Like so much else in the OSS world, the toolset exists and is freely avaiulable, but no one has ever gotten around to the documentation for it. As a result, nobody knows if it is available, how to do it, or even why they would want to do it.
While distributed systems are always prefered in networking, the inherent problem with distributed systems is coordination and convergence. DNS takes a while to converge as it is. If it is distributed this would get even worse.
If you mean a small distributed system, then the current DNS system is a lot like what you've mentioned. Most of us do not directly query the root servers but query our ISP's DNS servers, IIRC.
After reading what these people have posted in the past, I don't think I'm going to pay too much attention to the report. Throwing out terms like "5th dimension defense" and "counter-attack fore" and suggesting the ENTIRE Internet be shut down in preparation for an attack that never materialized on 9/11/02 really cast doubts on the group's intelligence. One has to wonder what kind of credentials these people hold. If they're like most tech consultant groups, probably degrees in the liberal arts. I mean, did a single person in the group point out to these people that shutting down the Internet would be very close to be impossible and even if they did the damage would probably be higher than anything hackers can do themselves? Do these guys even understand the Internet? Or are they just a bunch of managers who can only attach big marketing buzz words to it? Do they not understand that the Internet is NOT homogenous? To them, the Interent is like an appliance. The Internet needs to stay UP if an attack occurs so people can communicate and coordinate a response. Can you imagine if the Internet was down while a new worm is spreading? How else are we going to get updates? Where will we go to get answers? That was just the dumbest thing any consultant group has ever said. It would have been obvious to anyone who has some kind of understanding of the Internet that it was a dumb suggestion. Therefore, I really doubt the experience and credentials of the group.
True but I don't want to wait until I'm dead before it gets corrected. Sure Hitler's manical dreams were at tne end "corrected", but at what cost? I don't think those millions who died cares. Not trying to equate the atrocities to the IP chaos but the point is the same. Yes, things do get corrected eventually but it makes no difference to those who must suffer through it first.
Delaying game releases seem to work well for Blizzard. Of course their games are always backwards in terms of technology but their story and gameplay are excellent. Maybe we should worry less about sophistication and technology and more about the non-visual aspects of the story? Then again, their FMVs are excellent, same with SquareSoft's. An interesting story with nice FMVs as reward for completing each stage seem to be the common theme here.
We should just build an open source rocket for fun and profit. Imagine an international team of researchers and just ordinary people collaborating on a project without any corporate or government intervention. This is stretching it but I think open source collaborative work could be applied to non-computer projects.
The day when someone can pass the source code for a virus around and tell people how to compile and then run it in the email is the day I lose faith in humanity, which given what has transpired already isn't too far off.:-)
I read once that an old trick some people used to use is to do a search for "root" on Altavista (yeah, this was back in the days) and it would actually return useful information for gaining access. Not sure if that was just a geek urban legend but it sound plausible to me.
Despite my usual love for evereything new and advanced, I have a strong love for mechanical watches. I wear an IWC Portofino right now. It doesn't even glow in the dark and I need a separate alarm to wake me up. All it does is tell me the time and date. But I'm fairly sure I would be wearing the same watch for the forseeable future and I have a greater love for it than any of my previous watches.
Why? Because ironically good timepieces should be timeless. Even a good mechanical watch from the 50's or earlier would still work and look nice if it has been taken care of. On the other hand, anything that's technologically advanced is the opposite. They're very vulnerable to the passage of time. The own selling point of technology is that they're somehow futuristic or advanced but once that future has arrived, they lost their charm. A well made time-piece or anything that is "timeless" has other qualities that age better.
I think a good part of it has to do with the person's personality as much as anything else. Having taken the technology route so many times, I'm happy to know that I have something, however small, that will last and do one thing really well day after day.
For MS to port Windows over the x86-64 is relatively easy when compared to porting it over to a totally different architecture. The way Windows is designed, much of the hardware is hidden. So MS only needs to change the code before the hardware abstraction layer. Furthermore, x86-64 is an extension of x86 so I can't imagine it being too difficult to do. So, if it doesn't cost MS too much, doing this just for AMD is a good way of hedging their bets. If the Opteron takes off in the server market, they don't want all of it to go to Linux.
If they don't bother trying to secure their machine, then perhaps they should bear the responsibility for it. Perhaps AOL or their ISP can warn them at a certain point. Hopefully this will pressure people to be more security-conscious and that might in turn pressure software makers to do the same.
