I actually like mongrel clusters as an exercise in horizontal scaling. The reason I'd consider modrails is that it's somewhat faster.
Remember, once you've got a mongrel cluster -- complete with "complicated" (read: five simple config lines that you copy and paste) rewrite rules -- it's trivial to put a few more mongrels on another machine.
This, IMHO, goes to show that Ruby isn't any better at security than the other Open Source interpreted languages. Fixed that for you.
And it never claimed to be. I don't know anyone who uses Ruby because it's more secure. Everyone I know who uses Ruby does so because of the beautiful syntax, pervasive OO, and other things that make it nicer to program in.
far less mature then, let's say, Python or PHP. Oh,really?
And again, it's not the security. I'm willing to risk having to patch my interpreter like this once in awhile, if it means I'm able to
Keep in mind, this vulnerability is so far only a DoS, and won't necessarily affect most installations. Most people run multiple interpreters serving a single site, each load-balanced to. Knock out one and it'll be restarted, while the other continues to serve content.
Which brings us to your next point...
A matured, tested and established mod_ruby, unicode and a few years more in the field is what Ruby needs before I take a look at it. Well, let's see -- Unicode has existed, albeit not great, for quite awhile. 1.9 has had Unicode strings from the beginning.
mod_ruby -- you do realize pretty much no one in the Ruby world uses Apache, right? It's all mongrels and nginx... But if you must, there's Passenger.
a few years more in the field is what Ruby needs before I take a look at it. Obviously, you really haven't taken a look at it.
I don't know how bad Facebook is, but think of every story, every complaint you've ever had about Myspace, technology-wise.
It's worse than that.
Simple example: Trying to pull tour dates from Myspace. Too much to expect that they'd have a working iCal feed, or that they'd put hCal on the page. Fine, we'll scrape the HTML, no problem...
No, the real WTF moment was the month (I think, might've been more) during which none of the calendars worked.
People joke about Twitter being unable to scale, but really, you'd think with the amount of money Myspace pulls in, they'd be able to hire one good tech person? I'm guessing that's a major reason people are going to Facebook.
Java is Java, JavaScript is JavaScript. Believe me, I know. I've worked with JavaScript for years, and thankfully, I no longer have to touch Java. I realize JavaScript is really more of a LISP dialect with a C-like syntax.
No part of Gmail uses Java. If by "no part" you mean "pretty much every part", you're right. Gmail was built with the Google Web Toolkit, which allows you to write the whole app in Java. It then takes certain classes, written in Java, and "compiles" them to JavaScript.
your average BLAH_CRACK.EXE is a virus Well, you might think the same would be true of your average torrent, or your average burned CD. But most people will open attachments from their friends that say "OMG you have to see this screensaver!!!"
As for strong clue, there's a quick virus scan of the downloaded file, combined with a decent source.
most people don't find a 3 minute phone call every few months(/years) frustrating Assuming it only takes a 3 minute phone call, then the DRM would not work, because all the pirate would have to do is call and social engineer himself into an activation. I know people who do this with Windows -- just claim it's the same computer, and you get a key.
most people are organised enough not to lose something that cost them several $100s. Again, it depends on the product. In the case of games, it cost more like $50, at best.
Because you are almost NEVER going to find a woman that will admit the truth of it. Haven't seen any denying it, either. I actually just want to hear what they have to say.
Check from a fresh Hardy install. I'm not sure, but from what I remember, it ran a script to download it separately, and did request that you agree to that license. It also keeps track of that agreement, so you can reinstall without re-agreeing.
No, No it doesn't. My software, as in software that I've written.
When that appliance is operating in any way that the manufacturer didn't intend, And they are using my code in a way I didn't intend.
I would call not creating drivers That's lack of effort, not a deliberate attempt.
not warranting defective parts Never had a defective part refused because I'd installed Linux. At the worst, I might have to restore Windows to prove that it is actually the hardware which is defective.
