which will make browsers fail when they try to show you ads. The list is longer (get it if you're curious)
But this seems a bit "hacky". Is there a better way to do this, is there some project which keeps track of such ad sites, or even ip ranges and allows you to block them easily?
Why on earth would you want a torrent for Solaris 10? Torrents are great for people who can't allow the bandwith & server costs, but dude, we're talking about SUN. They can do it
And with bittorrent you don't just download things, you've to upload too. And sun is offering you their powerful servers with huge bandwith, with no upload costs to you, and you ask for a torrent? How stupid.
American public should be allowed to use that service. Considering they paid for it with their taxes, I don't see how this bill could be passed!
America seems to have this stupid tradition of "EVerythingShouldBePrivate". I suppose the for-pay weather companies would want to ban the public service because they "believe" that private-only comapnies will improve competence.
Which is stupid, services should'nt be just public or private, they should be public if they benefit the consumer being public and private if they don't. Wheater looks to me like something that americans should have right to access freely. What will be the next stupidity, trying to supress the congress by a bunch of private congresists?
He is not allowed to write one because of the license
Besides, rewriting BK doesn't mean that reverse-engineering does everything. Developing BK has taken many years and many developers. Look at wine for a example.
...this is good or is bad? Damn, my knowledge is based in what/. considers right or wrong, if you don't say me what I've to think I don't know what to think!
I hope it does better than it did at Yahoo. In the latest years, Yahoo has not been exactly the "head of R & D" in search engines. They've done a few nice things, but they're far from being the leaders on that field.
Remote Approach's reporting did not work when we viewed the document with Kpdf, Xpdf and Adobe Reader 5.0.10. It also failed using Apple's "Preview" application on Mac OS X. The document was still viewable with no apparent glitch in other PDF readers, but the reporting function did not work. However, when we opened the file using Adobe Acrobat Reader 7, Remote Approach started logging views from our IP address. After doing a little research, we found that Adobe's Reader was connecting to http://www.remoteapproach.com/remoteapproach/loggi ng.asp each time we opened the document
(Easy fix: Assign a IP which doesn't work ie: 0.0.0.1 to www.remoteapproach.com in your/etc/hosts)
"What Larry is not fine with, is somebody writing a free replacement by just reverse-engineering what he did. Larry has a very clear moral standpoint: 'You can compete with me, but you can't do so by riding on my coat-tails. Solve the problems on your own, and compete honestly. Don't compete by looking at my solution.'
Aside from the false starting about openoficce, this one is real, but it looks to me that he's defending that Larry's can choose, which is not the same than agreeing with him
AMD ambushed Intel by moving up their dual core release date. In response, Intel hasn't moved up their actual release, because they can't, but is instead touting a phony paper release a day or two before the AMD date so as to appear to be first.
Replace AMD with Intel and Intel with AMD and you've what AMD did a couple of weeks ago.
They are. This "news item" is so full of pro-Intel baloney it has to be a paid placement. AMD started shipping their dual core Opterons to OEMs a couple months ago. HP will have a dual-core Opteron server available for immediate delivery on AMD's release date of April 21. Intel wanted really badly to be first with dual core processor release,
A couple of weeks ago the official date for amd dual-core chips was for Q3 or so, they moved it to 21 April a couple of weeks ago. AMD is playing the same game than Intel.
My prediction is: These will be hard to get, and the AMD parts will be all over the world on the day they announce.
Not quite. In the start AMD was planning to release dual core CPUs at the end of 2005. Then Intel moved their dates ahead to the end of the 2nd quarter - and a couple of weeks ago AMD moved their dates too, it looks to me like they're playing to see who releases dual core CPUs before.
Intel parts will be hard to get, but the AMD ones will not be better
That the majority of AMD motherboards you see on store shelves are broken? Bullshit.
Go to a store, buy a motherboard with a shitty chipset and fill all the PCI holes with a clever combination of expensive cards which forces the chipset to work hard to give all the neede resources to those cards.
Sure, it'll work with only a nvidia card, but don't ask for more because low-end chipsets are designed to put nvidia cards in it, end of the story. The high-end x86 hardware is biased towards Intel, it's a fact and some people seem to hate facts. Perhaps AMD will get better chipsets with the time, but that's something that doesn't happend in a couple of months.
what exactly do you perceive the problem to be with, say, nforce3 chipset? or via's kt800? maybe you just buy intel because you don't bother to keep up with the choices?
The problem is that they're low-end chipsets. Nvidia started to
I've a friend who likes to test mainboards, he uses several combinations of PCI cards filling all the PCI slots with expensive SCSI cards, etc
Most of the VIA/nvidia chipset can't even be used. They don't work, even in win nt, etc. Several of them don't even pass the post bios test. Intel chipsets and cia usually do well most of the time
In short, most of the better amd-based mainboards are crappy, and the good intel-based boards behave better. no matter how slow and hot intel CPUs are. People knows this, and there's a reason why intel has 90-95% of the x86 server market
This already was said in the past. It won't happen.
