Not officially. Can you get to these supposed domains from anywhere? Heck, if that were the case, I can set up my own TLDs, I choose.ford,.gm,.ibm,.ms,.microsoft,.walmart, just for starters.....
Lets see, ICANN - recognized authority that pretty much anyone who is anyone utilizes for authoritive DNS. Some upstart goes, hey, I like to sell some folks a new TLD that ICANN doesn't recognize, because it's spiffy and cool, and I can charge extra for it. Who cares if 99% of the folks cannot see it, these chumps won't know. Wait, ICANN is going to use this!?!?! AAAArrrggghh!
The authoritive new TLD completely ignores the squatter as it's squished beneath the wheels of recognized progress. To be honest, this is like setting up a couple of twigs on some ranchers land and then claiming said land as your own. There's a reason ICANN exists. There's a reason "upstarts" aren't recognized.
Hate to break it to you, but several products couldn't be patched, because someone (hint, the letters M & S are prominent) were scrambling to get the patch out. Oh, and that patch didn't patch it, so there was another patch, which, omg, still didn't fix the stupid security hole. (if I still had the link, I'd post it)
.NET was originally a set of web services, then a service platform, then a server OS, then a set of services on a server OS, then a development platform, and, now, the most known.NET (because I think there's more than one, MS couldn't tell me for sure though) is the multiple language to bytecode platform/compiler.
Is it any surprise that.NET appears to be fading away? Anything that mucked up by schizophrenic marketing would have to be simply the best thing since the goose that laid gold eggs to survive. And MS's products are definitely not that. (that's not an opinion, see the recent virus outbreak reports for why - just about every major MS product's been hit in the last 6 months)
I really wanted to RTFA, but even the google cache is mostly dead. I saw the Commodore GUI mentioned, but missed any mention of the following both in what little of the article I was able to get or previous comments:
You are right. The problem is that it's far cheaper for a company to work a single employee 80 hours, than to have 2 employees work 40 hours. Couple this with the supposed concept that an employee on average only does 3 hours of real work a day (I can't find the link anymore, this study was quite old), maybe companies think well, keep the employee here for 80 hours, we'll get 30 or so real hours of work out of them..
The main problem is that companies are already paying people less, but they're not hiring more people, they're paying us less to work more hours. (US workers put in most hours)
This is why schools are having trouble finding teachers, right? Because there's too much supply? Why schools are churning out thousands of new candidates to become teachers that can't find jobs?
After looking through the article (gasp, I read it!) I think the authors may have missed a significant factor. Most of the "happier" professions aren't worried about their jobs getting outsourced, and don't appear to be the type of job that have bosses breathing down your neck, forcing you to work 80 hour weeks for 40 hours of pay, which, by the way, also had your salary cut.
Nurses are an example of a profession even less "happy" than IT. While nurses aren't worried about their jobs being outsourced, interestingly enough they tend to be overworked (usually 10-12 hour rotating shifts throughout the week) and underpaid, especially compared to their colleagues. But, according to the articles, they should be happy, as they are very hands on. Guess that hypothesis just got shot down.
The only useful thing I found out of this study is the actual data, which I don't really know how to treat (with suspicion?). The rest is pretty much opinionated fluff.
Linux does not need some fancy graphics on the desktop to make an impact.
I would disagree. Fancy graphics, eye candy, etc, appeals to the masses. The masses spend massive amounts of money on additional software. Massive amounts of money tends to attract the kind of attention Linux needs to make a lasting impact. (Note: it's already made a real impact:)
So, even if this is utter crap for you and me and we might never use it, having it as an option would be good for Linux. After all, look at the functionally crappy but pretty Windows UI, and how many people "like" it. Then listen to new Mac panther users. They LOVE their new OS - "everything's so easy" is what I hear from the converted. Matter of fact, I'd say that OSX has done more to promote Unix to the common person's desktop than anyone.