And again -- this is a lack of effort. It is not as if they deliberately don't support Linux -- rather, that they deliberately choose to train their phone operators to diagnose Windows problems.
reformatting hidden partitions in an obscure code in order to keep their recovery partition in tact so they don't have to send CDs Except they still send CDs, you just have to request them first. And who says the code is intended to thwart Linux? It seems it would be useful for their own tools.
Unless your installing different operating systems violate copyright, then I'm not sure how relevant it is. Unless my installing different operating systems on my TiVo violates copyright, I'm not sure how relevant it is to copyright violation.
I thought you just said they didn't... Laptop manufacturers don't. "Appliance" manufacturers do.
But in an appliance like a Tivo or whatever, certain parts of the hardware are specifically designed to control of copyrighted works so when you defeat that control, don't expect it to work. Ah, I see what you mean by "dealing with reality."
In various Muslim countries, women have pretty much no rights. I believe that is wrong. You seem to believe that it's her own fault if a woman visits to that country -- maybe true, but beside the point.
Let me be very clear: I am not expecting to buy a Tivo, take it apart, recompile the OS, and have it work. I realize that will not happen. I also realize Tivo won't help me if I do that.
I do, however, find it ludicrous that Tivo would put forth an effort to prevent me from doing so, which they have -- you don't dispute that. This is the collateral damage I speak of -- Tivo likely doesn't care what I build with my hardware, all they care about is the copy protection. But that copy protection severely limits what I could build.
And it is downright insulting if they are going to use my (free) labor to build such a thing.
If you take it apart to collect parts for your robot, they won't work as the manufacturer intended. Do you see how that is?... You take the motor from a drill, and guess what it doesn't drill anymore. You have proved my point. I take the motor from a drill, and it still motors. I take a motor from something else, put it in the drill, and it still drills.
It's not as though there is C4 inside the drill, designed to detonate if I tamper with it.
It is these two concepts which you still seem unable to grasp: The GPL was intended, clearly and plainly, to ensure a right to tinker, with hardware -- the rules have not changed, only a loophole has been closed. And there is a considerable difference between refusing to help and actually hindering -- certainly to the extent that these "appliance" manufacturers go.
Maybe you have no problem with it -- in which case, we'll just disagree, and there's no point continuing this. But instead, you're reiterating the same arguments, and calling names -- I guess there still isn't a point in continuing this.
Right. I don't see any way that distinguishes between fake RST packets and real ones. Sure, they'll timeout eventually, but I really wouldn't want to see this adopted by a large population of torrent users.
Unless they can get the copy off their equally non-nerdy friends, which is precisely what DRM stops. Or unless they can get the copy off a nerdy friend -- or a nerdy "friend" who's released it onto thepiratebay, or wherever. And once one of them has the DRM-free copy, they can share it with their friends, and the whole system comes tumbling down.
Let me spell it out for you:
90-95% (taken from large population of my clients) of computer users still have no idea how to break it It doesn't take 10% to break it. It doesn't take 5%.
It takes one person to break it for everyone.
No, DRM does not work. If it has worked for you so far, you either aren't popular enough yet (niche market), or you're lucky -- and, possibly, your DRM scheme isn't too much trouble for your legitimate users.
Yeah, that's the other problem:
most non-nerds value their time above the effort required to find an unauthorised DRM-free copy of something. So it's all about time, right?
How about time lost due to having to get on the phone to re-authorize something which thinks you've installed too many times? Or to re-validate a key that doesn't work for some reason?
How about time lost due to the physical requirements -- having to keep track of a dongle as the one copy of that program moves around, or having to keep the original CD -- or looking for an open network connection, if, for some reason, the DRm decides to kick in and demand to talk to the authorization servers?
At a certain point, going to, say, gamecopyworld.com, and spending maybe two minutes to download a crack, maybe five more to install it if you don't know what you're doing, is well worth the hours of agony you'd endure putting up with the DRM.
