We used Sunrays at my old workplace. They worked fine and were very reliable - just throw in your card, put in your password and away you went. I highly recommend them.
And no, I don't not work for/am not in any way affiliated with Sun Microsystems - I just really like their product.
I know I know, it's actually been released now...hooray. As similarly mentioned previously here and here . Sorry, ordinarily I wouldn't care, but I've just re-read the same news from so many sources about this magazine closing. Enough already.
While I respect your right to an opinion, I disagree...
The poster you quoted sounds to me like he recognised that his addiction to pornography was a problem (speculation here). To preceive viewing pornography as an addiction, and addictions having a negative connotation, you must first percieve that viewing pornography is a bad thing (in which case, the pornography is bad). Your case was that (interpretation) viewing pornography isn't bad, only the addiction to it.
True, you mention that there are many ways of preventing (or at least making more difficult) yourself from viewing pornography - but have you ever tried to do so? Do you know how difficult it is to break such an entrenched (and pleasureable) addiction?
Alright, onto what I actually WANTED to say:S
I'd be curious as to see what your definition of "relationship problems" is (divorce? high numbers of arguments? verbal abuse? multiple partners?). I'd also be curious to find out the relationship between viewing pornography and relationship problems.
For the record, I have a great respect for the person who has the guts to come online and be honest about the fact that he runs several porn sites, and then to go on and try to find out if what he is providing has caused people to become addicted. While I disagree with what he does (I am a Bible-believing Christian), I have a deep respect for this person.
Actually, technically, given the passage of time, the probability tends towards 0, ie. 0%. An example ripped (badly) from HGTG:
If the universe is infinite, and filled largely with emptiness or uninhabited planets, then as we increase the size of the universe, the ratio of square metres to one person tends towards 0. Hence, you could say, we technically don't exist.
Yes, like I said, it was badly ripped, but I don't have the book in front of me, so:P The point was, your maths is wrong. It approaches 0%, not 100%.
Also (and mod me down if you like), I find it interesting that you assume that life on earth evolved. There's actually quite a bit of evidence (scientific and otherwise) to suggest life on earth was created. Check out http://www.answersingenesis.org/ or a book called "In Six Days: Why 50 scientists choose to believe in Creation". Basically, have an open mind, and investigate for yourself.
and if the cards themselves could do, say, signature detection of various flood types, or basic analysis of traffic trends
What would be really cool is to have a programmable network card - so you could program it to recognise DDOS attacks, or signatures, or whatever. Kindof like taking your old Pentium 200Mhz that you run Linux on now as a router, and squeezing into a network-card size. I imagine something like that would have a huge market in the hacker/geek crowd, plus IDS companies would love it too (provided you can protect it from being re-progammed, maybe a jumper on it to turn off programmable mode or something).
Yes, I think so actually. I'm starting to see the point... that no humans are involved.
Think about this: What's the most expensive part of a space mission (apart from the launch)? Maintaining the humans on board once they're in space. Think about all the extra food, supplies, and all the space "wasted" on the astronauts. Imagine now if you could do away with them, and have machines do everything in space for you? Imagine if machines built the ISS? How much more space could be devoted to materials with each launch!
And for those that scoff at the idea: Think of the mars rover. That was remotely controlled (correct me if I'm wrong). Why couldn't somebody remotely control a robot to perform a task? True, latency, but, a few seconds, depending on the altitude. Or even completely autonomously, as this article could lead to. Have a robot build a space station, all by itself - no human intervention whatsoever (not even relaying commands to ground control). Sounds pretty cool to me.
From the article: "the first robotic spacecraft designed to rendezvous in orbit with other satellites without any human intervention"
So, basically, it's the same as any other non-manned launch, except this time it's going to meet up with another satellite? True, that sounds incredibly complex... but don't they do that already with manned craft? What's so special about this? And is it truly "autonomous", or will it receive instruction from ground control? If it's truly autonomous, then I will be slightly impressed: the thought of satellites up there mucking about by themselves is rather interesting (watching illegal TV I'd imagine!).
I had a quick squiz through RFC1883 (http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc1883.txt?number=1883) "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification" and all it appears to mention on the subject is:
"IPv6 increases the IP address size from 32 bits to 128 bits, to support more levels of addressing hierarchy, a much greater number of addressable nodes, and simpler auto-configuration of addresses."