I don't know what boards you're looking at for large memory configurations, but 24GB, 20GB both use a maximum 2GB sticks for those. (Having more DDR slots than PCI slots is kinda strange looking)
Now, you could argue that these aren't standard motherboards, but then again, what 64 bit CPU motherboard is? For next year or two, I don't expect to be hitting the 20GB memory limit...;)
Just registered my first domain with them. 10 years is the maximum, and they're dirt cheap with decent service. Maybe they'll get a little more business thanks to this.:) After all, I'm happy at this point, and the only one or two bad things I've heard seem to be your standard "problem customers" griping that you'd have even if you ran a "perfect" company.
I'm pretty sure the price could be estimated rather well, as we do have some experience sending things over to Mars, after all, most of which came in under $1B.
Then there's the Moon missions, can't forget those, the price tag to re-egineer those should be quite easy to determine, and should be a lot less expensive because of major improvements in technology. Combine that with the cost of space station modules for supporting human life over a relatively long timespan, and you can probably come up with a reasonable estimate for a Mars mission.
Personally, assembling the mars ship at a "spacedock" at an appropriate orbit, and then launching it would probably be a lot more efficient and cost effective than ground based launches, not to mention the usefulness of such a "spacedock" in general. Much better investment then the ISS imnsho.
This reminded me of another extreme hobby, BBQ lighting by George Goble, who also happens to be a systems engineer (go figure).
To do something just to show that it can be done is one thing, but I don't think anyone should seriously consider doing this for any other reason than to merely say "I did it".
And for those asking "why so cold", I can answer that one, it has to do with total thermal inertia, and thermal gradients. Basically, the larger the temprature difference, the faster heat will attempt to move from hot to cold. Just because the outside of the chip may be 0 degrees, doesn't mean the inside of the chip is.
I really get the feeling they're trying any old tactics to sell Joe Public the idea of DRM.
DRM tied to windows, that is, and the most virus prone POS mail client I know of. Phoenix used to have a good BIOS. As I'm moving away from MS, it appears their new products will be unwelcome on my new machines.
Heck, some of us are waiting for 1 of 2 things to happen: Apple laptops to come down in price, or move up the CPU chain. (Basically, current pricing for Powerbooks is too high)
But I think setting up a system to protect them would also gain us much knowledge to protect us, which is a much bigger task. (I also concur in advance that the system would have a harder time detecting smaller objects, but an easier time dealing with them, as compared to those objects damaging to the planet. Of course, the detection network could server double duty)
If it's a solid lump of rock (ie, not permeated with ice or some other frozen gaseous substance) it could make it, possibly. A solid lump of metal - sure. From what I recall about several other asteroid studies, including the one of the "potato" (Quail's having a flashback) is that they are an amalgam of dust, rocks, etc. Such an object should explode/come apart when heated sufficiently by entry into the atmosphere. A few pieces probably will hit the ground, but they should be of insufficient size to cause significant harm unless you're in its path or a car.
Ahh, but they could at least advertise it as a special order. Most don't even show you what's there. They'd rather stock an extra TNT card that may sell, rather than a special order item that costs them nothing, and might make them some money on a mail order equivalent basis.
Heck, and let's not forget to actually live and work there, as a local. The taxes in a country like Denmark used to be killer (many years ago, no idea about whether their system has changed). As for Holland, when balanced out against US wages, taxes, insurance, and more, my counterpart in Holland actually made more cash take home than I did at the end of the day. We were both "average" salaried for our respective countries.
Now granted, items in general appeared to cost more, and the standard of living is different in Holland, and lower by many standards. Then again, it's higher by others, especially for those that are poor, disabled, or old.
128 bit SSL is NOT secure, at least not from government resources. From the average hacker, yes it is. And that's all it's really meant to protect you from. 1024 bit encryption isn't secure either, nor is any other published mathematical formula.
Anything that is interceptable and has a known formula applied to it can be cracked. However, if everything's encrypted to a reasonable level, that means resources have to be devoted to it, and that costs cash, therefore, widely used adequate encryption prevents mass scanning, and we're back to targeted scanning, which is what wire-tapping is roughly equivalent to.
This is actually humerous, as I just installed Woody two days ago. I must admit, I'm fully with "Bob" on this, and I consider myself relatively knowledgable.
First, I'd agree with the concept of default simple installations. For those wanting a quick install, there should at least be a "simple server" and a "simple desktop" install. Both would be of a fixed size and install into a single partition. The server install is console based (ie - super simple), the desktop install would install the server install plus a GUI desktop, with the only additional selection being which desktop.
