The difference here is that they are changing what p2p means. They then muddy the water by saying p2p is anything that is illegal. The internet is p2p. Peer to peer software is peer to peer. They only use it to define that software. If the definition gets associated with being illegal, that is just wrong. It's just a matter of either having them acknowledge that the internet is peer to peer or in this case at least keeping to their definition they're making up.
This completely ignores reuse of parts. I've built family and friends computers from their old computers and parts that I had collected from people who had PCs die and over my years. I've put together computers that would cost $500 for just a touch over $200.
Why? Because all I did was replace the parts that were needed. To the person I was doing it for, this was a completely new computer. For me, I have new parts for next time or making one for myself. It only takes a few hours to put things together and I don't have any of the operating system taxes or the such as overhead. That's not the only reason for me, but one that I don't think will be mentioned otherwise.
Slashdot has mentioned Xen 3 times in as many months. Magazines about Linux have been publishing information about Xen since it is a major project stirring a lot of interest in a lot of people. It's not obscure because you haven't heard of it. That just means that it's not a userland tool.
I always thought the reason for burning in components was to test for them being faulty and (in the case of overclockers) to get the thermal paste to completely set and change state. This allows you to begin doing the highest level of overclocking right away. I could be wrong though.
I know for a fact that thermal pads are only effective after you have burned them in. Does anyone know details about the way thermal grease reacts to the heat? Does it change state as well?
I would like to point out that the NET act has never been used. That act has no teeth as there are no federal investigation at this point that are funded for copyright infringement. All attempts to create those investigations through future laws and allocations of money have failed. There were two laws under the Clinton era that were quite frightening that got through, and I'm sure you are aware of them both.
You are arguing semantics with me for the current state of copyright. I would like to point out that originally you could not make personal copies because of practicality and the law made no difference between the two. If you have read writings by the founders of the country and their influences, one thing they wanted to avoid was copyright ownership by the few of public goods. Which is the current case. Are you saying the current system and way of looking at this issue is perfect?
The current system is not at this point in line with what the majority of people want. I agree there are issues with every system, but you can at least agree that the current system is horribly flawed. There is no reason for sweeping lawsuits of the nature that are currently occurring.
If you believe the WIPO's Berne conventions are correct, I would suggest you check out of some of their more recent work, discussed on Slashdot. Their current works tend to lead you to believe that they are not big on common sense. Even proposing something that horrible really makes me question if they should be viewed as an authority as it comes to freedom.
The idea of changing the copyright laws would require a shift in the way they operate. If you want copyright protection, you would have to register your copyright. That's the way the country used to work on this issue. At the point of registering you would become eligible for the protection that the new laws would allow. I'm not very big on trust of the government in these kinds of issues, but I am even more afraid of trusting a corporation with anything.
As I've said before, there is no perfect solution. The current solution is very very far from perfect for the modern era. There is no reason for me to possibly face legal action of $150,000 per song that I download. I'm content meeting somewhere in the middle, but I would prefer the power goes to the people with the issue of art. As it currently stands, the power is within large corporations who control what the standard person thinks as well as they can.
I do understand what you're saying with things by the way. I'm just really horrible about discussing this subject since my views are supported by... Well, no one. However, I don't believe they are wrong.
You have just used the worst analogy for the situation. I'm sorry, but that's just horrible. If you look at murder, that is a criminal issue. Civil issues are a completely different beast. Also, since the government is a reflection of the people, I truly doubt a large majority would decide killing people at will is a good idea.
The legal system is nothing. It's based on laws that are made by the legislative branch of the United States government. The legislative branch creates laws based on the general will of the people, as those officials are elected on a regular basis. Upsetting your constituents is a horrible idea for them.
I know you're under the impression that the government is above you and can do whatever they please, however there are still many of us who refuse to believe that. (Yes, I realize that is a straw man most likely. However, it was quite an easy one to say in the current situation. You are proposing government being above the people. That's not what the US was founded on and the government is limited legally from being more than what it was intended.)
The content is very much owned by the people who possess it. I suggest you look at legal rulings up until the lobbyists have struck back. The content and the media were not separated. You could make legal copies for yourself all you wanted and sell the original. You did not have full ownership, but you did OWN what was on there to a very large point. The restrictions were not meant to affect your ownership, just your ability to transfer ownership.