Again, this may not apply to you -- but there are certainly cases in which DRM does the exact opposite of "work". Especially because now you've got someone who would have happily bought a legit copy every time, but now they know how to get an illegitimate copy. As someone else said, if your process is this:
1: Buy game 2: Try to install game 3: Get frustrated 4: Download cracked version (or get geek friend to do so)
You'll very quickly eliminate steps 2 and 3. From there, it's not that much of a leap to eliminate step 1.
I tried after all that, to emulate somewhat the actions and attitudes I saw the successful 'assholes' did towards women, and guess what? Yep...I started getting more 'lucky'. In fact, someone distilled exactly this down to a philosophy, and then wrote a book about training yourself to be just that. He called it "cocky but funny".
In particular, it was almost entirely about getting laid, precisely because of this:
And, once you are in the friend zone before sleeping with them, you generally never get out of that zone. Weird, but true -- it's easier to become her friend once you've slept together, than it is to sleep together once you're a friend.
Oh..they may eventually grab the steady, meeker nice guy, and have kids with them because they are stable, but then they will often go out and cheat.... These aren't mutually exclusive, by the way. There's a very specific set of behaviors that can trigger that "bad boy" reaction, but they don't actually make you something you're not -- no need to buy leather pants and a motorcycle or anything. The point is not to be a complete asshole, but rather to take the personality you already have, and present it differently.
Interesting, though -- I haven't seen (that I know of) any comments on this thread by actual women.
yes... I've had that speech from women far too often "you're so nice, why can't the guys I date be more like you?" Here's my favorite illustration of this:
DragonflyBlade21: A woman has a close male friend. This means that he is probably interested in her, which is why he hangs around so much. She sees him strictly as a friend. This always starts out with, you're a great guy, but I don't like you in that way. This is roughly the equivalent for the guy of going to a job interview and the company saying, You have a great resume, you have all the qualifications we are looking for, but we're not going to hire you. We will, however, use your resume as the basis for comparison for all other applicants. But, we're going to hire somebody who is far less qualified and is probably an alcoholic. And if he doesn't work out, we'll hire somebody else, but still not you. In fact, we will never hire you. But we will call you from time to time to complain about the person that we hired. So, to all the nice guys out there -- read this, and remember it. At a certain point, you have to call them on it -- say "I'm sorry you got hurt, but it's your own fucking fault." Or, when you get the "nice guy" speech, say "I'm right here."
Not only will this make you less of an emotional bitch for her, but it will also show at least some of the qualities that she seems to like -- assertiveness, bluntness...
These are people with leadership qualities Indeed. One seemingly stupid definition of a leader I once heard is: "Someone with followers". Hmm. I can see the correlation, somewhat -- but not all leaders are assholes.
If you become aware of such things then you are able to take a 3rd person view of yourself when such natural instincts arise and then are better able to deal with the situation with a clear head. Or, in other words, you should be smart enough to figure it out.
Then you shoudl be smart enough to not fall for a cute chick who is gorgeuos and seems cool but really just used you for your money right? Exactly.
Except for the part where you should also be smart enough to spell "should" and "gorgeous" -- are there any major browsers left that don't auto-spellcheck textareas?
Gmail specifically targets browsers -- it "compiles" different versions of the page (and the javascript) from the original Java source in a different way for each supported browser, and then the proper "compiled" version is selected based on user-agent.
Given that, unless Opera is explicitly targeted by Google, good luck. Despite Safari being more or less supported, I believe Konqueror does best when identifying as Firefox... weird.
When I'm stuck without X, I like the web browsers, but honestly, what has more often saved me is irssi. This being because when I am stuck without X, usually my first priority is to regain X.
Except modern physics engines (see: Quake 1 for MS DOS) use threads for each individual moving physics object Name one engine that is that stupid.
When we're talking about game worlds in which there could easily be 50 or 100 objects on the screen at once, it makes much more sense to have maybe one physics thread (separate from the render thread, and the AI thread) -- or maybe one per core. I very much doubt one real OS thread per object would work well at all.
First: Do NOT store them as playable DVDs. If you transcode them at all (from whatever your camcorder records), put them in h.264, with a decent audio codec -- something like aac, ac3, ogg, anything but mp3.