Going into more detail and reading RFC1971 (http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc1971.txt?number=1971) " IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration" gives you the nuts and bolts of how it actually happens. Abstract says:
"This document specifies the steps a host takes in deciding how to autoconfigure its interfaces in IP version 6. The autoconfiguration process includes creating a link-local address and verifying its uniqueness on a link, determining what information should be autoconfigured (addresses, other information, or both), and in the case of addresses, whether they should be obtained through the stateless mechanism, the stateful mechanism, or both. This document defines the process for generating a link-local address, the process for generating site-local and global addresses via stateless address autoconfiguration, and the Duplicate Address Detection procedure. The details of autoconfiguration using the stateful protocol are specified elsewhere."
Two key points here: 1) Stateful autoconfiguration and 2) Stateless autoconfiguration.
1) Stateful autoconfiguration: Is where it uses a server. Ignore.
2) Stateless autoconfiguration: Does NOT require a server, but requires a router if you want more than just a link-local address. From the RFC:
" IPv6 defines both a stateful and stateless address autoconfiguration mechanism. Stateless autoconfiguration requires no manual configuration of hosts, minimal (if any) configuration of routers, and no additional servers. The stateless mechanism allows a host to generate its own addresses using a combination of locally available information and information advertised by routers. Routers advertise prefixes that identify the subnet(s) associated with a link, while hosts generate an "interface token" that uniquely identifies an interface on a subnet. An address is formed by combining the two. In the absence of routers, a host can only generate link-local addresses. However, link-local addresses are sufficient for allowing communication among nodes attached to the same link."
For the record, "link local addresses" are defined as:
"an address having link-only scope that can be used to reach neighboring nodes attached to the same link. All interfaces have a link-local unicast address."
So, essentially, it looks like MS is getting VERY close to what this RFC states, although they seem to be allowing more than just a link-local address without needing a router.
Based on ONLY reading the abstract in the post above, I'd have to say: this actually sounds like a good idea.
From my understanding, it appears to be DHCP (as someone mentioned earlier), but without the DHCP server. In essence, it sounds like the perfect thing for mom & pop at home who don't know how to give their computer an "IP Address" (what the heck's that?). Instead, just have the computer assign one itself (you'll notice they mention this is for small networks only, they even specify that it would be useful for "home network environment").
What can I say (never thought I'd say this) - but nice idea Microsoft.
Cheers all,
Sampizcat
PS. I run Linux at home, worked as a sys-admin for Unix and prefer *Nix over Windows any day. However, a good idea is still a good idea, no matter who it comes from.
The first part of the monorail, which uses Bombardier M-VI train vehicles, 'a derivative of the famous Walt Disney World Mark VI trains', is 4 miles long
I had to do a double-take when I read this the first time. I thought it said the train itself was 4 miles long...
Actually, as well as the benefits mentioned above, we eliminate (mostly) the problem of transporting weighty materials to the moon. All we really need is the mining equipment.
...plus a few fluoro lights, brightly-coloured flower wall-paper, lava lamps, spiders to leave their webs around the upper parts of the tunnel and dark areas so you can walk through them...
So, why not make it underground, and just tunnel everywhere? We could become the Mole People!
Seriously though, it would shield from (some? UV?) radiation as well as help against debris striking the base (provided the debris was small and/or the base & tunnels were deep enough underground).
Plus, the moon rock between you and space would provide some sort of insulation and therefore warmth as opposed to being simply "out in the open", wouldn't it? And how hard could moon-mining be anyway? There's no issue of debris, just shoot it out into space, or even at Earth and it will just burn up (assuming the pieces are small enough). Of course, this could be bad as if they don't make it we could end up with a lovely ring of debris around the moon.
Regardless of what happens, there's some pretty cool stuff waiting in the future. Hope it's in my lifetime.
Looks pretty, but wont computers at this level be more concerned with process cycles than spending time on a fancy GUI?
I think Sun are envisioning this for their new desktop replacement, the Java Desktop System (http://wwws.sun.com/software/javadesktopsystem/), and workstations rather than their servers.
Why not just record straight to the hard disk?
on
LA to Oregon at Mach 9
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Wow, first post. I feel 1337.
Seriously though, is there any performance hit or other reason why you wouldn't record straight to (RAM then) hard disk?
"but to pretend like they are an Open Source advocate is a mistake."
Get your facts straight. It seems you don't read/. enough, if you did you wouldn't have missed this article about how Sun settled their fight against Microsoft.