I know you believe that the current laws and society are the way things have always been. I suggest you read a book such as Free Culture by Lawrence Lessig for starters. The way the legal community has thought about things has been shifting a lot, however it is not with the current times and is fighting against current technology.
To say I don't understand how copyright works is rather amusing to me though. It's one of my favorite topics to read about since I have a large portion of my life dealing with it. Your perception of things is flawed in the fact that you believe what the RIAA and MPAA are saying is the way things are no matter what. If you stop reading press releases or following their FUD you'd understand the topic a lot more thoroughly. It's a commonly held misconception with what copyright is currently.
I have no problem with someone making infinite copies and distributing something for free. Why? Because I believe the government can design a new system that would reward copyright owners for those sales in a way to make up for the potential loss of revenue that would slow down the arts. There currently is money granted by state governments to fund the arts. I'm very sure that people would be happy to pay a different fee or a moving fee or a voluntary fee to a program that would pay artists. There are so many methods and interesting ideas on allowing the system to completely remove the RIAA and make the MPAA less threatening that they want hidden. The EFF and other places have these ideas outlined very well.
Do some more reading on the subject and the options that you have before you decide the world can not be changed.
You have completely missed the point of everything posted by the grandparent. The constitution as written grants copyright to encourage future production. The owner of the work is the person who owns the work, not the person who created it. The book in front of me is owned by me. The video on my hard drive is owned by me. All the songs I have obtained are owned by me. I am merely restricted from copying them and distributing them.
The law is questionable when it comes to this however in the fact that the owners being restricted from producing and distributing those copies are having that term made longer and are even having an attack performed against the rights that are granted in the consitution. Freedom is being attacked and taken away. My freedom is being stolen. You can not deny that with sound reasoning.
The content is owned by the person who possesses it. I assume you acknowledge this fact? Now, what the grandparent was saying is quite true. Content that the public was going to be in full control of that they already owned is being taken away from us without our consent. The attempt currently is to make it so the individual never owns the content. That's horrible and wrong in my opinion. Do you disagree?
Startup code or a program initializing would not have an effect on the genetic portion. The effects from code being ran are very slow, and tuning things in that code will help. The idea is so that you would not have an adverse effect from a piece of code being ran for a minute. It would take time for the scheduler to change over. This is really designed for a computer that would be doing database work for a time on a website then at night may do some compiling. A desktop would gain little from this in my opinion as it's mostly idle.
For instance, here is the output of vmstat for my desktop:
User: 20
System: 2
Idle: 77
IO Wait: 1
Notice the idle time. The scheduler should be setup on a desktop to always give priority to the task that is running and new. That's what is currently done. This really has a larger impact on something that would do a single task for a long time and then move over to another task, with other tasks possibly sprinkled in. It can optimize for those specific work loads.
It would help a desktop possibly though. I'm not an expert, I'm just using the bits of knowledge I have. Ideas?
The genetic algorithm is supposed to create a situation where you no longer have to select a scheduler. What you are proposing is using it to find the best scheduler for the task. This is already known and the scheduler can be designed to take advantage of the environment if it is known. This is best to be thrown into a mixed environment where you do not know the types of processes.
The implementation is horribly useful and needs improvement on the scheduler end as is said. The schedulers that it can use are the weakest point since the guy who wrote it doesn't do those. He just needs to do the algorithm that selects which scheduler is used.
Oh, and in case anyone thinks I know what I am talking about, I don't. I read the kernel mailing lists, so I know a bit I believe, but I am not an expert in any way.
Re:How did Carlson land that job anyways?
on
CNN Cancels Crossfire
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I agree with you completely. I take it a step in a different direction though, and would prefer a lot of people with questionable credentials coming to a conclusion on an issue. Something such as Slashdot mainly.
Takes your mind down more interesting paths and forces you to question things.
Was Carlson's personality something taht anyone could market though? Was he presented as an asshole to make it so that people from "the left" would watch to hope he gets his ass handed to him?
How did Carlson land that job anyways?
on
CNN Cancels Crossfire
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I don't know a single person that likes him, regardless of their political interests. If he were on Slashdot, he'd have been modded -1 flamebait immediately and never thought of again.
