Including one that I own and when they're in a good mood, they attempt to make shortened URLs as quickly as our servers can handle them, often many thousands per day.
Thankfully, due to the sterling efforts of many of the URL blacklisting services out there, these are purged on the hour, on the day, on the week and on the month automatically, so often don't last that long.
However, if legitimate people start to use the URL shortening services that the spammers provide, it'll hardly be in their interests to remove the spammy redirects.
Continuing on from this, can I just suggest that people do not pay attention to 'Top 10' websites. The majority of these basically place companies with the highest cost per click/monthly revenue in the highest positions, leaving low paying hosting companies down dozens of pages and not getting noticed.
Ask real people (especially the support staff), get involved on hosting forums and take all reviews with a pinch of salt. Don't trust much in the way of second hand research.
I speak from experience running a web hosting company myself.
Also if you are planing on running virtual machines AMD are often a better choice. Intel doesn't support virtualization on a lot of their CPUs while I think AMD does on their AM2 and up CPUs.
There are many alternative virtualisation technologies around that don't require CPU support too, such as Xen (paravirtualisation) and VMWare (full emulation).
Azureus (and possibly other bittorrent clients) has a plugin called Ono which can find peers close to you (from a networking perspective). The website states:
The main goal of this plugin is simple -- to improve download speeds for your BitTorrent client. For most P2P applications, the decision regarding which peer to download from is generally arbitrary. When most peers offer good download performance, the random solution works well. However, if most peers are in a different part of the world from you, your downloads can really suffer.
The Ono plugin avoids this by proactively finding peers that are close to you (in a networking sense). These peers generally offer better response time, which can lead to significantly improved performance. We identify those peers that are near you by reusing network measurements from content distribution networks (CDNs), i.e. without performing extensive path measurement or probing.
It's tricky to see how much this helps me, as a bittorrent user, but as others have stated here, it must be good if major internet backbones aren't being used as much.
At my university, someone recently ran a DC hub and it was shut down within a day. This was had over 200 users on it. Once they have an IP address, IT admins are often easily able to find out what physical room the hub is located in and terminate their internet connection, stating that using P2P programs (what about e-mail?!) is against their AUP.
Does anyone know of a decent decentralised network, preferably with chat facilities, that will work on a LAN and not try to connect to the Internet? It does not really have to be anonymous, but that would be nice. I've been looking around on the net but nothing has really suited my needs.
We're currently running an off-campus solution, but this isn't scalable. IRC is totally blocked by the firewall, so that's out of the question and this appears to be the only way to create an online, real-time community for the students. Info is here: http://www.twofo.co.uk/
I went to a job interview with the BBC R&D department and they informed me that one of the driving reasons behind the Dirac codec was so that they could use it with their p2p network. Paying out fees for using the codecs of others costs them a lot of money and it's also pretty difficult to calculate how many times each programme is downloaded (and thus pay based on number of downloads).
Thus, I'm sure that when Dirac matures, it will be used as it was the original intention.
Looks spiffy. I'm seriously a geek in heaven lately...it seems that now my biggest problem is choosing between all the pretty, easy, functional linux installs I could be running and resisting the urge to "catch 'em all."
How do you get 20 Linux distributions onto a tiny hard drive? You Pok-em-on.
In reality, hardly a blip occurred on the stocks. It seems as though they only went down about 5% and are totally rebounding now.
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/en-gb/
While a service like this is truly incredible, as people from the UK (who have had it for a few years) have pointed out, these services usually only work on "popular" songs. Songs that probably get played twenty times a day on U.S. top-40 radio, with oppertunities to find out the name quite often.
I disagree. I've had Shazam work extremely well with some old 70s songs right through to some heavy trance songs in clubs that aren't really played much on UK radio. It didn't work with theme tunes though, which is unfortunate, and I've heard it doesn't work with classical tunes either.
x86 and PPCs (Apple doesn't make them) also often use more electricity and are less suitable from running off batteries. I don't use immoral/proprietary software, which I'm assuming RISC OS is.
You're right about the electricity usage - ARMs really do use very little. RISC OS is proprietrary software so I understand you not wanting to use it, but calling it immoral seems kind of bizarre! FOSS is nice, but commercial/closed source isn't necessary evil!
