Pamela Jones, the proprietor of Groklaw, suggests Linus Torvalds would have a great case for defamation as a result of this letter and subsequent events.
He's not going to get involved, no matter how nasty the other side is.
Besides, after IBM et al. get through with SCO, there's going to be nothing left but bones. Linus won't be able to collect anything.
I see the fine of $10,000,000 as a maximum to be completely impotent against a company with a financial foundation such as microsoft's.
I'm sure it was a mega-crapload in 1890 when the Sherman act was written. What needs to happen is fines specified in legislation need to be indexed to inflation. So that $10 mil would be like $1 billion today or something.
The connections between Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, and international terror are IRREFUTABLE
Can you provide this irrefutable evidence? Really, I would like to examine some references. The only evidence I have seen regarding connections between Hussein and the Taliban were mostly conjecture. Last I checked, even Bush is not speaking to any connection.
A while back I was working at EA sports. The guy beside me was drinking a coke, and the manager comes up to him and says
"hey where'd you get that coke?"
"uh, from the vending machine."
Later that day, he was fired. Turns out, the vending machine sells pepsi, and he stole the coke out of the fridge from someone.
An extremely minor offense, and who the hell cares about a coke right? Well the point was that they could no longer trust him. If he would steal a coke, maybe he'll steal a CD, or a cartridge. When there's millions of dollars on the line, you need to be able to trust your employees 100% and nothing less. If the guy will post a picture of the loading dock, maybe next he'll post a picture of the test lab, with longhorn running in the back.
That coke thing was a running joke for about 6 months after that.
every email message is stored in a separate file....I used a maildir folder containing 50,000 emails.
Sure it would have been better for him to run a number of scenarios, but he couldn't build himself a whole lab due to cost factors. Even with this rudimentary testing, a difference of 8 times indicates to me that there is an effect.
Holy crap, I need to pry myself away from this shit . I'll give it one more post because you have really pissed me off with your refusal to see what I am saying, and your inability to see what even you have said.
> Because you said so.
I never said that. Why would you say that I did?
Because you did, in this post which I quote in it's entirety.
Re:Some facts (Score:3, Informative)
by consumer (9588) on Friday October 17, @12:24PM (#7240637)
PHP provides persistent connections, so the system does not need to reconnect to the database on each hit. It also provides various caching tools, like memcached [danga.com]. Charts and graphs are typically handled with third-party libraries. It's not exactly hard.
I'm arguing with Bagdhad Bob here. What you should have said, which would have produced a much more intelligent conversation was "PHP persists database connections over the life of the page execution."
I never said that. In my PHP3 book
Nobody mentioned your book. If this is a tactic to gain some kind of credibility, it should fail as most books are crap.
> I know nothing of PHP...
Then why are you making such wild claims?
I have made ZERO claims regarding PHP. You just made this up, pulled out of your ass if you will. I only responded to your claim of persisting database connections. That is not a language specific issue. My posts assert one thing and one thing only, persisting database connections in session scope (over several page views) is a waste of resources. I don't see how language choice can change that fundamental concept.
> you have piss poor English skills, so goodbye.
What are you upset about?
I'm pissed because you made a vague claim about persisting database connections (see quote above). I misunderstood your claim because of the vague wording. You quickly realized I misunderstood, but instead of clarifying, you turned this into a flame fest. All you had to say was "persist over the life of the page execution". When you say "persist" you have to qualify that. You can persist to disk, you can persist to application scope, you can persist over function calls etc...It took me 5 seconds to come up with that more specific phrase. Surely you could have mentined it once in your last 5 posts.
You can reply, but I wont. Please understand a priori, that I consider any replies to this misguided due to your inattention, and I stand by every one of my statements in this post.
Why in the hell are you claiming PHP has processes sitting around doing nothing waiting on output from a particular user?
Because you said so. I know nothing of PHP but was relying on you saying that (and I quote) "PHP provides persistent connections, so the system does not need to reconnect to the database on each hit". I see now that you mean database hits, not webserver hits. Apparently you know what you are talking about technically, but you have piss poor English skills, so goodbye.
relinquishing a database connection is only a win when you have idle threads/processes
Right, and since in between page requests, the user is idle staring at their screen, and considering your original assertion "PHP provides persistent connections, so the system does not need to reconnect to the database on each hit", then there will be persisted idle database connections in between requests, which could be allocated to something useful.
Again, we are talking about the MAXIMUM that the application can handle
Let me quote the original post that you replied to, in order to determine what we are talking about
But connection pooling scales much, much better than persistent connections... Especially when each user makes only a couple of requests.