See, Intel has 80% of the desktop market and 90-95% of the x86 server market. This is quite unlike to change. It doesn't really matters how fast are AMD CPUs, people seems to care more about the chipsets, and that's the achiles' heel of AMD, they just make CPUs not chipsets.
With intel, I can buy a motherboard with a intel or serverworks chipsets, which is not exactly the same than a VIA/Nvidia shitty chipset that people uses with AMDs.
If we're using Free sofware because software ought to be free, then using proprietary software doesn't make sense. It's like saying that you're going on a hunger strike to protest something...but eating a few crackers every day or so. This is what he said, I don't necisarily agree or disagree.
Then RMS should apply that to himself because he needed to use non-free software when he started to develop GNU. And until linux was there, I guess he couldn't use a free kernel either.
BK is not different from this particular bit of GNU history. Linus started to use BK because he needed it. Not using BK (or other propietary tool) and using a free (but inferior) SCM would have mean that the kernel development rate would have slowed down, and it'd have been worse for the free software (we) overall, even GNU people. I mean, why a propietary tool has always to be harmful? BK has been certainly good for the linux kernel, and the fact that linus uses it has not taken away my freedom...
Slashdot Mirror
WHO GIVES A STINKING SHIT ABOUT TIGER??
The Apple-bashing room is on the other door, here only google bashing please
I use /etc/hosts to filter ad sites, but I wonder if it's the "best way" of doing it. I have some docens of lines on that file like this:
0.0.0.1 doubleclick.net ad.doubleclick.net ads.mcafee.com 247.vo.llnw.net
0.0.0.1 doubleclick.com m.doubleclick.net m2.doubleclick.net ad.au.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.1 ads.web.aol.com ads.web.de ads.web21.com adserv.newcentury.net
0.0.0.1 adservant.guj.de adservant.mediapoint.de adserver-espnet.sportszone.com
0.0.0.1 advert.heise.de banners.internetextra.com bannerswap.com customad.cnn.com
0.0.0.1 pagead2.googlesyndication.com
which will make browsers fail when they try to show you ads. The list is longer (get it if you're curious)
But this seems a bit "hacky". Is there a better way to do this, is there some project which keeps track of such ad sites, or even ip ranges and allows you to block them easily?
What does launchd exactly do, wait on "events"? Ie, it doesn't starts cupsd, it waits for somebody to try to print something?
Why on earth would you want a torrent for Solaris 10? Torrents are great for people who can't allow the bandwith & server costs, but dude, we're talking about SUN. They can do it
And with bittorrent you don't just download things, you've to upload too. And sun is offering you their powerful servers with huge bandwith, with no upload costs to you, and you ask for a torrent? How stupid.
That 512 CPU setup is a custom fork of Linux made by SGI. Also, measuring scalability in number of CPUs is like measuring speed in MHz.
....and most of it is already in 2.6, and the rest is being integrated, so what's your point?
See all the benchmarks done during the 2.5 development to decide if linux "scales" or not.
As desktop OS I suppose. As much as I like linux, Solaris IS a good choice for servers - and the download is gratis, and it will be open sourced soon.
I don't think Solaris will beat redhat & cia though. With linux 2.6 scaling to 512 CPUs boxes and huge storage devices, is no longer a toy
American public should be allowed to use that service. Considering they paid for it with their taxes, I don't see how this bill could be passed!
America seems to have this stupid tradition of "EVerythingShouldBePrivate". I suppose the for-pay weather companies would want to ban the public service because they "believe" that private-only comapnies will improve competence.
Which is stupid, services should'nt be just public or private, they should be public if they benefit the consumer being public and private if they don't. Wheater looks to me like something that americans should have right to access freely. What will be the next stupidity, trying to supress the congress by a bunch of private congresists?
He is not allowed to write one because of the license
Besides, rewriting BK doesn't mean that reverse-engineering does everything. Developing BK has taken many years and many developers. Look at wine for a example.
http://lists.seyza.com/pipermail/gnu-arch-dev/2005 -April/001097.html
I hate to say this...do I have to hate software patents?
...this is good or is bad? Damn, my knowledge is based in what /. considers right or wrong, if you don't say me what I've to think I don't know what to think!
Record the voice, learn to imitate the voice of somebody? Damn, I'm going to start trying to mimc the voice of Bill Gates
:P
And what will happen when you're cold and your voice is not the same? In fact, teenagers would not be able to use it from one year to another
Someone should start it. Seriously, google seems to produce new things every two days or so.
I hope it does better than it did at Yahoo. In the latest years, Yahoo has not been exactly the "head of R & D" in search engines. They've done a few nice things, but they're far from being the leaders on that field.
Why do they have to Open Source?
Because if we wouldn't care about open source, we would use windows. Open source was born for something.
