Maybe these addresses are simply leftovers from before people started to make wide use of NAT, which cut down a whole lot on the # of addresses in circulation
Strangely I have found my attention to be MUCH worse when I am using bluetooth. I think it has to do with our level of involvement in the conversation. You can tell when you see some chick bobbing her head back and forth and cackling that she isn't pay a damn cent of attention to the road. Likewise, when I am on my bluetooth I tend to think I can drive better since my hands are free. But it has nothing to do with hands. When I am holding my cell phone I make a conscious effort to pay attention to the road before processing the buffer of text that is accumulating while I do that. It is possible to prioritize, but it's pretty hard to do it consistently.
This is totally wrong. The only people who don't care about the DRM are kids - because their parents shell out all the cash for the games. For me it's a huge issue, because half the games I play are old games that are no longer produced. I'm sick of paying for half-assed re-releases of these games that I must pay full price for, even though I already own a broken medium with the version I want. I don't even like the "upgrades" they make to the game. When I buy a game, I should own that content, and I should be able to copy it to different media as many times as I want to preserve it. DRM is a perfect example of where capitalism is not working. The consumer no longer gets to decide because all companies enforce the same policy.
The demand is for transportation, just as the demand is for media (both concepts), but the method in which it is delivered changes. The real issue here is if you considered the horse and buggy replaced by a zero-cost vehicle. To continue this analogy, sure, you can still buy a car, if you want all the nice things that buying one provides you with, but if you just wanna get around, you could do it free. So does that mean steps should be taken to prevent the inevitable culturable enrichment that would occur if we all had zero cost transportation just so an industry that has existed in the past can continue to exist?
This game is the 'sequel' to the PS2 Indigo Prophecy. Before you start bashing realism in games, play that game - this is not a game with realistic graphics, the game's _style_ is realism! It is reminiscent of MGS4 gameplay - lots of interactive cinematics (a-la Dragon's Lair, but way better) interspersed with regular 3D character control, though it has much more of the feel of an interactive movie than MGS4. It really is a unique experience. One of PS2's real unique gems, and a good plot (that is, in the beginning, until it turned into aliens / self-aware computer world domination crap). I'm hoping this release will be more of the great stuff and less of the filler.
P.S. Trust me, I know "Interactive Cinematics" sounds lame, but try it and see.
Eye candy is the least of my friend's problems, who, after having just purchased a new Dell Laptop with Ubuntu he updated to Ubuntu 8 his sound is broken, all the way from the kernel to gstreamer.
It'd be nice if he had wobbly windows to console him now that he can't play music or videos, but unfortunately compiz is unsupported by his video driver.
Ubuntu, I had such high hopes for you:( But in the end, all that money and publicity, you are *worse* than Debian.
"Nothing that you will ever do in your life could ever equal being the first human to walk on another planet." I could feed someone who's hungry. Or maybe just smile at someone. You're right, they don't equal being the first to walk on another planet... they're much better. The second doesn't even cost any money, let alone billions of dollars. Courage and vision are not the qualities of the man who launches himself into a suicide rocket to Mars, they are the qualities of men and women who do simple, good things on a daily basis. People who try to contribute positively to the world around them, and work to be better people every day. These kinds of people are very, very rare. In my opinion, we need do a seriously reappraisal of our ideals. I don't think the drive for conquest is a natural thing as some believe. I think it's simply a quality that man is capable of, that our culture, and cultures before us have worshipped. I understand the desire to GO there. I, like any other person, would love to stand on Mars and look up at the red, or possibly blue, sky, and think, I am standing on Mars! But for god's sake, let's do it when we are ready!! What's the rush? Being on Mars isn't going to solve any of the millions of problems that exist in our world today - not only simple things like hunger, disease, and war, but much trickier problems, like, how do we overcome the shortcomings of our own humanity? Take a glance at the psychological research cited by some of the commentary on the article, for instance.