That alone should drop you from 100 gigs to 20 gigs, without much loss in quality.
This, combined with scripts to periodically check discs, create parity, and replace/re-burn defective discs, should give me a fair amount of somewhat-reliable storage. Combined with a FUSE filesystem driver, it should also give me relatively easy, sort-of random access (very slow seek time). It would also be upgradeable to Blu-Ray, if that ever gets cheaper per gig than DVD5.
Not that I advocate this to anyone who doesn't have a few dozen (hundred?) hours to kill building a robot, but I think the same basic principles apply -- use parity, check periodically for bad media (and replace it immediately), and DVD5s are about the cheapest storage you can get today.
There is one other possibility worth considering: Just use Amazon S3. 100 gigs = $10 to upload and $10/mo to store.
Given the lengths they went to, first to fight the very notion of an open standard format, and then to push OOXML, it seems hard to believe that this is over.
I'm as happy as anyone else if it is, but it's very unlike MS. To my knowledge, this has happened only once before, with HTML, and we're still paying for the fallout of that one.
tar is still a good choice. For an NTFS partition? Really?
Let's take it as a given that I will have to reinstall the bootloader. Will it capture the "hidden" flag? Will it capture alternate file streams? How about ACLs?
I suspect that everything you can do in NTFS, you can also do (to some extent) in Linux. But I'm not sure they map one to one, certainly when mounting -- by default, all files end up being owned by the user who mounted the drive.
Slashdot Mirror
I actually like mongrel clusters as an exercise in horizontal scaling. The reason I'd consider modrails is that it's somewhat faster.
Remember, once you've got a mongrel cluster -- complete with "complicated" (read: five simple config lines that you copy and paste) rewrite rules -- it's trivial to put a few more mongrels on another machine.
And it never claimed to be. I don't know anyone who uses Ruby because it's more secure. Everyone I know who uses Ruby does so because of the beautiful syntax, pervasive OO, and other things that make it nicer to program in.
far less mature then, let's say, Python or PHP. Oh, really?And again, it's not the security. I'm willing to risk having to patch my interpreter like this once in awhile, if it means I'm able to
Keep in mind, this vulnerability is so far only a DoS, and won't necessarily affect most installations. Most people run multiple interpreters serving a single site, each load-balanced to. Knock out one and it'll be restarted, while the other continues to serve content.
Which brings us to your next point...
A matured, tested and established mod_ruby, unicode and a few years more in the field is what Ruby needs before I take a look at it. Well, let's see -- Unicode has existed, albeit not great, for quite awhile. 1.9 has had Unicode strings from the beginning.mod_ruby -- you do realize pretty much no one in the Ruby world uses Apache, right? It's all mongrels and nginx... But if you must, there's Passenger.
a few years more in the field is what Ruby needs before I take a look at it. Obviously, you really haven't taken a look at it.I don't know how bad Facebook is, but think of every story, every complaint you've ever had about Myspace, technology-wise.
It's worse than that.
Simple example: Trying to pull tour dates from Myspace. Too much to expect that they'd have a working iCal feed, or that they'd put hCal on the page. Fine, we'll scrape the HTML, no problem...
No, the real WTF moment was the month (I think, might've been more) during which none of the calendars worked.
People joke about Twitter being unable to scale, but really, you'd think with the amount of money Myspace pulls in, they'd be able to hire one good tech person? I'm guessing that's a major reason people are going to Facebook.
As for strong clue, there's a quick virus scan of the downloaded file, combined with a decent source.
most people don't find a 3 minute phone call every few months(/years) frustrating Assuming it only takes a 3 minute phone call, then the DRM would not work, because all the pirate would have to do is call and social engineer himself into an activation. I know people who do this with Windows -- just claim it's the same computer, and you get a key. most people are organised enough not to lose something that cost them several $100s. Again, it depends on the product. In the case of games, it cost more like $50, at best.Sorry, popunder. Fucking flash popunder. Blacklisting that site.