This would get you to a simple running system which can then be configured via a more robust configuration tool, especially on the GUI side, which definitely would be more user-friendly than the current text mode installer, which should still exist for those capable of dealing with it.
Some items that would really be helpful: 1) A true partitioning/disk configuration guide. The benefits of setting up partitions for various directory trees, size recommendations, etc.
2)Example(s) for specific installations - ie, server wetup with Apache ONLY. I've seen far too many "examples" consisting of a bundle of "simple" components, that seriously wind up being less than helpful to someone looking only how to setup component 'B', but doesn't care about components 'A', 'C-F', nor their integration. Yes, this is more work, but documentation always is.
3)DNS sounds like a great service, and many windows power users "know" it. However, how many will see "DNS" and think, yeah, I need that! After all, how else will I get onto the internet?". Some explanations should be available detailing what each service is. (Again, the simple server setup would take care of a lot of this, since these questions won't come up then. DNS in particular is a good one, as most won't need it, but then again, if the benefits of running one's own DNS is explained, including how sitefinder can be neutralized, it would become helpful.:)
4) Have the installer create an install script for any installs done. NOT a log. This would be awesome, as custom installations could be created by knowledgable folks, and they could be made available for download much the same the above described simple server/simple desktop installs would work, except the install would be via script.
Just some things that would make life a lot easier and less confusing for the first time installer, with more explanations in familiar "wizard form". (Personally, I hate being forced to use wizards, although they can be helpful the first time you run into something new, provided they contain useful information. For instance, Windows XP's recovery wizard is useless. "Please insert floppy" is the first step...my machine doesn't have a floppy. Whoops. And MS is going floppyless? Hey Bill, news flash - quit depending on floppies! [Obligatory swipe at MS completed];)
Slashdot Mirror
Not officially. Can you get to these supposed domains from anywhere? Heck, if that were the case, I can set up my own TLDs, I choose .ford, .gm, .ibm, .ms, .microsoft, .walmart, just for starters.....
Lets see, ICANN - recognized authority that pretty much anyone who is anyone utilizes for authoritive DNS. Some upstart goes, hey, I like to sell some folks a new TLD that ICANN doesn't recognize, because it's spiffy and cool, and I can charge extra for it. Who cares if 99% of the folks cannot see it, these chumps won't know. Wait, ICANN is going to use this!?!?! AAAArrrggghh!
The authoritive new TLD completely ignores the squatter as it's squished beneath the wheels of recognized progress. To be honest, this is like setting up a couple of twigs on some ranchers land and then claiming said land as your own. There's a reason ICANN exists. There's a reason "upstarts" aren't recognized.
Hate to break it to you, but several products couldn't be patched, because someone (hint, the letters M & S are prominent) were scrambling to get the patch out. Oh, and that patch didn't patch it, so there was another patch, which, omg, still didn't fix the stupid security hole. (if I still had the link, I'd post it)
Oh, and .NET has issues too.
and if you just want to dwellIsn't this what SCO is doing?
.NET was originally a set of web services, then a service platform, then a server OS, then a set of services on a server OS, then a development platform, and, now, the most known .NET (because I think there's more than one, MS couldn't tell me for sure though) is the multiple language to bytecode platform/compiler.
Is it any surprise that .NET appears to be fading away? Anything that mucked up by schizophrenic marketing would have to be simply the best thing since the goose that laid gold eggs to survive. And MS's products are definitely not that. (that's not an opinion, see the recent virus outbreak reports for why - just about every major MS product's been hit in the last 6 months)
I really wanted to RTFA, but even the google cache is mostly dead. I saw the Commodore GUI mentioned, but missed any mention of the following both in what little of the article I was able to get or previous comments:
- Atari
- Next
- OS/2's PM
Maybe I can view it later in full detail.You are right. The problem is that it's far cheaper for a company to work a single employee 80 hours, than to have 2 employees work 40 hours. Couple this with the supposed concept that an employee on average only does 3 hours of real work a day (I can't find the link anymore, this study was quite old), maybe companies think well, keep the employee here for 80 hours, we'll get 30 or so real hours of work out of them..