True, IBM does a lot for open source, but it doesn't mean that Sun's contribution should be disregarded. I don't mind an opinion, just make sure it's an informed one.
From what I remember, they've recently made a deal with Universal. I'm pretty sure they've got deals with other big names too. Don't know if this is Australia-only though.
IANAL...
I could be wrong,but don't patents cover processes? What specific processes are there in linux that could be covered?
If someone within the linux community did get sued because they infringed somebody's patent, isn't there a good chance that they could just declare the patent void? In aus, to get a patent the process you are patenting must "not be secretly in use" as well as not in the general knowledge (to someone who works in that specific area). Given that, don't companies also have to make reasonable effort to enforce their patents, so chances are if they DID have the patents long before this stuff was put into linux, wouldn't they lose their rights to the patent due to the fact that they didn't enforce it until this point?
Rather than defining what P2P is, lawmakers should focus on what "fair use" is,
Generally, lawmakers set out the laws, and stuff like focussing on what "fair use" is is left up to the courts to decide based on the law (hence why case law aka common law is so important, it sets the precedent. So, if the courts decide that doing X with P2P does not constitute fair use, then chances are every other case will follow suit). So it all really depends on how these early cases turn out.
Ok, while I think that what the RIAA is doing is really terrible, evil and at times just downright mean (extreme I know, but hey, desperate times...), I have to say some of the things the greplaw guy (Peterson) said were pretty stupid. "No doubt, music piracy is a bad thing. Sometimes, it is appropriately characterized as a form of property theft." Music piracy IS property theft. There's no way around it. I don't know how it is in the US, but here in Aus the Copyright Act prevents against unauthorized reproductions, alterations etc. etc. So dl'ing your mp3's is illegal, plain and simple (barring that whole if you own it its ok, or the 24 hours then wipe it thing, anyone know where that came from anyway?). True, it's not quite as bad as murder or beating up the elderly, but still...
My favourite bit :
"The potential abuser categories are limitless, and include everything from annoying marketers to swindlers, child abductors, blackmailers, and terrorists." TERRORISTS! Ah yes, I can see it now. "So, Osama, what do you think of our latest plan? We'll subpoena people to courthouses, then we'll BLOW THE COURTHOUSES UP, WITH THEM INSIDE! MUAHAAHAHAAHAAAA!". True evil genius at work...
Or perhaps Al Qaeda could release an album, then sue everyone for pirating it off kazaa to make money for their next campaign! The possibilities are endless!
Slashdot Mirror
See also0 961327%5E15306,00.html
http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,2
Wow! A $27.5 settlement that gives $27000 to 800 workers? How do I get that guy to be my accountant?
We used Sunrays at my old workplace. They worked fine and were very reliable - just throw in your card, put in your password and away you went. I highly recommend them.
And no, I don't not work for/am not in any way affiliated with Sun Microsystems - I just really like their product.
Sampizcat
I know I know, it's actually been released now...hooray. As similarly mentioned previously here and here . Sorry, ordinarily I wouldn't care, but I've just re-read the same news from so many sources about this magazine closing. Enough already.
Disgruntledly yours,
Sampizcat
While I respect your right to an opinion, I disagree...
:S
The poster you quoted sounds to me like he recognised that his addiction to pornography was a problem (speculation here). To preceive viewing pornography as an addiction, and addictions having a negative connotation, you must first percieve that viewing pornography is a bad thing (in which case, the pornography is bad). Your case was that (interpretation) viewing pornography isn't bad, only the addiction to it.
True, you mention that there are many ways of preventing (or at least making more difficult) yourself from viewing pornography - but have you ever tried to do so? Do you know how difficult it is to break such an entrenched (and pleasureable) addiction?
Alright, onto what I actually WANTED to say
I'd be curious as to see what your definition of "relationship problems" is (divorce? high numbers of arguments? verbal abuse? multiple partners?). I'd also be curious to find out the relationship between viewing pornography and relationship problems.
For the record, I have a great respect for the person who has the guts to come online and be honest about the fact that he runs several porn sites, and then to go on and try to find out if what he is providing has caused people to become addicted. While I disagree with what he does (I am a Bible-believing Christian), I have a deep respect for this person.
Cheers,
Sampizcat
Actually, technically, given the passage of time, the probability tends towards 0, ie. 0%. An example ripped (badly) from HGTG:
:P The point was, your maths is wrong. It approaches 0%, not 100%.