Check from a fresh Hardy install. I'm not sure, but from what I remember, it ran a script to download it separately, and did request that you agree to that license. It also keeps track of that agreement, so you can reinstall without re-agreeing.
I could be wrong, though.
And again -- this is a lack of effort. It is not as if they deliberately don't support Linux -- rather, that they deliberately choose to train their phone operators to diagnose Windows problems.
reformatting hidden partitions in an obscure code in order to keep their recovery partition in tact so they don't have to send CDs Except they still send CDs, you just have to request them first. And who says the code is intended to thwart Linux? It seems it would be useful for their own tools. Unless your installing different operating systems violate copyright, then I'm not sure how relevant it is. Unless my installing different operating systems on my TiVo violates copyright, I'm not sure how relevant it is to copyright violation. I thought you just said they didn't... Laptop manufacturers don't. "Appliance" manufacturers do. But in an appliance like a Tivo or whatever, certain parts of the hardware are specifically designed to control of copyrighted works so when you defeat that control, don't expect it to work. Ah, I see what you mean by "dealing with reality."In various Muslim countries, women have pretty much no rights. I believe that is wrong. You seem to believe that it's her own fault if a woman visits to that country -- maybe true, but beside the point.
Let me be very clear: I am not expecting to buy a Tivo, take it apart, recompile the OS, and have it work. I realize that will not happen. I also realize Tivo won't help me if I do that.
I do, however, find it ludicrous that Tivo would put forth an effort to prevent me from doing so, which they have -- you don't dispute that. This is the collateral damage I speak of -- Tivo likely doesn't care what I build with my hardware, all they care about is the copy protection. But that copy protection severely limits what I could build.
And it is downright insulting if they are going to use my (free) labor to build such a thing.
If you take it apart to collect parts for your robot, they won't work as the manufacturer intended. Do you see how that is?It's not as though there is C4 inside the drill, designed to detonate if I tamper with it.
It is these two concepts which you still seem unable to grasp: The GPL was intended, clearly and plainly, to ensure a right to tinker, with hardware -- the rules have not changed, only a loophole has been closed. And there is a considerable difference between refusing to help and actually hindering -- certainly to the extent that these "appliance" manufacturers go.
Maybe you have no problem with it -- in which case, we'll just disagree, and there's no point continuing this. But instead, you're reiterating the same arguments, and calling names -- I guess there still isn't a point in continuing this.
Right. I don't see any way that distinguishes between fake RST packets and real ones. Sure, they'll timeout eventually, but I really wouldn't want to see this adopted by a large population of torrent users.
Let me spell it out for you:
90-95% (taken from large population of my clients) of computer users still have no idea how to break it It doesn't take 10% to break it. It doesn't take 5%.It takes one person to break it for everyone.
No, DRM does not work. If it has worked for you so far, you either aren't popular enough yet (niche market), or you're lucky -- and, possibly, your DRM scheme isn't too much trouble for your legitimate users.
Yeah, that's the other problem:
most non-nerds value their time above the effort required to find an unauthorised DRM-free copy of something. So it's all about time, right?How about time lost due to having to get on the phone to re-authorize something which thinks you've installed too many times? Or to re-validate a key that doesn't work for some reason?
How about time lost due to the physical requirements -- having to keep track of a dongle as the one copy of that program moves around, or having to keep the original CD -- or looking for an open network connection, if, for some reason, the DRm decides to kick in and demand to talk to the authorization servers?
At a certain point, going to, say, gamecopyworld.com, and spending maybe two minutes to download a crack, maybe five more to install it if you don't know what you're doing, is well worth the hours of agony you'd endure putting up with the DRM.
Again, this may not apply to you -- but there are certainly cases in which DRM does the exact opposite of "work". Especially because now you've got someone who would have happily bought a legit copy every time, but now they know how to get an illegitimate copy. As someone else said, if your process is this:
1: Buy game
2: Try to install game
3: Get frustrated
4: Download cracked version (or get geek friend to do so)
You'll very quickly eliminate steps 2 and 3. From there, it's not that much of a leap to eliminate step 1.