This article and the comments baffle me. Maybe I'm not a true geek, but who the heck wants to live on Mars? It's a miserable, cold, wasteland. From the article, "We shouldn't be stuck on this rock forever." This rock? This ROCK? Our planet is an incredible, wonderful place. Human beings evolved here, and like it or not if we're taken away from it we suffer. I can't imagine anything more important or better than living a human life on earth. Would you really trade your life away for a place in a history book? It's not important how history remembers us but what kind of men and women we are. We have a hell of a lot of work to do here, we don't need to start colonizing other planets. We're still killing each other like damn animals. If you ask me, this is less about progress and more about not wanting to accept the cards that we have been dealt. Hell, maybe warp travel isn't possible, maybe we're stuck in this solar system, or if we travel away it will have to be in suspended animation and the time dilation will mean everyone we ever know will be dead when we re-emerge. Maybe there's no way to communicate faster than we can now. Are these things really so horrible? Would it be such a horrific thing to live on our planet as best we can until our sun goes supernova and then just die? Before we go deciding we're going to start firing off rockets full of people on one way trips maybe first we should come to terms with our humanity and learn how to live together in harmony.
I don't know, I always groan when I see stuff like this. I mean, you wrote the code and you obviously have a copy of it. So here's my question: what defines this particular code as a single entity, distinguishable from, say, if you were to run the code through astyle?
What if you were to break up the code and split it around through a complicated set of macros not unlike techniques used in the Obsfucated C code contest? Can you argue software is the same because it provides the same functionality? Obviously this is impossible, and is in fact, discouraged, as often it's advantageous to formalize protocols for behavior so that different software can speak the same language. This fact didn't stop Blizzard from winning its case against [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bnetd]bnetd[/url].
What if you were simply to write the project from scratch and it turned to be shockingly similar to their code? Would it be illegal, then, considering it was a totally new creation? This is one of the reasons I support the GNU GPL. Because it is simply _impossible_ to come up with a reasonable way to license software. People are gonna steal it anyway if they can, and by sharing we promote the faster growth of the science as a whole, so why not just make code available anyway? That way rather than expending effort trying to conceal the fact that people have stolen code they just adhere to a very simple set of rules that anyone would be willing to and everyone's happy.
One thing I don't understand is, microkernels are supposed to be more durable and secure because they split the kernel up into a lot of small user mode programs. But once you figure out how to run code in kernel mode all bets are off on security anyway, which is a design choice of computer engineering for CPUs anyway. The way it looks in Linux more and more is being done in user mode now anyway. DBUS, HAL, UDEV, these are all userspace programs, aren't they? I even started using a user mode framebuffer console.
What is a microkernel, anyway? Is it really distinguishable for any other kernel, or are aspects of both micro and monolithic kernel designs used in each?
the less well-known, feature packed, tiny player xmplay is better. don't pay for winamp pro if you want to rip cds because xmplay does it;)
p.s. please don't flood the site;)
My honest, truthful opinion on this matter is.... Schools, (at least high school) should not use the internet. If they're so concerned about filtering (which really, jesus christ, we're all animals anyway), perhaps to appease all the whiny mothers who protect their kids to the last second possible, then why not go back to the classics?! CLASSIC SCHOOL..... i was around then, in grade school, when there was no internet... it wasn't that bad!!!!
jesus christ, just accept the internet as wild and COMPLETELY UNCONTROLLABLE.
I go to the University of Iowa. We had a service here for a while called "HawkSearch" (our team being the Hawkeyes), run by a student. It existed for a while in the form of a http search page. One day, an article was written about it in the paper. The University had Hawksearch down within 10 minutes, and everyone they could prove used it had their internet connection shut off.
Of course, the university isn't stupid. They know exactly what I know, which is, every student in the school with a computer has kazaa and 80% of them run it like a vital piece of their windows XP. p2p will never die, so we have to live with it. until everyone realizes this (which may never happen), there will be this ongoing, useless struggle where some people suffer and some don't - it's the luck of the draw.
As for local area network sharing... it's just the wrong place to do it (on campus). I mean, if one of your friends wants a CD, they can borrow it. If you want music off the radio, you may tape it. I mean, let's be honest - your friends burn your cds, and you burn theirs. Is this worse or better? Better because it's not on a large scale?
p2ps next stage (if wide area sharing dies, IF) will be small local area networks, and without a university packet sniffer to rat out a small percentage of the guilty people, there will be no way to prevent it.
Let not the guilty go unpunished? Ha.
"It was like trying to hand out speeding tickets at the Indy 500." - Apocalypse Now
Man... i don't even want to here that bull****.