It's withdrawing itself due to an identity crisis, not sure if it a vowel or not. That whole "sometimes y" mess was the straw that broke the camel's back.
Yes but what can you honestly do with FreeDOS? I assume that FreeDOS is similar to MSDOS. Even if someone gave me MSDOS today I wouldn't want to run it. Unless you're buying the value PC for paying abandonware or really old PC games that you own, I am not sure how useful the setup would be. What is the point of giving people FreeDOS when you can just as easily give them Linux?
I think you have to do more than that. You might want to check out the Panavision case.
http://www.kentlaw.edu/legalaspects/panavision_d om ain.html
If you're clearly out to damage someone's ability to use their own trademark, you are cybersquatting. The defendant in the case had a "legitamate" use for the domain; he had a site with aerial views of Pana, Illinois. But on further examination, it became clear that his intention was to spoil the domain name for Panavision and then selling it back to them. Likewise, if AOL can prove that was what your friend was trying to do, they would probably win the case.
I can imagine terrorists or criminals starting to use open source software in the future because of this. Then some marketing or PR department of some large closed source or any sworn enemy of open source (ie. SCO) would start sprouting FUDs about open source and damage it's credibility. Worse, it could push the government to regulate it.
Anyone know if there is a Beowulf Cluster of these chips or the VIA ones? And would a cluster comnparable in performance to a P4 generate as much heat or use as much power? I'm thinking about trying this because: 1. A Mini-ITX system is mad cheap. 2. They're very quiet. 3. Should be more redundant/reliable than a single processor system.
I have 2 servers right now. One is a Mini-ITX at 900 mhz and another one is an Athlon at 1.6 Ghz. The smaller one is more preferable because I live in a dorm room. Plus it's mad easy to carry around when I have to move. Furthermore, it doesn't draw a lot of power so it won't overload my UPS. A small cluster of these things could be interesting.
The article seems to imply that computer graphics is pretty much everything that a computer ever needs to do. Therefore, if the G5 beats the Opterons at most of those CG related benchmarks, then it must be faster than the Opteron at almost everything...
Maybe it's not an intentional bias. The site seems catered towards the Mac crowd and those might be things that Mac users care more about. PCs are often used for games and that might be an issue PC users would care more about.
So, maybe as far as Mac users are concerned, the G5 is faster than the Opteron, but I doubt they really needed the convincing to start with. However, I must state that those benchmarks are nowhere near being definitive. It doesn't convince me, the PC-user, and that's the audience it should be targetting. I'm not trying to be stubborn about it (in fact, I'm saving up money for the Powerbook because it and OSX outclass any PC laptop out there) but I use none of those applications he tested on except for PS7, which the Opteron did better on.
In the future, I suggest testers to use a more balanced set of test and research their audience. If all they want to do is rubber-stamp a prevailing opinion, then keep this up. Otherwise, try targetting those who don't normally agree with you. It's tough but at least it would be something more useful than rubber-stamping.
It seems to me that he equates incentive to create with profit. Now, I'm not an idealist or anything and money is a good incentive but there are some of us who just want to advance the art/science. Can he not see that? Surely he must be aware of it. Perhaps he thinks the world is so materialistic that everyone would simply buy his argument.
Whenever I read his argument I imagine either: 1. Mr. Burns pulling his hair out, unable to comprehend this new "madness" of non-profit work.
2. Sauron, unable to imagine what the little geeks have in mind for Linux's profit potentials...
Seven Samurai actually had characters and a theme. It contrasted the ideals of Bushido with the reality of living (as peasants to be specific). Mifune embodied that contrast because he was really a farmer's son who pretended to be a samurai. Crude and unsophisticated, he was able to capture the essence of it nonetheless.
Kill Bill had...
for (time = 0; time length; time++){
if (time % 2 == 0){
scene.coolFightScene();
}
else{
scene.shock()
} }
It's not as though he wrote LoTR in those fantasy languages. Then he would be pompous. He was being incredibly imaginative when he invented his own language. I mean, honestly, how credible would the story have been if English was the elves' primary language? It's not something we can't get over but the languages are another level of detail that Tolkien is willing to go.
I can't convicne you otherwise in regards to the story of LoTR but calling Tolkien pompous for trying to add another level of detail is really unfair.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean like GNU/Sex?
