1) From the context of the bands thinking, this is a good tribute, and actually good advertising for themselves.
2) From the context of the record company, they SHOULD see this as good advertising (after all, the $$$ is their only goal in life) - silly that they are far too stuck up their own arses to realise.
Interesting point... I class myself as 'fair' at maths, but rather-good at programming.
I am particular good at boolean maths/logic etc. but as for general maths, I'd say "fair" (in the context of slashdot posters, not in the context of the general UK citizen who can't do anything without a calculator and someone to help him/her)
I've always 'heard' that being excellent at maths is invaluable to programming, but from my opinion, as long as your maths isn't rubbish, your personal creativity, and ability to think of solutions "outside the box" (damn, I HATE phrases like that, and will regret writing it in the morning) is far more valuable.
I'm not dissin' the maths people who program, I just agree that it's not the bee-all-and-end-all
ARGGGGGGGH - is there way to get slashdot to automatically filter out posts that contain the word (or a stem of) analogy ? -- Most slashdot posters seem to have really weird analogy concepts worth nothing more than laughing at (not directed personally to the Parent)
And many of us who use other opensource operating systems can't use ActionScript/Flash from Adobe *either* because they have a very limited platform portfolio.
Just because they happen to do a Linux version, it doesn't make them any less evil trying to push a 'standard' that is closed and proprietry.
I'm not a 'everything open source' zealot - I happily run the Nvidia Binary driver blob for my video card on FreeBSD, but media formats -- ESPECIALLY WEB FORMATS -- SHOULD BE OPEN!
In the UK, the cost-bottleneck with ADSL is the local-loop provided by BT. The ISP's 'sub contract' the local-loop from BT, and this is the part that is causing ISP's to restrict services, not the internet part of the link.
There are a number of things wrong with YOUR post - all based on the false assumption that I was attacking all forms of lossy-compression, which I wasn't.
I'm talking about the MANY sources that are 128Kbs mp3, or even 96Kbps mp3 (stereo music radio too), and also often encoded using an encoder that isn't very good.
Are you really trying to say that download music services (for this is what we're talking about due to the conext of piracy and encryption) provide good quality 192kb/s or 256kb/s downloads ?
You then banging on on your crusade about 256kb/s and 192kb/s is therefore irrelevant, and a strawman argument.
And again, with tracks of the typical quality we're talking about, any added jitter will be minimal to negligable. Incidently, you'll find the music SOURCE was analogue originally, so there will already have been one A->D conversion done.
I've always said the same thing with audio. Even if the best encryption in the world comes about, simply feed the analogue line-out into the analogue line-in.
This 'one time' analogue loop (without tapes and so on in the mix) will still sound FAR better than most of the retarded low-bitrate lossy-compresssion algorithms we are expected to accept.
1.5 million out of roughly 60 million population have gone to the website, and made their views shown. More than enough *TO* put it to a vote if required.
The anti-congestion charge one has racked up over 1.5 million signatures, and that too is going to be ignored.
Last week I created a petition asking the government to actually pay notice to the petition service that *THEY* set up, and not just give it lip-service when it suits them... That petition request was rejected.
The performance of my machine hasn't changed, and if under constant load, the power usage/temperature is the same as before 'fvcool' too. but as soon as that cpu has some idle bits, the temperature goes down, and using only 10% of the cpu, the cpu actaully gets 10degrees C cooler.
It's called a firewall. These hack-job NAT/Router devices will be replaced with ip6 firewall/router devices. They will be more flexible and equally if not more secure than the hack NAT trash.
Another one who has trouble reading... Sigh, anyone would think I criticised the GPL with all this blind zealotry.
That's a flawed argument. Getting rid of NAT changes absolutely nothing security-wise for Joe Public, while making many other things easier or even possible in the first place.
Those 2 comments contradict themselves. How can it make things SOO much harder for legitimate things, but not make it any harder for illicit things?
What are you arguing here? There's no gain or loss in security, whether viruses know the public address or not.
Off the top of my head, if something installs a trojan, the hacker needs to know what IP to connect to - that information could be slotted into an innocent looking email, sent via the isp. With Nat, the trojan has no choice but to open a direct connection to somewhere so the ip can be logged - far more likely to be spotted by local firewall security on the pc.
There should be some law where anyone defending NAT in a discussion loses by default. It's sickening to read this crap over and over again.