MAN!
Sorry, my mom uses Macs at her office (she's in publishing, and macs have the best software for them). She's ALWAYS complaining about the macs. I mean, let's not leave out the fact that it's just a friggin OS and it competes will allll the other OSes , and having used it, it's not BAD. I'm simply refuting your point about the stability and ease of use!
Jesus christ man, i cannot list how many times i got the bomb, and i hardly ever use Macs! I'm sure it's been improved, but you CANNOT tell me macs haven't been shitty in the past. Furthermore, my mother tells me about how they're always have to upgrade and buy new software, and that they keep releasing new version after new version of the Mac OS, and what's more, Adobe Pagemaker DOESN'T WORK FOR THE OLDER VERSIONS so they have to buy a new one!
How's that for jumping through hoops for software?
You all know that software suffers the same problems with compatibility and upgrades on EVERY OS so don't even try to bull**** it with the Mac OS, this point is completely useless.
-Erich
I don't know what all of these silly posts everyone is putting up are about. It seems like half of the people don't know what they're talking about. If you don't know what you're talking about, post an article with that in mind, don't spout garbage.... (like me)
Truth of the matter is, when i read the article i immediately thought of ways that i could write a program to deal with multiple transmissions on the same frequency. Now let me just say, I'm no expert on radio, or photons, or anything. I know a bit about radio tranmission and how it works, but here's my idea:
Why can't this be done just like TCP works?!
Each transmission is given a specific identifying number, sort of like the tcp sequence number - but not randomly generated.
The radio holds a buffer, reads in all transmissions at a certain rate calculated based on the total number of tranmissions active, and outputs whatever number tranmission the user of the radio specifies.
Example:
if there are 3 transmissions, the radio buffer reads at 3 times the rate a normal radio program should be output. say we call these transmissions A, B, and C. if the user is listening to A, then A, which was received at a rate 3 times that of a normal radio program, will be transformed and slowed from its original state in the buffer to be presented as a radio program at a normal rate.
The read rate of the buffer corresponds to the amount of data coming in from the broadcaster. I don't know how many transmissions could be handled this way, and I'm SURE there's a better way, but my purpose is not to tell this guy how to make his "smart" radio, i just want to point out that this guy's idea is not complete garbage, and me, with no experience in the field, can already formulate some ideas about how it might be possible. I don't know whether there really is interference, or at what point it actually occurs, but i'm pretty sure we can pack a few more stations on to each frequency this way, if nothing else.
Am i right or am i right?
Right right right?
*TWHACK*
-Groundhog Day
If you mean that as an example of how interference DOES exist, you would be wrong. Just because the light photons of the traffic light effect your radio does not mean that they are "interfering with it". You're missing the concept - radio waves can be organized like the TCP/IP Suite - with unique sequence numbers and "IP addresses" to distinguish one transmission from another. Not only would this allow for multiple program broadcasting on the same frequency, but you probably wouldn't be able to tell if the light was green without looking at it.
Sorry, I had another comment that I only thought of after posting the first. Has it occurred to anyone that Sony is purposefully tilting the release sales? For those of us with OCD, recall (or don't) the game we used to play as children on swings at the park... if you and the kid next to you were swinging in sync then you were "married". This seems to be an appropriate metaphor for what I am picturing. Sony skipped a beat, and they know that Nintendo and Microsoft can't just spring a new system on their public without losing TONS of support simply based on the speed of release. People _ALREADY_ complain about buying a new, top-of-the-line system and it being old within 3 years. This bar has been set and will not be lowered - consumers simply will not tolerate it. MS knows this, Sony knows this, Nintendo knows this, and Sony will be eating up sales while MS and Nintendo eat their dust (provided developers released good games for the PS3)
It seems to be a moot point to me, as the XBox is already doing pretty rotten in the GAMES department, which is generally what makes or a breaks a system.
Do you think, to add insult to injury, Microsoft would spring a NEW $300 system on the unsuspecting public ? Who gives a DAMN about backwards compatibility - we're talking simply about consumer willingness to purchase a new system every 6 months!