This machine runs RISC OS, which is the only real reason someone may want it. There is no point in comparing the specs of other machines to this. Of course mainstream x86 and Apples will have a greater Power:Price ratio, but that's not the point. This is a computer for a niche market, so prices will inevitably be greater, and this niche market likes RISC OS for a multitude of reasons. Please look up some information RISC OS, its advantages and disadvantages and market sizes before comparing this to a PDA.
If you really want to make some constructive comments, try RISC OS first - you might just like it.
Flicker isn't a problem. 25fps is slightly more than what movies are projected in (24fps), and I don't see crowds walking out of movie theatres complaining about the awful flicker
You might be interested, as an additional fact, that at cinemas, each frame is actually shown twice with a blanking 'fan', so it's something like: Frame 1, blank, Frame 1, blank, Frame 2, blank, Frame 2, blank Frame 3... Thus, it seems like 48fps. Still not great though as I can easily see the flicker out of the corner of my eye.
Most DVD players that support DivX support MPEG-4 based codecs, of which XviD is one. My DK Digital DVD player supports DivX, but in reality plays most of my XviDs and no doubt other MPEG-4 codecs.
Many of you probably won't know this, but Sky (another provider in the UK who also have a teletext service) used to provide a form of interactive teletext.
This required you to dial up a (typically premium rate) phone number and then access a specific teletext page. This was your page, and you could interact with it using the digits on the telephone keypad. I played many simple games, e.g. snake, and there were even ways to do online banking using this.
If you knew how to, other people could also look at the same teletext page and see exactly what you were doing. Sky used to have a password system for some of their online games, so it used to be quite easy to figure out someone else's password by looking at it as it was typed in!
Marc
(who won a tenner by being one of the highest scores in one of the games)
Can you specify which standards we're talking about here? There are many of them, and I'm sure a lot that Shareaza doesn't implement.
I'm pretty sure it's terrible at supporting Gnutella standards. IIRC, it cannot be an Ultrapeer, i.e. a hub which links to many dozens (or hundreds) of leaves to help out the network.
Cocodude (A Gnutella client developer)
I suppose it would also be possible to cheat and just send a certain number of levels of the wavelet transform to get a rougher image, but (standardly) quarter of the bitrate. This could lessen the time taken to compute, but has very discrete bitrates that could be transmitted! I know this isn't entirely what you mean;-)
I know what you're saying - it seems very much like a grey area, or at least that's the stance I'm going to have now! Don't forget that you don't have to get a TV license... if you don't have a TV:-/
That's interesting. When I visited the R and D centre, they said that WMP streaming had a royalty model which they didn't like. They prefered Real's and gave no hint that they'll be doing WMP soon, but rather concentrate on Dirac. This is of course in an informal demonstration/chat, not official information.
I confess to not knowing that much about this topic, but I still don't think you can say the codec is owned by the government. Even if it was, it doesn't really matter being GPLed etc.
Although it's not an authoritative source, I refer you to this article on Google Groups which states, amongst other things, that "The BBC is run under a Royal Charter, not by the government" and "But it was part of the Government to start with, yes? The BBC was not,
and has never been, and will never been part of the British Government."
Slashdot Mirror
has got to be the Love Hotel.
Does anyone know why this is even there?
Including one that I own and when they're in a good mood, they attempt to make shortened URLs as quickly as our servers can handle them, often many thousands per day.
Thankfully, due to the sterling efforts of many of the URL blacklisting services out there, these are purged on the hour, on the day, on the week and on the month automatically, so often don't last that long.
However, if legitimate people start to use the URL shortening services that the spammers provide, it'll hardly be in their interests to remove the spammy redirects.
Does this mean that the Living Earth Simulator will attempt to simulate itself? malloc(): error: recursive call
Continuing on from this, can I just suggest that people do not pay attention to 'Top 10' websites. The majority of these basically place companies with the highest cost per click/monthly revenue in the highest positions, leaving low paying hosting companies down dozens of pages and not getting noticed.
Ask real people (especially the support staff), get involved on hosting forums and take all reviews with a pinch of salt. Don't trust much in the way of second hand research.