I'm curious though. What's his background that earned him the spot on a show like Crossfire? He had to have done something that made him in the spotlight in some way before that I would assume?
Those distributions might be better for your uses or better for the ideals of the community but distributions like Mandrake are great for everyone as well. Putting forth a product like this gives another option to a business thinking about buying Linux. A major company would never purchase something without support or a business backing it. The larger the user base for Linux, the more software that gets written for it. The more drivers there are. I'll never complain about a distribution, even if I think its goals suck.
Really what I'm trying to say is that while I would prefer to use a Debian or a Gentoo I realize that is just an opinion. Letting others fill in different situations is optimal. Gentoo is not in a position to release a corporate edition nor do they need to be. I think that is a good thing for everyone involved.
Isn't this rather off the topic at hand of having a corporate desktop? The distribution method would most likely be tailored to paying customers along with the support models that go along with it. This is not meant to be a feely available distribution.
Your experiences with a bad download or bad hardware compatibility for the distribution certainly have no place in this thread. I generally don't complain about modding, but why was this modded insightful?
The ATI requires nearly the same. The reason for the second molex connector is stability. Under most conditions you can get away without it, however the AGP power is not always completely clean and if the molex is putting out a smaller amount, there can still be issues.
X-bit Labs did tests to show this. These tests show there is not a difference that is significant in power consumption throughout, although the new XT cards are improving with their heat loss and power consumption.
All of what you're saying is true or almost true. However, the transfer rate cited was anemic compared to the numbers that should be obtained. Bittorrent is not perfect at the current moment, but it definitely isn't horrible or worthless.
I've seen it work great for me consistently, and see the problems you are citing. However, it's not to the degree you are citing. It will saturate my bandwidth with control packets and other overhead making it go slower. I've never seen the slowdown you're talking about, and I've downloaded 158 torrents that I still have the.torrent for. If you setup things properly and someone can transfer it, bt will usually saturated your connection if you have a proper client. That's my experience and the same of many others.
I want to make sure it's said, I really do understand the problems with it. I'm a college student who is starting to study networking more extensively. I couldn't dress it down or anything with my knowledge, but I know it's not perfect. It's also the best there is right now for its purpose. So, until something is better, let's make the best of it?
Not familiar with firewalls? I have to cap bittorrent off at 350KB/s otherwise it saturates my downstream. Something is definitely wrong on your end with the speed problem.
I don't think it's a matter of hating EA for this. I think it is hating the system and already having a dislike for EA that is the root of everything.
If Microsoft got a license to be the only operating system legally allowed, people wouldn't start hating Microsoft, they already would have. They'd also be upset with the system that created the situation. It's the same thing with this.
People seem to have it out for Javascript at Slashdot. Heh. A lot of negativity towards the language. I've seen some beautiful javascript, but I guess I'm one of the few.
Hrmmmmm... You confused me a bit. First you were bashing Scwartz. Then at the end you were saying negative things about Eric Raymond.
Schwartz is making Sun look quite horrible though. He has to have some kind of an agenda. I'd like to believe he isn't mildly retarded and actually just flying off the seat of his pants. No one should be allowed to make this much of a fool of themselves by accident if they are the CEO of a company.
Slashdot is a lot about the discussion. The blurbs are obviously short, and the people hardly read them. The topic is brought up and the meat is in the comments. I, personally, keep reading these articles to gauge the response on the issue and see if there are any opinions about it that are unique. I'm actually rather torn on this subject. Understanding both sides of the argument, it's interesting to read for me.
Since these are being posted, I have a feeling others feel the same way. These discussions most likely get a lot of hits.
A lot more information here though so I wouldn't call it a dupe. Just thought some people might be interested in the earlier discussion that took place.
I think everything like this needs to be taken with a grain of salt as to what its true value is. Even if this is the city Plato mentions (in passing) the stories are most likely out of proportion to the reality.
The questions you raise are already answers in the gaim encryption plugin. It's slightly different, but it's doing nearly the same thing. Notifies and remembers that users use the plugin with a system of saying to either send it out, establish regardless, or various other settings for what to do.