If the universe is infinite, and filled largely with emptiness or uninhabited planets, then as we increase the size of the universe, the ratio of square metres to one person tends towards 0. Hence, you could say, we technically don't exist.
Yes, like I said, it was badly ripped, but I don't have the book in front of me, so
Also (and mod me down if you like), I find it interesting that you assume that life on earth evolved. There's actually quite a bit of evidence (scientific and otherwise) to suggest life on earth was created. Check out http://www.answersingenesis.org/ or a book called "In Six Days: Why 50 scientists choose to believe in Creation". Basically, have an open mind, and investigate for yourself.
Cheers,
Sampizcat
...Jim Beam?
Yeah, I'll be quiet now...
Sampizcat
What would be really cool is to have a programmable network card - so you could program it to recognise DDOS attacks, or signatures, or whatever. Kindof like taking your old Pentium 200Mhz that you run Linux on now as a router, and squeezing into a network-card size. I imagine something like that would have a huge market in the hacker/geek crowd, plus IDS companies would love it too (provided you can protect it from being re-progammed, maybe a jumper on it to turn off programmable mode or something).
Does anything like this currently exist?
Anyway, just my 2cents.
Sampizcat
Think about this: What's the most expensive part of a space mission (apart from the launch)? Maintaining the humans on board once they're in space. Think about all the extra food, supplies, and all the space "wasted" on the astronauts. Imagine now if you could do away with them, and have machines do everything in space for you? Imagine if machines built the ISS? How much more space could be devoted to materials with each launch!
And for those that scoff at the idea: Think of the mars rover. That was remotely controlled (correct me if I'm wrong). Why couldn't somebody remotely control a robot to perform a task? True, latency, but, a few seconds, depending on the altitude. Or even completely autonomously, as this article could lead to. Have a robot build a space station, all by itself - no human intervention whatsoever (not even relaying commands to ground control). Sounds pretty cool to me.
Sampizcat
So, basically, it's the same as any other non-manned launch, except this time it's going to meet up with another satellite? True, that sounds incredibly complex... but don't they do that already with manned craft? What's so special about this? And is it truly "autonomous", or will it receive instruction from ground control? If it's truly autonomous, then I will be slightly impressed: the thought of satellites up there mucking about by themselves is rather interesting (watching illegal TV I'd imagine!).
Sampizcat
"IPv6 increases the IP address size from 32 bits to 128 bits, to support more levels of addressing hierarchy, a much greater number of addressable nodes, and simpler auto-configuration of addresses."
Going into more detail and reading RFC1971 (http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc1971.txt?number=1971) " IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration" gives you the nuts and bolts of how it actually happens. Abstract says:
"This document specifies the steps a host takes in deciding how to autoconfigure its interfaces in IP version 6. The autoconfiguration process includes creating a link-local address and verifying its uniqueness on a link, determining what information should be autoconfigured (addresses, other information, or both), and in the case of addresses, whether they should be obtained through the stateless mechanism, the stateful mechanism, or both. This document defines the process for generating a link-local address, the process for generating site-local and global addresses via stateless address autoconfiguration, and the Duplicate Address Detection procedure. The details of autoconfiguration using the stateful protocol are specified elsewhere."
Two key points here: 1) Stateful autoconfiguration and 2) Stateless autoconfiguration.
1) Stateful autoconfiguration: Is where it uses a server. Ignore.
2) Stateless autoconfiguration: Does NOT require a server, but requires a router if you want more than just a link-local address. From the RFC:
" IPv6 defines both a stateful and stateless address autoconfiguration mechanism. Stateless autoconfiguration requires no manual configuration of hosts, minimal (if any) configuration of routers, and no additional servers. The stateless mechanism allows a host to generate its own addresses using a combination of locally available information and information advertised by routers. Routers advertise prefixes that identify the subnet(s) associated with a link, while hosts generate an "interface token" that uniquely identifies an interface on a subnet. An address is formed by combining the two. In the absence of routers, a host can only generate link-local addresses. However, link-local addresses are sufficient for allowing communication among nodes attached to the same link."
For the record, "link local addresses" are defined as:
"an address having link-only scope that can be used to reach neighboring nodes attached to the same link. All interfaces have a link-local unicast address."
So, essentially, it looks like MS is getting VERY close to what this RFC states, although they seem to be allowing more than just a link-local address without needing a router.