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe these addresses are simply leftovers from before people started to make wide use of NAT, which cut down a whole lot on the # of addresses in circulation
Strangely I have found my attention to be MUCH worse when I am using bluetooth. I think it has to do with our level of involvement in the conversation. You can tell when you see some chick bobbing her head back and forth and cackling that she isn't pay a damn cent of attention to the road. Likewise, when I am on my bluetooth I tend to think I can drive better since my hands are free. But it has nothing to do with hands. When I am holding my cell phone I make a conscious effort to pay attention to the road before processing the buffer of text that is accumulating while I do that. It is possible to prioritize, but it's pretty hard to do it consistently.
This is totally wrong. The only people who don't care about the DRM are kids - because their parents shell out all the cash for the games. For me it's a huge issue, because half the games I play are old games that are no longer produced. I'm sick of paying for half-assed re-releases of these games that I must pay full price for, even though I already own a broken medium with the version I want. I don't even like the "upgrades" they make to the game. When I buy a game, I should own that content, and I should be able to copy it to different media as many times as I want to preserve it. DRM is a perfect example of where capitalism is not working. The consumer no longer gets to decide because all companies enforce the same policy.
Here, demand isn't vanishing.
The demand is for transportation, just as the demand is for media (both concepts), but the method in which it is delivered changes. The real issue here is if you considered the horse and buggy replaced by a zero-cost vehicle. To continue this analogy, sure, you can still buy a car, if you want all the nice things that buying one provides you with, but if you just wanna get around, you could do it free. So does that mean steps should be taken to prevent the inevitable culturable enrichment that would occur if we all had zero cost transportation just so an industry that has existed in the past can continue to exist?
When medical science got good. It's not just mutation, it's the strong vs weak that does it
CYBERRRR COMMMMANNNDDDDDD
This game is the 'sequel' to the PS2 Indigo Prophecy. Before you start bashing realism in games, play that game - this is not a game with realistic graphics, the game's _style_ is realism! It is reminiscent of MGS4 gameplay - lots of interactive cinematics (a-la Dragon's Lair, but way better) interspersed with regular 3D character control, though it has much more of the feel of an interactive movie than MGS4. It really is a unique experience. One of PS2's real unique gems, and a good plot (that is, in the beginning, until it turned into aliens / self-aware computer world domination crap). I'm hoping this release will be more of the great stuff and less of the filler. P.S. Trust me, I know "Interactive Cinematics" sounds lame, but try it and see.
1. The decades of development of a context from experiencing our environment as we live
2. Any sort of emotional reward / punishment system for motivation to do anything
Eye candy is the least of my friend's problems, who, after having just purchased a new Dell Laptop with Ubuntu he updated to Ubuntu 8 his sound is broken, all the way from the kernel to gstreamer. It'd be nice if he had wobbly windows to console him now that he can't play music or videos, but unfortunately compiz is unsupported by his video driver. Ubuntu, I had such high hopes for you :( But in the end, all that money and publicity, you are *worse* than Debian.
Now instead of thinking up elaborate ways to avoid doing what's right we can just pay someone to cover up our lies
"Nothing that you will ever do in your life could ever equal being the first human to walk on another planet." I could feed someone who's hungry. Or maybe just smile at someone. You're right, they don't equal being the first to walk on another planet... they're much better. The second doesn't even cost any money, let alone billions of dollars. Courage and vision are not the qualities of the man who launches himself into a suicide rocket to Mars, they are the qualities of men and women who do simple, good things on a daily basis. People who try to contribute positively to the world around them, and work to be better people every day. These kinds of people are very, very rare. In my opinion, we need do a seriously reappraisal of our ideals. I don't think the drive for conquest is a natural thing as some believe. I think it's simply a quality that man is capable of, that our culture, and cultures before us have worshipped. I understand the desire to GO there. I, like any other person, would love to stand on Mars and look up at the red, or possibly blue, sky, and think, I am standing on Mars! But for god's sake, let's do it when we are ready!! What's the rush? Being on Mars isn't going to solve any of the millions of problems that exist in our world today - not only simple things like hunger, disease, and war, but much trickier problems, like, how do we overcome the shortcomings of our own humanity? Take a glance at the psychological research cited by some of the commentary on the article, for instance.
