugged in. It shares video memory in the traditional text console as well as VGA with the main processor, and passes through serial events for mouse and keyboard. It can also map an .iso over the network as a boot device for installing operating systems. So you can not only hit the remote power button, you can wake the system up and watch it POST, and as the OS comes up you can manipulate it as if it were in front of you -- even if you don't actually know where it is, which is becoming more common lately. Typically this is handled on a separate network or VLAN (the management has its own port) which is called the "server management network".
Technically, this embedded system is a computer with it's own OS and BIOS, so you're both right.
/At least that's the way it works with HP gear. And of course theres a central management server that aggregates the sensor logs, presents the datacenter as a single website graphical diagram where you can drill down to individual servers or image vast sets of them, manage power by server, rack, row, room or site, etc, etc.
If by "Older box" you mean more than 3 months old, it's time to upgrade :)
Ooh. So forceful. You must be a real dominant person in real life.
You're not going to get what you want. And that's got nothing to do with me.
Is that there's so many to choose from.
English is such a slippery langage. People have appropriated the term reorganization to include mass layoffs. That's not a reorganization - it's a layoff.
I meant the classical reorganization - a fundamental change in the organizational structure that moves people around.