It's not the most elegant solution, but when you are piggybacking a large proprietary network for something like this, I think it's more than enough.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference here is that they are changing what p2p means. They then muddy the water by saying p2p is anything that is illegal. The internet is p2p. Peer to peer software is peer to peer. They only use it to define that software. If the definition gets associated with being illegal, that is just wrong. It's just a matter of either having them acknowledge that the internet is peer to peer or in this case at least keeping to their definition they're making up.
This completely ignores reuse of parts. I've built family and friends computers from their old computers and parts that I had collected from people who had PCs die and over my years. I've put together computers that would cost $500 for just a touch over $200.
Why? Because all I did was replace the parts that were needed. To the person I was doing it for, this was a completely new computer. For me, I have new parts for next time or making one for myself. It only takes a few hours to put things together and I don't have any of the operating system taxes or the such as overhead. That's not the only reason for me, but one that I don't think will be mentioned otherwise.
Slashdot has mentioned Xen 3 times in as many months. Magazines about Linux have been publishing information about Xen since it is a major project stirring a lot of interest in a lot of people. It's not obscure because you haven't heard of it. That just means that it's not a userland tool.
I always thought the reason for burning in components was to test for them being faulty and (in the case of overclockers) to get the thermal paste to completely set and change state. This allows you to begin doing the highest level of overclocking right away. I could be wrong though.
I know for a fact that thermal pads are only effective after you have burned them in. Does anyone know details about the way thermal grease reacts to the heat? Does it change state as well?
I've been soaked in geek culture way too long. I had to read that post 5 or 6 times to realize that it's weird for a 3 year old to say woot.
I would like to point out that the NET act has never been used. That act has no teeth as there are no federal investigation at this point that are funded for copyright infringement. All attempts to create those investigations through future laws and allocations of money have failed. There were two laws under the Clinton era that were quite frightening that got through, and I'm sure you are aware of them both.
You are arguing semantics with me for the current state of copyright. I would like to point out that originally you could not make personal copies because of practicality and the law made no difference between the two. If you have read writings by the founders of the country and their influences, one thing they wanted to avoid was copyright ownership by the few of public goods. Which is the current case. Are you saying the current system and way of looking at this issue is perfect?
The current system is not at this point in line with what the majority of people want. I agree there are issues with every system, but you can at least agree that the current system is horribly flawed. There is no reason for sweeping lawsuits of the nature that are currently occurring.
If you believe the WIPO's Berne conventions are correct, I would suggest you check out of some of their more recent work, discussed on Slashdot. Their current works tend to lead you to believe that they are not big on common sense. Even proposing something that horrible really makes me question if they should be viewed as an authority as it comes to freedom.
The idea of changing the copyright laws would require a shift in the way they operate. If you want copyright protection, you would have to register your copyright. That's the way the country used to work on this issue. At the point of registering you would become eligible for the protection that the new laws would allow. I'm not very big on trust of the government in these kinds of issues, but I am even more afraid of trusting a corporation with anything.
As I've said before, there is no perfect solution. The current solution is very very far from perfect for the modern era. There is no reason for me to possibly face legal action of $150,000 per song that I download. I'm content meeting somewhere in the middle, but I would prefer the power goes to the people with the issue of art. As it currently stands, the power is within large corporations who control what the standard person thinks as well as they can.
I do understand what you're saying with things by the way. I'm just really horrible about discussing this subject since my views are supported by... Well, no one. However, I don't believe they are wrong.
You have just used the worst analogy for the situation. I'm sorry, but that's just horrible. If you look at murder, that is a criminal issue. Civil issues are a completely different beast. Also, since the government is a reflection of the people, I truly doubt a large majority would decide killing people at will is a good idea.
The legal system is nothing. It's based on laws that are made by the legislative branch of the United States government. The legislative branch creates laws based on the general will of the people, as those officials are elected on a regular basis. Upsetting your constituents is a horrible idea for them.
I know you're under the impression that the government is above you and can do whatever they please, however there are still many of us who refuse to believe that. (Yes, I realize that is a straw man most likely. However, it was quite an easy one to say in the current situation. You are proposing government being above the people. That's not what the US was founded on and the government is limited legally from being more than what it was intended.)
The content is very much owned by the people who possess it. I suggest you look at legal rulings up until the lobbyists have struck back. The content and the media were not separated. You could make legal copies for yourself all you wanted and sell the original. You did not have full ownership, but you did OWN what was on there to a very large point. The restrictions were not meant to affect your ownership, just your ability to transfer ownership.