While distributed systems are always prefered in networking, the inherent problem with distributed systems is coordination and convergence. DNS takes a while to converge as it is. If it is distributed this would get even worse. If you mean a small distributed system, then the current DNS system is a lot like what you've mentioned. Most of us do not directly query the root servers but query our ISP's DNS servers, IIRC.
After reading what these people have posted in the past, I don't think I'm going to pay too much attention to the report. Throwing out terms like "5th dimension defense" and "counter-attack fore" and suggesting the ENTIRE Internet be shut down in preparation for an attack that never materialized on 9/11/02 really cast doubts on the group's intelligence. One has to wonder what kind of credentials these people hold. If they're like most tech consultant groups, probably degrees in the liberal arts. I mean, did a single person in the group point out to these people that shutting down the Internet would be very close to be impossible and even if they did the damage would probably be higher than anything hackers can do themselves? Do these guys even understand the Internet? Or are they just a bunch of managers who can only attach big marketing buzz words to it? Do they not understand that the Internet is NOT homogenous? To them, the Interent is like an appliance. The Internet needs to stay UP if an attack occurs so people can communicate and coordinate a response. Can you imagine if the Internet was down while a new worm is spreading? How else are we going to get updates? Where will we go to get answers? That was just the dumbest thing any consultant group has ever said. It would have been obvious to anyone who has some kind of understanding of the Internet that it was a dumb suggestion. Therefore, I really doubt the experience and credentials of the group.
If they all counter-sued and dried up RIAA's resources, it would be like the legal equivalent of a Slashdotting!
True but I don't want to wait until I'm dead before it gets corrected. Sure Hitler's manical dreams were at tne end "corrected", but at what cost? I don't think those millions who died cares. Not trying to equate the atrocities to the IP chaos but the point is the same. Yes, things do get corrected eventually but it makes no difference to those who must suffer through it first.
Delaying game releases seem to work well for Blizzard. Of course their games are always backwards in terms of technology but their story and gameplay are excellent. Maybe we should worry less about sophistication and technology and more about the non-visual aspects of the story? Then again, their FMVs are excellent, same with SquareSoft's. An interesting story with nice FMVs as reward for completing each stage seem to be the common theme here.
We should just build an open source rocket for fun and profit. Imagine an international team of researchers and just ordinary people collaborating on a project without any corporate or government intervention. This is stretching it but I think open source collaborative work could be applied to non-computer projects.
The day when someone can pass the source code for a virus around and tell people how to compile and then run it in the email is the day I lose faith in humanity, which given what has transpired already isn't too far off. :-)
I read once that an old trick some people used to use is to do a search for "root" on Altavista (yeah, this was back in the days) and it would actually return useful information for gaining access. Not sure if that was just a geek urban legend but it sound plausible to me.
Despite my usual love for evereything new and advanced, I have a strong love for mechanical watches. I wear an IWC Portofino right now. It doesn't even glow in the dark and I need a separate alarm to wake me up. All it does is tell me the time and date. But I'm fairly sure I would be wearing the same watch for the forseeable future and I have a greater love for it than any of my previous watches.
Why? Because ironically good timepieces should be timeless. Even a good mechanical watch from the 50's or earlier would still work and look nice if it has been taken care of. On the other hand, anything that's technologically advanced is the opposite. They're very vulnerable to the passage of time. The own selling point of technology is that they're somehow futuristic or advanced but once that future has arrived, they lost their charm. A well made time-piece or anything that is "timeless" has other qualities that age better.
I think a good part of it has to do with the person's personality as much as anything else. Having taken the technology route so many times, I'm happy to know that I have something, however small, that will last and do one thing really well day after day.
For MS to port Windows over the x86-64 is relatively easy when compared to porting it over to a totally different architecture. The way Windows is designed, much of the hardware is hidden. So MS only needs to change the code before the hardware abstraction layer. Furthermore, x86-64 is an extension of x86 so I can't imagine it being too difficult to do. So, if it doesn't cost MS too much, doing this just for AMD is a good way of hedging their bets. If the Opteron takes off in the server market, they don't want all of it to go to Linux.
If they don't bother trying to secure their machine, then perhaps they should bear the responsibility for it. Perhaps AOL or their ISP can warn them at a certain point. Hopefully this will pressure people to be more security-conscious and that might in turn pressure software makers to do the same.
It's withdrawing itself due to an identity crisis, not sure if it a vowel or not. That whole "sometimes y" mess was the straw that broke the camel's back.