Cheers,
Sampizcat
From my understanding, it appears to be DHCP (as someone mentioned earlier), but without the DHCP server. In essence, it sounds like the perfect thing for mom & pop at home who don't know how to give their computer an "IP Address" (what the heck's that?). Instead, just have the computer assign one itself (you'll notice they mention this is for small networks only, they even specify that it would be useful for "home network environment").
What can I say (never thought I'd say this) - but nice idea Microsoft.
Cheers all,
Sampizcat
PS. I run Linux at home, worked as a sys-admin for Unix and prefer *Nix over Windows any day. However, a good idea is still a good idea, no matter who it comes from.
I had to do a double-take when I read this the first time. I thought it said the train itself was 4 miles long...
Actually, as well as the benefits mentioned above, we eliminate (mostly) the problem of transporting weighty materials to the moon. All we really need is the mining equipment.
...plus a few fluoro lights, brightly-coloured flower wall-paper, lava lamps, spiders to leave their webs around the upper parts of the tunnel and dark areas so you can walk through them...
So, why not make it underground, and just tunnel everywhere? We could become the Mole People!
Seriously though, it would shield from (some? UV?) radiation as well as help against debris striking the base (provided the debris was small and/or the base & tunnels were deep enough underground).
Plus, the moon rock between you and space would provide some sort of insulation and therefore warmth as opposed to being simply "out in the open", wouldn't it? And how hard could moon-mining be anyway? There's no issue of debris, just shoot it out into space, or even at Earth and it will just burn up (assuming the pieces are small enough). Of course, this could be bad as if they don't make it we could end up with a lovely ring of debris around the moon.
Regardless of what happens, there's some pretty cool stuff waiting in the future. Hope it's in my lifetime.
Looks pretty, but wont computers at this level be more concerned with process cycles than spending time on a fancy GUI?
, and workstations rather than their servers.
I think Sun are envisioning this for their new desktop replacement, the Java Desktop System (http://wwws.sun.com/software/javadesktopsystem/)
Wow, first post. I feel 1337. Seriously though, is there any performance hit or other reason why you wouldn't record straight to (RAM then) hard disk?
"but to pretend like they are an Open Source advocate is a mistake."
/. enough, if you did you wouldn't have missed this article about how Sun settled their fight against Microsoft.
Get your facts straight. It seems you don't read
True, IBM does a lot for open source, but it doesn't mean that Sun's contribution should be disregarded. I don't mind an opinion, just make sure it's an informed one.
Sampizcat
at http://www.bigpondmusic.com/
From what I remember, they've recently made a deal with Universal. I'm pretty sure they've got deals with other big names too. Don't know if this is Australia-only though.
IANAL... I could be wrong,but don't patents cover processes? What specific processes are there in linux that could be covered?
If someone within the linux community did get sued because they infringed somebody's patent, isn't there a good chance that they could just declare the patent void? In aus, to get a patent the process you are patenting must "not be secretly in use" as well as not in the general knowledge (to someone who works in that specific area). Given that, don't companies also have to make reasonable effort to enforce their patents, so chances are if they DID have the patents long before this stuff was put into linux, wouldn't they lose their rights to the patent due to the fact that they didn't enforce it until this point?
Just my 2 cents...
Ok, while I think that what the RIAA is doing is really terrible, evil and at times just downright mean (extreme I know, but hey, desperate times...), I have to say some of the things the greplaw guy (Peterson) said were pretty stupid. "No doubt, music piracy is a bad thing. Sometimes, it is appropriately characterized as a form of property theft." Music piracy IS property theft. There's no way around it. I don't know how it is in the US, but here in Aus the Copyright Act prevents against unauthorized reproductions, alterations etc. etc. So dl'ing your mp3's is illegal, plain and simple (barring that whole if you own it its ok, or the 24 hours then wipe it thing, anyone know where that came from anyway?). True, it's not quite as bad as murder or beating up the elderly, but still...
My favourite bit : "The potential abuser categories are limitless, and include everything from annoying marketers to swindlers, child abductors, blackmailers, and terrorists." TERRORISTS! Ah yes, I can see it now. "So, Osama, what do you think of our latest plan? We'll subpoena people to courthouses, then we'll BLOW THE COURTHOUSES UP, WITH THEM INSIDE! MUAHAAHAHAAHAAAA!". True evil genius at work... Or perhaps Al Qaeda could release an album, then sue everyone for pirating it off kazaa to make money for their next campaign! The possibilities are endless!
Tired, assignments, busy, apologies...
Sampizcat