I know you believe that the current laws and society are the way things have always been. I suggest you read a book such as Free Culture by Lawrence Lessig for starters. The way the legal community has thought about things has been shifting a lot, however it is not with the current times and is fighting against current technology.
To say I don't understand how copyright works is rather amusing to me though. It's one of my favorite topics to read about since I have a large portion of my life dealing with it. Your perception of things is flawed in the fact that you believe what the RIAA and MPAA are saying is the way things are no matter what. If you stop reading press releases or following their FUD you'd understand the topic a lot more thoroughly. It's a commonly held misconception with what copyright is currently.
I have no problem with someone making infinite copies and distributing something for free. Why? Because I believe the government can design a new system that would reward copyright owners for those sales in a way to make up for the potential loss of revenue that would slow down the arts. There currently is money granted by state governments to fund the arts. I'm very sure that people would be happy to pay a different fee or a moving fee or a voluntary fee to a program that would pay artists. There are so many methods and interesting ideas on allowing the system to completely remove the RIAA and make the MPAA less threatening that they want hidden. The EFF and other places have these ideas outlined very well.
Do some more reading on the subject and the options that you have before you decide the world can not be changed.
You have completely missed the point of everything posted by the grandparent. The constitution as written grants copyright to encourage future production. The owner of the work is the person who owns the work, not the person who created it. The book in front of me is owned by me. The video on my hard drive is owned by me. All the songs I have obtained are owned by me. I am merely restricted from copying them and distributing them.
The law is questionable when it comes to this however in the fact that the owners being restricted from producing and distributing those copies are having that term made longer and are even having an attack performed against the rights that are granted in the consitution. Freedom is being attacked and taken away. My freedom is being stolen. You can not deny that with sound reasoning.
The content is owned by the person who possesses it. I assume you acknowledge this fact? Now, what the grandparent was saying is quite true. Content that the public was going to be in full control of that they already owned is being taken away from us without our consent. The attempt currently is to make it so the individual never owns the content. That's horrible and wrong in my opinion. Do you disagree?
Startup code or a program initializing would not have an effect on the genetic portion. The effects from code being ran are very slow, and tuning things in that code will help. The idea is so that you would not have an adverse effect from a piece of code being ran for a minute. It would take time for the scheduler to change over. This is really designed for a computer that would be doing database work for a time on a website then at night may do some compiling. A desktop would gain little from this in my opinion as it's mostly idle.
For instance, here is the output of vmstat for my desktop:
User: 20
System: 2
Idle: 77
IO Wait: 1
Notice the idle time. The scheduler should be setup on a desktop to always give priority to the task that is running and new. That's what is currently done. This really has a larger impact on something that would do a single task for a long time and then move over to another task, with other tasks possibly sprinkled in. It can optimize for those specific work loads.
It would help a desktop possibly though. I'm not an expert, I'm just using the bits of knowledge I have. Ideas?
The genetic algorithm is supposed to create a situation where you no longer have to select a scheduler. What you are proposing is using it to find the best scheduler for the task. This is already known and the scheduler can be designed to take advantage of the environment if it is known. This is best to be thrown into a mixed environment where you do not know the types of processes.
The implementation is horribly useful and needs improvement on the scheduler end as is said. The schedulers that it can use are the weakest point since the guy who wrote it doesn't do those. He just needs to do the algorithm that selects which scheduler is used.
Oh, and in case anyone thinks I know what I am talking about, I don't. I read the kernel mailing lists, so I know a bit I believe, but I am not an expert in any way.
I agree with you completely. I take it a step in a different direction though, and would prefer a lot of people with questionable credentials coming to a conclusion on an issue. Something such as Slashdot mainly.
Takes your mind down more interesting paths and forces you to question things.
Was Carlson's personality something taht anyone could market though? Was he presented as an asshole to make it so that people from "the left" would watch to hope he gets his ass handed to him?
I don't know a single person that likes him, regardless of their political interests. If he were on Slashdot, he'd have been modded -1 flamebait immediately and never thought of again.
I'm curious though. What's his background that earned him the spot on a show like Crossfire? He had to have done something that made him in the spotlight in some way before that I would assume?
This Boucher?