This article and the comments baffle me. Maybe I'm not a true geek, but who the heck wants to live on Mars? It's a miserable, cold, wasteland. From the article, "We shouldn't be stuck on this rock forever." This rock? This ROCK? Our planet is an incredible, wonderful place. Human beings evolved here, and like it or not if we're taken away from it we suffer. I can't imagine anything more important or better than living a human life on earth. Would you really trade your life away for a place in a history book? It's not important how history remembers us but what kind of men and women we are. We have a hell of a lot of work to do here, we don't need to start colonizing other planets. We're still killing each other like damn animals. If you ask me, this is less about progress and more about not wanting to accept the cards that we have been dealt. Hell, maybe warp travel isn't possible, maybe we're stuck in this solar system, or if we travel away it will have to be in suspended animation and the time dilation will mean everyone we ever know will be dead when we re-emerge. Maybe there's no way to communicate faster than we can now. Are these things really so horrible? Would it be such a horrific thing to live on our planet as best we can until our sun goes supernova and then just die? Before we go deciding we're going to start firing off rockets full of people on one way trips maybe first we should come to terms with our humanity and learn how to live together in harmony.
I don't know, I always groan when I see stuff like this. I mean, you wrote the code and you obviously have a copy of it. So here's my question: what defines this particular code as a single entity, distinguishable from, say, if you were to run the code through astyle? What if you were to break up the code and split it around through a complicated set of macros not unlike techniques used in the Obsfucated C code contest? Can you argue software is the same because it provides the same functionality? Obviously this is impossible, and is in fact, discouraged, as often it's advantageous to formalize protocols for behavior so that different software can speak the same language. This fact didn't stop Blizzard from winning its case against [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bnetd]bnetd[/url]. What if you were simply to write the project from scratch and it turned to be shockingly similar to their code? Would it be illegal, then, considering it was a totally new creation? This is one of the reasons I support the GNU GPL. Because it is simply _impossible_ to come up with a reasonable way to license software. People are gonna steal it anyway if they can, and by sharing we promote the faster growth of the science as a whole, so why not just make code available anyway? That way rather than expending effort trying to conceal the fact that people have stolen code they just adhere to a very simple set of rules that anyone would be willing to and everyone's happy.
One thing I don't understand is, microkernels are supposed to be more durable and secure because they split the kernel up into a lot of small user mode programs. But once you figure out how to run code in kernel mode all bets are off on security anyway, which is a design choice of computer engineering for CPUs anyway. The way it looks in Linux more and more is being done in user mode now anyway. DBUS, HAL, UDEV, these are all userspace programs, aren't they? I even started using a user mode framebuffer console. What is a microkernel, anyway? Is it really distinguishable for any other kernel, or are aspects of both micro and monolithic kernel designs used in each?
the less well-known, feature packed, tiny player xmplay is better. don't pay for winamp pro if you want to rip cds because xmplay does it ;)
p.s. please don't flood the site ;)
My honest, truthful opinion on this matter is....
Schools, (at least high school) should not use the internet. If they're so concerned about filtering (which really, jesus christ, we're all animals anyway), perhaps to appease all the whiny mothers who protect their kids to the last second possible, then why not go back to the classics?! CLASSIC SCHOOL..... i was around then, in grade school, when there was no internet... it wasn't that bad!!!!
jesus christ, just accept the internet as wild and COMPLETELY UNCONTROLLABLE.
Hello there,
I go to the University of Iowa.
We had a service here for a while called "HawkSearch" (our team being the Hawkeyes), run by a student. It existed for a while in the form of a http search page. One day, an article was written about it in the paper. The University had Hawksearch down within 10 minutes, and everyone they could prove used it had their internet connection shut off.
Of course, the university isn't stupid. They know exactly what I know, which is, every student in the school with a computer has kazaa and 80% of them run it like a vital piece of their windows XP. p2p will never die, so we have to live with it. until everyone realizes this (which may never happen), there will be this ongoing, useless struggle where some people suffer and some don't - it's the luck of the draw.
As for local area network sharing... it's just the wrong place to do it (on campus). I mean, if one of your friends wants a CD, they can borrow it. If you want music off the radio, you may tape it. I mean, let's be honest - your friends burn your cds, and you burn theirs. Is this worse or better? Better because it's not on a large scale?
p2ps next stage (if wide area sharing dies, IF) will be small local area networks, and without a university packet sniffer to rat out a small percentage of the guilty people, there will be no way to prevent it.