I speak from experience running a web hosting company myself.
Also if you are planing on running virtual machines AMD are often a better choice. Intel doesn't support virtualization on a lot of their CPUs while I think AMD does on their AM2 and up CPUs.
Not quite true. Quite a lot of Intel chips, including some Pentium 4 even, do include Vanderpool (or VT-x as it's now called). Wikipedia is your friend - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_virtualization#Intel_Virtualization_Technology_for_x86_.28Intel_VT-x.29
There are many alternative virtualisation technologies around that don't require CPU support too, such as Xen (paravirtualisation) and VMWare (full emulation).
They've only shifted 0.931 gibiharddrives.
Cocodude
At my university, someone recently ran a DC hub and it was shut down within a day. This was had over 200 users on it. Once they have an IP address, IT admins are often easily able to find out what physical room the hub is located in and terminate their internet connection, stating that using P2P programs (what about e-mail?!) is against their AUP. Does anyone know of a decent decentralised network, preferably with chat facilities, that will work on a LAN and not try to connect to the Internet? It does not really have to be anonymous, but that would be nice. I've been looking around on the net but nothing has really suited my needs. We're currently running an off-campus solution, but this isn't scalable. IRC is totally blocked by the firewall, so that's out of the question and this appears to be the only way to create an online, real-time community for the students. Info is here: http://www.twofo.co.uk/
Thus, I'm sure that when Dirac matures, it will be used as it was the original intention.
Cocodude
[X] Another: [X] Checkbox list
How do you get 20 Linux distributions onto a tiny hard drive? You Pok-em-on.
<sigh>
In reality, hardly a blip occurred on the stocks. It seems as though they only went down about 5% and are totally rebounding now. http://www.londonstockexchange.com/en-gb/
If you really want to make some constructive comments, try RISC OS first - you might just like it.
Flicker isn't a problem. 25fps is slightly more than what movies are projected in (24fps), and I don't see crowds walking out of movie theatres complaining about the awful flicker
You might be interested, as an additional fact, that at cinemas, each frame is actually shown twice with a blanking 'fan', so it's something like: Frame 1, blank, Frame 1, blank, Frame 2, blank, Frame 2, blank Frame 3... Thus, it seems like 48fps. Still not great though as I can easily see the flicker out of the corner of my eye.
Most DVD players that support DivX support MPEG-4 based codecs, of which XviD is one. My DK Digital DVD player supports DivX, but in reality plays most of my XviDs and no doubt other MPEG-4 codecs.
This required you to dial up a (typically premium rate) phone number and then access a specific teletext page. This was your page, and you could interact with it using the digits on the telephone keypad. I played many simple games, e.g. snake, and there were even ways to do online banking using this.
If you knew how to, other people could also look at the same teletext page and see exactly what you were doing. Sky used to have a password system for some of their online games, so it used to be quite easy to figure out someone else's password by looking at it as it was typed in!
Marc
(who won a tenner by being one of the highest scores in one of the games)
So this is what the Internet Meltdown Predicted for Tomorrow article was referring to!
I suppose it would also be possible to cheat and just send a certain number of levels of the wavelet transform to get a rougher image, but (standardly) quarter of the bitrate. This could lessen the time taken to compute, but has very discrete bitrates that could be transmitted! I know this isn't entirely what you mean ;-)
I know what you're saying - it seems very much like a grey area, or at least that's the stance I'm going to have now! Don't forget that you don't have to get a TV license... if you don't have a TV :-/
That's interesting. When I visited the R and D centre, they said that WMP streaming had a royalty model which they didn't like. They prefered Real's and gave no hint that they'll be doing WMP soon, but rather concentrate on Dirac. This is of course in an informal demonstration/chat, not official information.
I confess to not knowing that much about this topic, but I still don't think you can say the codec is owned by the government. Even if it was, it doesn't really matter being GPLed etc.
Although it's not an authoritative source, I refer you to this article on Google Groups which states, amongst other things, that "The BBC is run under a Royal Charter, not by the government" and "But it was part of the Government to start with, yes? The BBC was not, and has never been, and will never been part of the British Government."