The main problem is that companies are already paying people less, but they're not hiring more people, they're paying us less to work more hours. (US workers put in most hours)
This is why schools are having trouble finding teachers, right? Because there's too much supply? Why schools are churning out thousands of new candidates to become teachers that can't find jobs?
Quite unlike IT professionals.
After looking through the article (gasp, I read it!) I think the authors may have missed a significant factor. Most of the "happier" professions aren't worried about their jobs getting outsourced, and don't appear to be the type of job that have bosses breathing down your neck, forcing you to work 80 hour weeks for 40 hours of pay, which, by the way, also had your salary cut.
Nurses are an example of a profession even less "happy" than IT. While nurses aren't worried about their jobs being outsourced, interestingly enough they tend to be overworked (usually 10-12 hour rotating shifts throughout the week) and underpaid, especially compared to their colleagues. But, according to the articles, they should be happy, as they are very hands on. Guess that hypothesis just got shot down.
The only useful thing I found out of this study is the actual data, which I don't really know how to treat (with suspicion?). The rest is pretty much opinionated fluff.
How about the currently existing Looking Glass Networks?
I would disagree. Fancy graphics, eye candy, etc, appeals to the masses. The masses spend massive amounts of money on additional software. Massive amounts of money tends to attract the kind of attention Linux needs to make a lasting impact. (Note: it's already made a real impact:)
So, even if this is utter crap for you and me and we might never use it, having it as an option would be good for Linux. After all, look at the functionally crappy but pretty Windows UI, and how many people "like" it. Then listen to new Mac panther users. They LOVE their new OS - "everything's so easy" is what I hear from the converted. Matter of fact, I'd say that OSX has done more to promote Unix to the common person's desktop than anyone.
I don't know what boards you're looking at for large memory configurations, but 24GB, 20GB both use a maximum 2GB sticks for those. (Having more DDR slots than PCI slots is kinda strange looking)
Now, you could argue that these aren't standard motherboards, but then again, what 64 bit CPU motherboard is? For next year or two, I don't expect to be hitting the 20GB memory limit... ;)
Just registered my first domain with them. 10 years is the maximum, and they're dirt cheap with decent service. Maybe they'll get a little more business thanks to this. :) After all, I'm happy at this point, and the only one or two bad things I've heard seem to be your standard "problem customers" griping that you'd have even if you ran a "perfect" company.
I'm pretty sure the price could be estimated rather well, as we do have some experience sending things over to Mars, after all, most of which came in under $1B.
Then there's the Moon missions, can't forget those, the price tag to re-egineer those should be quite easy to determine, and should be a lot less expensive because of major improvements in technology. Combine that with the cost of space station modules for supporting human life over a relatively long timespan, and you can probably come up with a reasonable estimate for a Mars mission.
Personally, assembling the mars ship at a "spacedock" at an appropriate orbit, and then launching it would probably be a lot more efficient and cost effective than ground based launches, not to mention the usefulness of such a "spacedock" in general. Much better investment then the ISS imnsho.
Load iTunes. I was going to anyways, maybe now I should. I'm sure iTunes has at least one of the wierd one/no hit wonders I have just about forgotten.
This reminded me of another extreme hobby, BBQ lighting by George Goble, who also happens to be a systems engineer (go figure).
To do something just to show that it can be done is one thing, but I don't think anyone should seriously consider doing this for any other reason than to merely say "I did it".
And for those asking "why so cold", I can answer that one, it has to do with total thermal inertia, and thermal gradients. Basically, the larger the temprature difference, the faster heat will attempt to move from hot to cold. Just because the outside of the chip may be 0 degrees, doesn't mean the inside of the chip is.
DRM tied to windows, that is, and the most virus prone POS mail client I know of. Phoenix used to have a good BIOS. As I'm moving away from MS, it appears their new products will be unwelcome on my new machines.
Heck, some of us are waiting for 1 of 2 things to happen: Apple laptops to come down in price, or move up the CPU chain. (Basically, current pricing for Powerbooks is too high)
+funny (even if it was a little weak ;)
The birds are quite expensive like $250M (or $1B - the reference to SIGINT is unclear) or Thuraya multi-part system at $1.1B or $350M satellites.