Yes but what can you honestly do with FreeDOS? I assume that FreeDOS is similar to MSDOS. Even if someone gave me MSDOS today I wouldn't want to run it. Unless you're buying the value PC for paying abandonware or really old PC games that you own, I am not sure how useful the setup would be. What is the point of giving people FreeDOS when you can just as easily give them Linux?
Hope he can build a web server out of LEGOs... He's going to need it now.
OK, which one of you posted the URL to Spirit's onboard webserver on Slashdot???
I think you have to do more than that. You might want to check out the Panavision case.
d om ain.html
http://www.kentlaw.edu/legalaspects/panavision_
If you're clearly out to damage someone's ability to use their own trademark, you are cybersquatting. The defendant in the case had a "legitamate" use for the domain; he had a site with aerial views of Pana, Illinois. But on further examination, it became clear that his intention was to spoil the domain name for Panavision and then selling it back to them. Likewise, if AOL can prove that was what your friend was trying to do, they would probably win the case.
I can imagine terrorists or criminals starting to use open source software in the future because of this. Then some marketing or PR department of some large closed source or any sworn enemy of open source (ie. SCO) would start sprouting FUDs about open source and damage it's credibility. Worse, it could push the government to regulate it.
Anyone know if there is a Beowulf Cluster of these chips or the VIA ones? And would a cluster comnparable in performance to a P4 generate as much heat or use as much power? I'm thinking about trying this because:
1. A Mini-ITX system is mad cheap.
2. They're very quiet.
3. Should be more redundant/reliable than a single processor system.
I have 2 servers right now. One is a Mini-ITX at 900 mhz and another one is an Athlon at 1.6 Ghz. The smaller one is more preferable because I live in a dorm room. Plus it's mad easy to carry around when I have to move. Furthermore, it doesn't draw a lot of power so it won't overload my UPS. A small cluster of these things could be interesting.
The electric company?
Actually my dorm room is usually noticably warmer than my common room because of the 4 computers I have inside.
Yes, but does it run Linu...
Oh, wait.
The article seems to imply that computer graphics is pretty much everything that a computer ever needs to do. Therefore, if the G5 beats the Opterons at most of those CG related benchmarks, then it must be faster than the Opteron at almost everything...
Maybe it's not an intentional bias. The site seems catered towards the Mac crowd and those might be things that Mac users care more about. PCs are often used for games and that might be an issue PC users would care more about.
So, maybe as far as Mac users are concerned, the G5 is faster than the Opteron, but I doubt they really needed the convincing to start with. However, I must state that those benchmarks are nowhere near being definitive. It doesn't convince me, the PC-user, and that's the audience it should be targetting. I'm not trying to be stubborn about it (in fact, I'm saving up money for the Powerbook because it and OSX outclass any PC laptop out there) but I use none of those applications he tested on except for PS7, which the Opteron did better on.
In the future, I suggest testers to use a more balanced set of test and research their audience. If all they want to do is rubber-stamp a prevailing opinion, then keep this up. Otherwise, try targetting those who don't normally agree with you. It's tough but at least it would be something more useful than rubber-stamping.
It seems to me that he equates incentive to create with profit. Now, I'm not an idealist or anything and money is a good incentive but there are some of us who just want to advance the art/science. Can he not see that? Surely he must be aware of it. Perhaps he thinks the world is so materialistic that everyone would simply buy his argument.
Whenever I read his argument I imagine either:
1. Mr. Burns pulling his hair out, unable to comprehend this new "madness" of non-profit work.
2. Sauron, unable to imagine what the little geeks have in mind for Linux's profit potentials...
Seven Samurai actually had characters and a theme. It contrasted the ideals of Bushido with the reality of living (as peasants to be specific). Mifune embodied that contrast because he was really a farmer's son who pretended to be a samurai. Crude and unsophisticated, he was able to capture the essence of it nonetheless.
Kill Bill had...
for (time = 0; time length; time++){
if (time % 2 == 0){
scene.coolFightScene();
}
else{
scene.shock()
}
}
Nerd humor.
It's not as though he wrote LoTR in those fantasy languages. Then he would be pompous. He was being incredibly imaginative when he invented his own language. I mean, honestly, how credible would the story have been if English was the elves' primary language? It's not something we can't get over but the languages are another level of detail that Tolkien is willing to go.
I can't convicne you otherwise in regards to the story of LoTR but calling Tolkien pompous for trying to add another level of detail is really unfair.