We are talking about scaling in a multi user environment. This concept which you refer to "MAXIMUM the application can handle" seems to assume that every single user performs some function simultaneously. Such a scenario, in a typical application, simply does not occur. When designing a high performance multi user application, you must consider the resources tied up by users who are not currently active.
If you are referring to a specific and unusual kind of software where these principles don't apply, please tell me what kind of application you work on where users are never idle.
The amount of load when the application is idle doesn't seem like a terribly important issue
OK are we talking about a multi-user application? I am.
We must understand the difference between one user being idle and the whole application and DB being idle. When one user is idle, if that user holds an open DB connection, that needlessly ties up resources that other users could be using. Surely this is quite evident.
Connection pooling only scales better if most of the time in your application is spent doing calculations
In the majority of applications, most of the time is spent idle waiting for the user to do something. If you are holding a DB connection during this period, that is extremely wasteful.
1. 20 year patents. I think the argument is that Congress should change it, and perhaps the world, if patent law has to be harmonized. The fact that it is Congress that has chosen the length of time isn't an argument for or against the timeframe. The fact that some software lasts longer than 20 years, and that the internet specifically has been useful for longer than 20 years is immaterial. The purpose of patents, according to the US constitution, is to "promote the progress of science and useful arts", by allowing the inventor to benefit for a time. This precludes the argument that the inventor should be able to benefit for the useful life of the invention. The question now is, how long is neccessary to "promote the progress of science and useful arts"? The answer is somewhat arbitrary, however I think 20 years for general inventions is probably excessive. For software, you acknowledge that the rate of change in this field is much greater, therefore I think it is obvious that 20 years is excessive in this more specific case.
2. I don't think your position differs significantly from mine or others on Slashdot. Some place blame on the PTO rather than Congress.
3. I am not familiar with this issue, and mentioned it only because others were on Slashdot. I think the issue was more about "obvious" patents, such as Amazon's one click checkout. Another company who attempted to patent hyperlinks was mentioned. The issue is not clear to me, and actually I was hoping you could clarify. For example, since Internet2 is getting started, could I patent "doing commerce on Internet2". This to me is obvious, but since Internet2 is fairly new, probably no one has patented this yet.
Well, that's bullshit. Laws are laws... either Microsoft is a monopoly by their laws or not.
Well according to the article, a monopoly in Israel is...."any company with 50 per cent market share. Tying is illegal, as is unreasonably refusing a service. violations are considered criminal felonies".
Do I need to convince you that Microsoft has 50% market share on the desktop? I hope not. So they are a monopoly, and thus have additional obligations under Israeli law, like not "unreasonably refusing a service". Therefore the country CAN "use its laws to try to force a company to do certain things". It can force them to provide the service.
I'm not sure on the details of this, but by the article, it seems that Bill Gates is now a criminal in Israel.
If the SCO can sue everyone, then surely you can. Whether you could win at trial or not is another matter, and I don't know as I am not a lawyer.
The point here is you don't even have to have a case, if you can turn up the heat on this company, you can get some kind of settlement. They will certainly fear a good lawyer, and the possiblitiy of bad press. These are your weapons.
Wow! You must listen to some REALLLLLLLLY stupid artists.
The artists I work for that have major label deals all make between $1 and $2 and album.
Gross or Net? Probably gross, and as has been noted countless times before, the expenses incurred can often reduce that number to zero, or less. Or do you dispute all the royalty calculations referenced by others on this thread? I suspect the calculations are accurate, as I haven't even seen the RIAA attempt to dispute them.
Why don't you talk about the bottom line, and tell us how much cash the artists walk away with at the end of the day, and how much the label does?
Remember, Kif: in the game of chess, you must never let your adversary see your pieces!
Getting the new satellite up is critical. If they can hit the bullzeye on that one, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!
I thought that was good advice too, until last week when I ran it to protect from the Blaster worm. After installing the patch, my webserver stopped working! I had to fiddle with my security settings to "work around" it. The problem is detailed here:
Slashdot Mirror
This is probably the one thread where the GNAA posts are ON topic.
We can watch all but the most weirdly long movies without changing DVDs. Is it supposed to be better quality?
Higher resolution, and so we won't have to buy the 15 disk set of The Hobbit, extended edition.
Pamela Jones, the proprietor of Groklaw, suggests Linus Torvalds would have a great case for defamation as a result of this letter and subsequent events.
He's not going to get involved, no matter how nasty the other side is.
Besides, after IBM et al. get through with SCO, there's going to be nothing left but bones. Linus won't be able to collect anything.
I accidentally modded parent redundant, so I'm posting here to counteract that....sorry
I'd argue that any time you're skipping school to play Doom, there's something wrong.
Absolutely. If you're skipping school to play Doom, you seriously need a computer upgrade.
I see the fine of $10,000,000 as a maximum to be completely impotent against a company with a financial foundation such as microsoft's.