In particular, it was almost entirely about getting laid, precisely because of this:
And, once you are in the friend zone before sleeping with them, you generally never get out of that zone. Weird, but true -- it's easier to become her friend once you've slept together, than it is to sleep together once you're a friend. Oh..they may eventually grab the steady, meeker nice guy, and have kids with them because they are stable, but then they will often go out and cheat.... These aren't mutually exclusive, by the way. There's a very specific set of behaviors that can trigger that "bad boy" reaction, but they don't actually make you something you're not -- no need to buy leather pants and a motorcycle or anything. The point is not to be a complete asshole, but rather to take the personality you already have, and present it differently.Interesting, though -- I haven't seen (that I know of) any comments on this thread by actual women.
Not only will this make you less of an emotional bitch for her, but it will also show at least some of the qualities that she seems to like -- assertiveness, bluntness...
Except for the part where you should also be smart enough to spell "should" and "gorgeous" -- are there any major browsers left that don't auto-spellcheck textareas?
Gmail specifically targets browsers -- it "compiles" different versions of the page (and the javascript) from the original Java source in a different way for each supported browser, and then the proper "compiled" version is selected based on user-agent.
Given that, unless Opera is explicitly targeted by Google, good luck. Despite Safari being more or less supported, I believe Konqueror does best when identifying as Firefox... weird.
Can this be set per-site? I know I can do the user-agent per-site, at least, in Konqueror.
When I'm stuck without X, I like the web browsers, but honestly, what has more often saved me is irssi. This being because when I am stuck without X, usually my first priority is to regain X.
When we're talking about game worlds in which there could easily be 50 or 100 objects on the screen at once, it makes much more sense to have maybe one physics thread (separate from the render thread, and the AI thread) -- or maybe one per core. I very much doubt one real OS thread per object would work well at all.
First: Do NOT store them as playable DVDs. If you transcode them at all (from whatever your camcorder records), put them in h.264, with a decent audio codec -- something like aac, ac3, ogg, anything but mp3.
That alone should drop you from 100 gigs to 20 gigs, without much loss in quality.
More to the point: The way I intend to deal with this is to build a CD-changing robot. You know, something like this -- the cheapest commercial versions are more than I'm willing to pay.
This, combined with scripts to periodically check discs, create parity, and replace/re-burn defective discs, should give me a fair amount of somewhat-reliable storage. Combined with a FUSE filesystem driver, it should also give me relatively easy, sort-of random access (very slow seek time). It would also be upgradeable to Blu-Ray, if that ever gets cheaper per gig than DVD5.
Not that I advocate this to anyone who doesn't have a few dozen (hundred?) hours to kill building a robot, but I think the same basic principles apply -- use parity, check periodically for bad media (and replace it immediately), and DVD5s are about the cheapest storage you can get today.
There is one other possibility worth considering: Just use Amazon S3. 100 gigs = $10 to upload and $10/mo to store.
That's 100 gigs for the first year. First child, for the first year of their life? Insane, but understandable.
If he has 500 gigs by 5 years old, though, that's when I wonder if we should call CPS.
Given the lengths they went to, first to fight the very notion of an open standard format, and then to push OOXML, it seems hard to believe that this is over.
I'm as happy as anyone else if it is, but it's very unlike MS. To my knowledge, this has happened only once before, with HTML, and we're still paying for the fallout of that one.
That won't work at all. Send it to their friends.
Point of Wikileaks was to (hopefully) get it indexed by Google, so that it will sneak up on them as a nasty surprise when someone googles their name.
Let's take it as a given that I will have to reinstall the bootloader. Will it capture the "hidden" flag? Will it capture alternate file streams? How about ACLs?
I suspect that everything you can do in NTFS, you can also do (to some extent) in Linux. But I'm not sure they map one to one, certainly when mounting -- by default, all files end up being owned by the user who mounted the drive.