But I think setting up a system to protect them would also gain us much knowledge to protect us, which is a much bigger task. (I also concur in advance that the system would have a harder time detecting smaller objects, but an easier time dealing with them, as compared to those objects damaging to the planet. Of course, the detection network could server double duty)
geo-synchronous satellite. 26km is just about their orbit. Shouldn't we try to protect them?!?
If it's a solid lump of rock (ie, not permeated with ice or some other frozen gaseous substance) it could make it, possibly. A solid lump of metal - sure. From what I recall about several other asteroid studies, including the one of the "potato" (Quail's having a flashback) is that they are an amalgam of dust, rocks, etc. Such an object should explode/come apart when heated sufficiently by entry into the atmosphere. A few pieces probably will hit the ground, but they should be of insufficient size to cause significant harm unless you're in its path or a car.
Ahh, but they could at least advertise it as a special order. Most don't even show you what's there. They'd rather stock an extra TNT card that may sell, rather than a special order item that costs them nothing, and might make them some money on a mail order equivalent basis.
Heck, and let's not forget to actually live and work there, as a local. The taxes in a country like Denmark used to be killer (many years ago, no idea about whether their system has changed). As for Holland, when balanced out against US wages, taxes, insurance, and more, my counterpart in Holland actually made more cash take home than I did at the end of the day. We were both "average" salaried for our respective countries.
Now granted, items in general appeared to cost more, and the standard of living is different in Holland, and lower by many standards. Then again, it's higher by others, especially for those that are poor, disabled, or old.
128 bit SSL is NOT secure, at least not from government resources. From the average hacker, yes it is. And that's all it's really meant to protect you from. 1024 bit encryption isn't secure either, nor is any other published mathematical formula. Anything that is interceptable and has a known formula applied to it can be cracked. However, if everything's encrypted to a reasonable level, that means resources have to be devoted to it, and that costs cash, therefore, widely used adequate encryption prevents mass scanning, and we're back to targeted scanning, which is what wire-tapping is roughly equivalent to.
This is actually humerous, as I just installed Woody two days ago. I must admit, I'm fully with "Bob" on this, and I consider myself relatively knowledgable.
;)
First, I'd agree with the concept of default simple installations. For those wanting a quick install, there should at least be a "simple server" and a "simple desktop" install. Both would be of a fixed size and install into a single partition. The server install is console based (ie - super simple), the desktop install would install the server install plus a GUI desktop, with the only additional selection being which desktop.
This would get you to a simple running system which can then be configured via a more robust configuration tool, especially on the GUI side, which definitely would be more user-friendly than the current text mode installer, which should still exist for those capable of dealing with it.
Some items that would really be helpful:
1) A true partitioning/disk configuration guide. The benefits of setting up partitions for various directory trees, size recommendations, etc.
2)Example(s) for specific installations - ie, server wetup with Apache ONLY. I've seen far too many "examples" consisting of a bundle of "simple" components, that seriously wind up being less than helpful to someone looking only how to setup component 'B', but doesn't care about components 'A', 'C-F', nor their integration. Yes, this is more work, but documentation always is.
3)DNS sounds like a great service, and many windows power users "know" it. However, how many will see "DNS" and think, yeah, I need that! After all, how else will I get onto the internet?". Some explanations should be available detailing what each service is. (Again, the simple server setup would take care of a lot of this, since these questions won't come up then. DNS in particular is a good one, as most won't need it, but then again, if the benefits of running one's own DNS is explained, including how sitefinder can be neutralized, it would become helpful.:)
4) Have the installer create an install script for any installs done. NOT a log. This would be awesome, as custom installations could be created by knowledgable folks, and they could be made available for download much the same the above described simple server/simple desktop installs would work, except the install would be via script.
Just some things that would make life a lot easier and less confusing for the first time installer, with more explanations in familiar "wizard form". (Personally, I hate being forced to use wizards, although they can be helpful the first time you run into something new, provided they contain useful information. For instance, Windows XP's recovery wizard is useless. "Please insert floppy" is the first step...my machine doesn't have a floppy. Whoops. And MS is going floppyless? Hey Bill, news flash - quit depending on floppies! [Obligatory swipe at MS completed]