I'm sure it was a mega-crapload in 1890 when the Sherman act was written. What needs to happen is fines specified in legislation need to be indexed to inflation. So that $10 mil would be like $1 billion today or something.
The connections between Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, and international terror are IRREFUTABLE
Can you provide this irrefutable evidence? Really, I would like to examine some references. The only evidence I have seen regarding connections between Hussein and the Taliban were mostly conjecture. Last I checked, even Bush is not speaking to any connection.
A while back I was working at EA sports. The guy beside me was drinking a coke, and the manager comes up to him and says
"hey where'd you get that coke?"
"uh, from the vending machine."
Later that day, he was fired. Turns out, the vending machine sells pepsi, and he stole the coke out of the fridge from someone.
An extremely minor offense, and who the hell cares about a coke right? Well the point was that they could no longer trust him. If he would steal a coke, maybe he'll steal a CD, or a cartridge. When there's millions of dollars on the line, you need to be able to trust your employees 100% and nothing less. If the guy will post a picture of the loading dock, maybe next he'll post a picture of the test lab, with longhorn running in the back.
That coke thing was a running joke for about 6 months after that.
"Hey Joe, is that my pencil?"
"nope, I got it from the vending machine!"
He reads one and only one file.
No, he read 50,000 files.
every email message is stored in a separate file....I used a maildir folder containing 50,000 emails.
Sure it would have been better for him to run a number of scenarios, but he couldn't build himself a whole lab due to cost factors. Even with this rudimentary testing, a difference of 8 times indicates to me that there is an effect.
Holy crap, I need to pry myself away from this shit . I'll give it one more post because you have really pissed me off with your refusal to see what I am saying, and your inability to see what even you have said.
> Because you said so. I never said that. Why would you say that I did?
Because you did, in this post which I quote in it's entirety.
Re:Some facts (Score:3, Informative) by consumer (9588) on Friday October 17, @12:24PM (#7240637) PHP provides persistent connections, so the system does not need to reconnect to the database on each hit. It also provides various caching tools, like memcached [danga.com]. Charts and graphs are typically handled with third-party libraries. It's not exactly hard.
I'm arguing with Bagdhad Bob here. What you should have said, which would have produced a much more intelligent conversation was "PHP persists database connections over the life of the page execution."
I never said that. In my PHP3 book
Nobody mentioned your book. If this is a tactic to gain some kind of credibility, it should fail as most books are crap.
> I know nothing of PHP... Then why are you making such wild claims?
I have made ZERO claims regarding PHP. You just made this up, pulled out of your ass if you will. I only responded to your claim of persisting database connections. That is not a language specific issue. My posts assert one thing and one thing only, persisting database connections in session scope (over several page views) is a waste of resources. I don't see how language choice can change that fundamental concept.
> you have piss poor English skills, so goodbye. What are you upset about?
I'm pissed because you made a vague claim about persisting database connections (see quote above). I misunderstood your claim because of the vague wording. You quickly realized I misunderstood, but instead of clarifying, you turned this into a flame fest. All you had to say was "persist over the life of the page execution". When you say "persist" you have to qualify that. You can persist to disk, you can persist to application scope, you can persist over function calls etc...It took me 5 seconds to come up with that more specific phrase. Surely you could have mentined it once in your last 5 posts.
You can reply, but I wont. Please understand a priori, that I consider any replies to this misguided due to your inattention, and I stand by every one of my statements in this post.
Why in the hell are you claiming PHP has processes sitting around doing nothing waiting on output from a particular user?
Because you said so. I know nothing of PHP but was relying on you saying that (and I quote) "PHP provides persistent connections, so the system does not need to reconnect to the database on each hit". I see now that you mean database hits, not webserver hits. Apparently you know what you are talking about technically, but you have piss poor English skills, so goodbye.
relinquishing a database connection is only a win when you have idle threads/processes
Right, and since in between page requests, the user is idle staring at their screen, and considering your original assertion "PHP provides persistent connections, so the system does not need to reconnect to the database on each hit", then there will be persisted idle database connections in between requests, which could be allocated to something useful.
Again, we are talking about the MAXIMUM that the application can handle
... Especially when each user makes only a couple of requests.
Let me quote the original post that you replied to, in order to determine what we are talking about
But connection pooling scales much, much better than persistent connections
We are talking about scaling in a multi user environment. This concept which you refer to "MAXIMUM the application can handle" seems to assume that every single user performs some function simultaneously. Such a scenario, in a typical application, simply does not occur. When designing a high performance multi user application, you must consider the resources tied up by users who are not currently active.
If you are referring to a specific and unusual kind of software where these principles don't apply, please tell me what kind of application you work on where users are never idle.