NAT is a PITA with no gain in security. That perceived security comes from packet filters which don't need NAT or have anything to do with it.
I'm not a NAT lover, I dislike NAT, but I do stand by my original statements, that in the broader scheme of things, it has helped secure joe public more than if he didn't have it.
You seem so blind in your anti-nat passion, you can't see the wood for the trees. - I guess that is why you also deliberately misread my 'defending' of nat in the first place...
There should be some law where anyone blindly holding some view like a religious zealot loses by default, but I guess that would ruin Slashdot, no ?
Well, in your situation, you can do just that - remove the NAT. As I said (time and time again, I'm talking about Mr. Joe public - the guy ripe to end up owning a zombie machine. And yes, it causes YOU problems and other nerds problems, but that very fact means that Joe publics machine (time five million for all the other joe publics who don't have a nerd to support them) are just that little bit more insulated from messing up things for the rest of us.
I know nats are a problem, and I've used ipv6 on ALL my machines for years, and I know nat doesn't make joe public invincible, I just think it has helped *US* more than you appreciate
You can cook your food over elephant shit, too, but it's not the best way to keep your house smelling nice.You can cook your food over elephant shit, too, but it's not the best way to keep your house smelling nice.
But if you NEED to cook your food, and elephant shit is all you've got to do it, then maybe you won't mind it so much.
I'm just saying that with these 'all in one' natd/firewall consumer modems, the natd DOES help 'firewall'. If the NATD aspect wasn't there, I doubt the firewall itself (or indeed the OS) would be made better.
For the last time:) Joe Public is more insulated from evil due to these nat combos!
so there!!
With a NAT box in the standard 'home' configuration, where the local network uses private-ip address space, NATed to the single, common IP address, there *is* effective packet filtering (incoming, at least) - whether it's by design or consequence is not relevent!
Also, unlike a firewall, some viruses and things which may need to determine their 'public' IP address will find the situation harder behind a nat.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with the sentiments here, and personally have been using IPv6 on all my servers, and all my home machines for many years, and have been involved in big networking projects for many more.. Yes, NAT can be a pain in the butt, but it HAS helped keep Joe Public a little bit more secure!
NAT is shit, IPv6 means we can get rid of it once and for all
Whilst I agree about the problems NAT has caused, that's a rather glib statement. It has helped get people out of a hole, and the many home-routers these days with natd have helped insulate PCs from the net for newbies, which can only be a good thing.
> And last, it seems to lag/spinlock (or whatever it's called) all the time. Every time, without fail, I initiate a chat window w/ someone, it hangs for 5-to-15 seconds (giving me the KDE "not responding -- terminate or keep running?" dialog 50% of the time). Every single time. Never any such lag with the other 2 apps mentioned above. I've used Kopete 100% for over a year on 3 different machines, i386 and AMD64, but all of them FreeBSD.
I can't help you specifically, but I can say that I use kopete extensively too, and it does NOT do this on my system (FreeBSD/i386)
That sounds typical of the current "proprietary" linux philosophy.
Linux people are now going off the standard-path just like they accuse microsoft of doing - ok, so they may provide the source-code but for 99.999% of people, it's still proprietry linux-only stuff.
Seems like they now want the standard sound-api to be "ALSA" where the "L" stands for "linux"
And the new flash-player for 'linux' will use the alsa api.
There was a time that Linux was a decent Unix player........ Extras, and enhancements are fine, but now Linux thinks it's the only kid in the block worth considering.... It's MS with source-code.
> We could possily end up using hybrid solid state and magnetic hard drvies. Write a GB to the disk and it stores > it in the solid state cache within seconds, then writes it over the next minute to the magnetic disk. To a user > it would be seamless. Best of both worlds. You culd also use the solid state area for your OS. Hmmm...
But then, the next Gb of your backup would have to wait for the cache to empty.... and so on.
Ultimately, no real speed increase for a sustained backup... unless you also have a couple of TB of flash:)
Damn, I even PREVIEWED before posting..... Of course in the case I mention, the user WON'T get a "404" - they'd get their browser/proxy 'no such host' page.
What I meant was the user will get the standard error page they are used to getting when they normally mistype a domain etc. not a '404' which is of course the server generated 'page not found' received from a valid server.
> And on top of this, let's all congratulate these guys on breaking the RFCs by "helping" > shovel us to the address we "meant" to type in.. Let's not report back an error and help > the end user correct their mistake, but transparently forward them so they never know.