Let not the guilty go unpunished? Ha.
"It was like trying to hand out speeding tickets at the Indy 500."
- Apocalypse Now
Man... i don't even want to here that bull****. MAN! Sorry, my mom uses Macs at her office (she's in publishing, and macs have the best software for them). She's ALWAYS complaining about the macs. I mean, let's not leave out the fact that it's just a friggin OS and it competes will allll the other OSes , and having used it, it's not BAD. I'm simply refuting your point about the stability and ease of use! Jesus christ man, i cannot list how many times i got the bomb, and i hardly ever use Macs! I'm sure it's been improved, but you CANNOT tell me macs haven't been shitty in the past. Furthermore, my mother tells me about how they're always have to upgrade and buy new software, and that they keep releasing new version after new version of the Mac OS, and what's more, Adobe Pagemaker DOESN'T WORK FOR THE OLDER VERSIONS so they have to buy a new one! How's that for jumping through hoops for software? You all know that software suffers the same problems with compatibility and upgrades on EVERY OS so don't even try to bull**** it with the Mac OS, this point is completely useless. -Erich
I don't know what all of these silly posts everyone is putting up are about. It seems like half of the people don't know what they're talking about. If you don't know what you're talking about, post an article with that in mind, don't spout garbage.... (like me) Truth of the matter is, when i read the article i immediately thought of ways that i could write a program to deal with multiple transmissions on the same frequency. Now let me just say, I'm no expert on radio, or photons, or anything. I know a bit about radio tranmission and how it works, but here's my idea: Why can't this be done just like TCP works?! Each transmission is given a specific identifying number, sort of like the tcp sequence number - but not randomly generated. The radio holds a buffer, reads in all transmissions at a certain rate calculated based on the total number of tranmissions active, and outputs whatever number tranmission the user of the radio specifies. Example: if there are 3 transmissions, the radio buffer reads at 3 times the rate a normal radio program should be output. say we call these transmissions A, B, and C. if the user is listening to A, then A, which was received at a rate 3 times that of a normal radio program, will be transformed and slowed from its original state in the buffer to be presented as a radio program at a normal rate. The read rate of the buffer corresponds to the amount of data coming in from the broadcaster. I don't know how many transmissions could be handled this way, and I'm SURE there's a better way, but my purpose is not to tell this guy how to make his "smart" radio, i just want to point out that this guy's idea is not complete garbage, and me, with no experience in the field, can already formulate some ideas about how it might be possible. I don't know whether there really is interference, or at what point it actually occurs, but i'm pretty sure we can pack a few more stations on to each frequency this way, if nothing else. Am i right or am i right? Right right right? *TWHACK* -Groundhog Day
If you mean that as an example of how interference DOES exist, you would be wrong. Just because the light photons of the traffic light effect your radio does not mean that they are "interfering with it". You're missing the concept - radio waves can be organized like the TCP/IP Suite - with unique sequence numbers and "IP addresses" to distinguish one transmission from another. Not only would this allow for multiple program broadcasting on the same frequency, but you probably wouldn't be able to tell if the light was green without looking at it.
Sorry, I had another comment that I only thought of after posting the first. Has it occurred to anyone that Sony is purposefully tilting the release sales? For those of us with OCD, recall (or don't) the game we used to play as children on swings at the park... if you and the kid next to you were swinging in sync then you were "married". This seems to be an appropriate metaphor for what I am picturing. Sony skipped a beat, and they know that Nintendo and Microsoft can't just spring a new system on their public without losing TONS of support simply based on the speed of release. People _ALREADY_ complain about buying a new, top-of-the-line system and it being old within 3 years. This bar has been set and will not be lowered - consumers simply will not tolerate it. MS knows this, Sony knows this, Nintendo knows this, and Sony will be eating up sales while MS and Nintendo eat their dust (provided developers released good games for the PS3)
In response to the comment about the XBox 2...
It seems to be a moot point to me, as the XBox is already doing pretty rotten in the GAMES department, which is generally what makes or a breaks a system.
Do you think, to add insult to injury, Microsoft would spring a NEW $300 system on the unsuspecting public ? Who gives a DAMN about backwards compatibility - we're talking simply about consumer willingness to purchase a new system every 6 months!
-Leothequick