The amount of load when the application is idle doesn't seem like a terribly important issue
OK are we talking about a multi-user application? I am.
We must understand the difference between one user being idle and the whole application and DB being idle. When one user is idle, if that user holds an open DB connection, that needlessly ties up resources that other users could be using. Surely this is quite evident.
Connection pooling only scales better if most of the time in your application is spent doing calculations
In the majority of applications, most of the time is spent idle waiting for the user to do something. If you are holding a DB connection during this period, that is extremely wasteful.
1. 20 year patents. I think the argument is that Congress should change it, and perhaps the world, if patent law has to be harmonized. The fact that it is Congress that has chosen the length of time isn't an argument for or against the timeframe. The fact that some software lasts longer than 20 years, and that the internet specifically has been useful for longer than 20 years is immaterial. The purpose of patents, according to the US constitution, is to "promote the progress of science and useful arts", by allowing the inventor to benefit for a time. This precludes the argument that the inventor should be able to benefit for the useful life of the invention. The question now is, how long is neccessary to "promote the progress of science and useful arts"? The answer is somewhat arbitrary, however I think 20 years for general inventions is probably excessive. For software, you acknowledge that the rate of change in this field is much greater, therefore I think it is obvious that 20 years is excessive in this more specific case.
2. I don't think your position differs significantly from mine or others on Slashdot. Some place blame on the PTO rather than Congress.
3. I am not familiar with this issue, and mentioned it only because others were on Slashdot. I think the issue was more about "obvious" patents, such as Amazon's one click checkout. Another company who attempted to patent hyperlinks was mentioned. The issue is not clear to me, and actually I was hoping you could clarify. For example, since Internet2 is getting started, could I patent "doing commerce on Internet2". This to me is obvious, but since Internet2 is fairly new, probably no one has patented this yet.
Well, that's bullshit. Laws are laws... either Microsoft is a monopoly by their laws or not.
Well according to the article, a monopoly in Israel is...."any company with 50 per cent market share. Tying is illegal, as is unreasonably refusing a service. violations are considered criminal felonies".
Do I need to convince you that Microsoft has 50% market share on the desktop? I hope not. So they are a monopoly, and thus have additional obligations under Israeli law, like not "unreasonably refusing a service". Therefore the country CAN "use its laws to try to force a company to do certain things". It can force them to provide the service.
I'm not sure on the details of this, but by the article, it seems that Bill Gates is now a criminal in Israel.
rants about topics you don't understand not only waste time, they are damaging if they contain misinformation that others believe.
Then why don't you clear some stuff up for us. I examined your post history but did not locate any rebuttals to the issues raised here such as:
1. 20 year patents, which might as well be forever for software.
2. Overly broad patents.
3. Patents, on something which you didn't invent, which are filed for the sole reason of amassing a war arsenal in case anyone pisses you off.
Can You Sue Over Loss of Personal Information?
If the SCO can sue everyone, then surely you can. Whether you could win at trial or not is another matter, and I don't know as I am not a lawyer.
The point here is you don't even have to have a case, if you can turn up the heat on this company, you can get some kind of settlement. They will certainly fear a good lawyer, and the possiblitiy of bad press. These are your weapons.
an Internet visible server would then have to contact their ISP for a port to be opened
Considering the quality of customer service at my ISP, I'd better hurry up and request an open port for my Duke Nukem Forever server to be up in time.
winners will be located by satellites tracking GPS devices
Why? Because when people opened their old cokes and it said "you win a car!", they were too lazy to go to the redemption office?
1. Take off clothes 2. Buy webcam 3. Profit!
You should probably buy webcam before taking off clothes, otherwise you're just going to end up in jail.
Wow! You must listen to some REALLLLLLLLY stupid artists. The artists I work for that have major label deals all make between $1 and $2 and album.
Gross or Net? Probably gross, and as has been noted countless times before, the expenses incurred can often reduce that number to zero, or less. Or do you dispute all the royalty calculations referenced by others on this thread? I suspect the calculations are accurate, as I haven't even seen the RIAA attempt to dispute them.
Why don't you talk about the bottom line, and tell us how much cash the artists walk away with at the end of the day, and how much the label does?
Remember, Kif: in the game of chess, you must never let your adversary see your pieces!
Getting the new satellite up is critical. If they can hit the bullzeye on that one, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!
The lesson here is to run MS update.
I thought that was good advice too, until last week when I ran it to protect from the Blaster worm. After installing the patch, my webserver stopped working! I had to fiddle with my security settings to "work around" it. The problem is detailed here:
MS patch breaks IIS
MS hasn't fixed this one yet AFAIK. So what can I do now. I'm screwed if I patch, or if I don't patch.