READ this before installing it: http://lwn.net/Articles/129729/
Remote Approach's reporting did not work when we viewed the document with Kpdf, Xpdf and Adobe Reader 5.0.10. It also failed using Apple's "Preview" application on Mac OS X. The document was still viewable with no apparent glitch in other PDF readers, but the reporting function did not work. However, when we opened the file using Adobe Acrobat Reader 7, Remote Approach started logging views from our IP address. After doing a little research, we found that Adobe's Reader was connecting to http://www.remoteapproach.com/remoteapproach/loggi ng.asp each time we opened the document
(Easy fix: Assign a IP which doesn't work ie: 0.0.0.1 to www.remoteapproach.com in your /etc/hosts)
"What Larry is not fine with, is somebody writing a free replacement by just reverse-engineering what he did. Larry has a very clear moral standpoint: 'You can compete with me, but you can't do so by riding on my coat-tails. Solve the problems on your own, and compete honestly. Don't compete by looking at my solution.'
Aside from the false starting about openoficce, this one is real, but it looks to me that he's defending that Larry's can choose, which is not the same than agreeing with him
AMD ambushed Intel by moving up their dual core release date. In response, Intel hasn't moved up their actual release, because they can't, but is instead touting a phony paper release a day or two before the AMD date so as to appear to be first.
Replace AMD with Intel and Intel with AMD and you've what AMD did a couple of weeks ago.
Just last week we were all ment to assume that Dell (oops, I mean Intel) wasn't ready to ship dual core until Q1 of next year...
Intel announced that they'd ship their cual core chips more than a month ago. It you're suprised, you're the only one
They are. This "news item" is so full of pro-Intel baloney it has to be a paid placement. AMD started shipping their dual core Opterons to OEMs a couple months ago. HP will have a dual-core Opteron server available for immediate delivery on AMD's release date of April 21. Intel wanted really badly to be first with dual core processor release,
A couple of weeks ago the official date for amd dual-core chips was for Q3 or so, they moved it to 21 April a couple of weeks ago. AMD is playing the same game than Intel.
My prediction is: These will be hard to get, and the AMD parts will be all over the world on the day they announce.
Not quite. In the start AMD was planning to release dual core CPUs at the end of 2005. Then Intel moved their dates ahead to the end of the 2nd quarter - and a couple of weeks ago AMD moved their dates too, it looks to me like they're playing to see who releases dual core CPUs before.
Intel parts will be hard to get, but the AMD ones will not be better
That the majority of AMD motherboards you see on store shelves are broken? Bullshit.
Go to a store, buy a motherboard with a shitty chipset and fill all the PCI holes with a clever combination of expensive cards which forces the chipset to work hard to give all the neede resources to those cards.
Sure, it'll work with only a nvidia card, but don't ask for more because low-end chipsets are designed to put nvidia cards in it, end of the story. The high-end x86 hardware is biased towards Intel, it's a fact and some people seem to hate facts. Perhaps AMD will get better chipsets with the time, but that's something that doesn't happend in a couple of months.
what exactly do you perceive the problem to be with, say, nforce3 chipset? or via's kt800? maybe you just buy intel because you don't bother to keep up with the choices?
The problem is that they're low-end chipsets. Nvidia started to
I've a friend who likes to test mainboards, he uses several combinations of PCI cards filling all the PCI slots with expensive SCSI cards, etc
Most of the VIA/nvidia chipset can't even be used. They don't work, even in win nt, etc. Several of them don't even pass the post bios test. Intel chipsets and cia usually do well most of the time
In short, most of the better amd-based mainboards are crappy, and the good intel-based boards behave better. no matter how slow and hot intel CPUs are. People knows this, and there's a reason why intel has 90-95% of the x86 server market
This already was said in the past. It won't happen.
See, Intel has 80% of the desktop market and 90-95% of the x86 server market. This is quite unlike to change. It doesn't really matters how fast are AMD CPUs, people seems to care more about the chipsets, and that's the achiles' heel of AMD, they just make CPUs not chipsets.
With intel, I can buy a motherboard with a intel or serverworks chipsets, which is not exactly the same than a VIA/Nvidia shitty chipset that people uses with AMDs.
If we're using Free sofware because software ought to be free, then using proprietary software doesn't make sense. It's like saying that you're going on a hunger strike to protest something...but eating a few crackers every day or so. This is what he said, I don't necisarily agree or disagree.
Then RMS should apply that to himself because he needed to use non-free software when he started to develop GNU. And until linux was there, I guess he couldn't use a free kernel either.
BK is not different from this particular bit of GNU history. Linus started to use BK because he needed it. Not using BK (or other propietary tool) and using a free (but inferior) SCM would have mean that the kernel development rate would have slowed down, and it'd have been worse for the free software (we) overall, even GNU people. I mean, why a propietary tool has always to be harmful? BK has been certainly good for the linux kernel, and the fact that linus uses it has not taken away my freedom...