I'm too lazy to see if that is him doing a 180 on the issue.
Those distributions might be better for your uses or better for the ideals of the community but distributions like Mandrake are great for everyone as well. Putting forth a product like this gives another option to a business thinking about buying Linux. A major company would never purchase something without support or a business backing it. The larger the user base for Linux, the more software that gets written for it. The more drivers there are. I'll never complain about a distribution, even if I think its goals suck.
Really what I'm trying to say is that while I would prefer to use a Debian or a Gentoo I realize that is just an opinion. Letting others fill in different situations is optimal. Gentoo is not in a position to release a corporate edition nor do they need to be. I think that is a good thing for everyone involved.
Isn't this rather off the topic at hand of having a corporate desktop? The distribution method would most likely be tailored to paying customers along with the support models that go along with it. This is not meant to be a feely available distribution.
Your experiences with a bad download or bad hardware compatibility for the distribution certainly have no place in this thread. I generally don't complain about modding, but why was this modded insightful?
The ATI requires nearly the same. The reason for the second molex connector is stability. Under most conditions you can get away without it, however the AGP power is not always completely clean and if the molex is putting out a smaller amount, there can still be issues.
X-bit Labs did tests to show this. These tests show there is not a difference that is significant in power consumption throughout, although the new XT cards are improving with their heat loss and power consumption.
All of what you're saying is true or almost true. However, the transfer rate cited was anemic compared to the numbers that should be obtained. Bittorrent is not perfect at the current moment, but it definitely isn't horrible or worthless.
.torrent for. If you setup things properly and someone can transfer it, bt will usually saturated your connection if you have a proper client. That's my experience and the same of many others.
I've seen it work great for me consistently, and see the problems you are citing. However, it's not to the degree you are citing. It will saturate my bandwidth with control packets and other overhead making it go slower. I've never seen the slowdown you're talking about, and I've downloaded 158 torrents that I still have the
I want to make sure it's said, I really do understand the problems with it. I'm a college student who is starting to study networking more extensively. I couldn't dress it down or anything with my knowledge, but I know it's not perfect. It's also the best there is right now for its purpose. So, until something is better, let's make the best of it?
Not familiar with firewalls? I have to cap bittorrent off at 350KB/s otherwise it saturates my downstream. Something is definitely wrong on your end with the speed problem.
I don't think it's a matter of hating EA for this. I think it is hating the system and already having a dislike for EA that is the root of everything.
If Microsoft got a license to be the only operating system legally allowed, people wouldn't start hating Microsoft, they already would have. They'd also be upset with the system that created the situation. It's the same thing with this.
Amusing proof of writing nightmare code in any language
People seem to have it out for Javascript at Slashdot. Heh. A lot of negativity towards the language. I've seen some beautiful javascript, but I guess I'm one of the few.
Some projects that use Spidermonkey that aren't all web browsers
Hrmmmmm... You confused me a bit. First you were bashing Scwartz. Then at the end you were saying negative things about Eric Raymond.
Schwartz is making Sun look quite horrible though. He has to have some kind of an agenda. I'd like to believe he isn't mildly retarded and actually just flying off the seat of his pants. No one should be allowed to make this much of a fool of themselves by accident if they are the CEO of a company.
Slashdot is a lot about the discussion. The blurbs are obviously short, and the people hardly read them. The topic is brought up and the meat is in the comments. I, personally, keep reading these articles to gauge the response on the issue and see if there are any opinions about it that are unique. I'm actually rather torn on this subject. Understanding both sides of the argument, it's interesting to read for me.
Since these are being posted, I have a feeling others feel the same way. These discussions most likely get a lot of hits.
This is a rehash of an earlier story.
A lot more information here though so I wouldn't call it a dupe. Just thought some people might be interested in the earlier discussion that took place.
I think everything like this needs to be taken with a grain of salt as to what its true value is. Even if this is the city Plato mentions (in passing) the stories are most likely out of proportion to the reality.
The questions you raise are already answers in the gaim encryption plugin. It's slightly different, but it's doing nearly the same thing. Notifies and remembers that users use the plugin with a system of saying to either send it out, establish regardless, or various other settings for what to do.
It's not the most elegant solution, but when you are piggybacking a large proprietary network for something like this, I think it's more than enough.