Good point.
Also, said user may then pass the incorrect address along to people, who themselves DON'T use the service, so ultimately causing more failed accesses than successes!
I was actually thinking of the viability of setting up a similar service to this a few weeks ago.
However, I was thinking simply of blocking fraud/phishing/purposely-misspelt-versions-of-popu lar-domains .
Administratively, bad sites would be 'voted on' by an open community I guess, or have some 'trusted' group, such as those that do mail blackhole lists, with a form option where someone can request their block removed.
Technically, though, any domain decided to be a fraud/phishing/purposely-misspelt-versions-of-popu lar-domain site would simply me NX'ed so the user would get a 404.
Other domains would resolve as normal.
No other service - no backend, no fake dns A or CNAME records, just a NX.
That's all that's needed!
It is much less likely to break non-dns services, and also, in the case of a misspelt-version, users will realise they've mistyped an address (just as they do now if they mistype an address that HASN'T been registered)
And in the case of a fraud site, they'll get the 404 just as they would if the authorities/hosting company had shut down the site.
Of course, there's no way to get revenue from such a service, but I have 2 dedicated co-located servers I'd be willing to allow to be used in a pool for such a service
He was fired ? I'm sure he wasn't so passionate based on personal interest in keeping the customer.
I'm also sure that if this publicity hadn't occured, and if the customer had been kept, he'd have kept his job, even if the 'bigwigs' happened to have heard the call.
> * You don't understand how Wikipedia works (the "made up of contributions" part)
Look up "peer review".
> * You think some people's input is "more trustworthy" than others'
Errr, of course.. And you don't ?
I wondered what type of people spammers targetted... By the way, if you ever buy a used car... Get a friend to help you!
> * You want everything handed to you 100% baked
Ahhh! Here cometh the strawman. Nothing I said or even implied could lead a sane person to deduce that.
> * You think you should be able to trust what other people say just because it's in an encyclopedia
Not quite - but it's certainly more trustworthy that something that lets any old troll post their contributions, without reference or real knowledge.
> * You think vandalism keeps the encyclopedia from being useful
Not totally, but somewhat. Anyone can identify and ignore "HAZ BIG PENIS LOL LOL" and similar, but if you have to scour the history for more subtle vandalism that may have been missed by subsequent updates, then it does impede it, yes.
> Wikipedia isn't broken - it's working exactly as it was designed to. The recent changes in policy are a > response to the recent increases in the AMOUNT of expected abuses, not the type. > > Your problem is your expectations! If you accept Wikipedia's caveats, it's right about where it should be in its evolution.
I never said it wasn't working as designed, though I'm sure they hoped for less vandalism and in-house fighting.
And I think Wikipedia has it's place, and I do use it occasionaly. But YOU (or at least, the original Mr. Anon) have problem with your expectations, not me!
It's NOT the most amazing, world-peace and harmony envoking thread to all encyclopedias that you Wiki-fanboys spout.
Slashdot Mirror
If anything:
1) From the context of the bands thinking, this is a good tribute, and actually good advertising for themselves.
2) From the context of the record company, they SHOULD see this as good advertising (after all, the $$$ is their only goal in life) - silly that they are far too stuck up their own arses to realise.
Interesting point... I class myself as 'fair' at maths, but rather-good at programming.
I am particular good at boolean maths/logic etc. but as for general maths, I'd say "fair" (in the context of slashdot posters, not in the context of the general UK citizen who can't do anything without a calculator and someone to help him/her)
I've always 'heard' that being excellent at maths is invaluable to programming, but from my opinion, as long as your maths isn't rubbish, your personal creativity, and ability to think of solutions "outside the box" (damn, I HATE phrases like that, and will regret writing it in the morning) is far more valuable.
I'm not dissin' the maths people who program, I just agree that it's not the bee-all-and-end-all
ARGGGGGGGH - is there way to get slashdot to automatically filter out posts that contain the word (or a stem of) analogy ? -- Most slashdot posters seem to have really weird analogy concepts worth nothing more than laughing at (not directed personally to the Parent)
And many of us who use other opensource operating systems can't use ActionScript/Flash from Adobe *either* because they have a very limited platform portfolio.
Just because they happen to do a Linux version, it doesn't make them any less evil trying to push a 'standard' that is closed and proprietry.
I'm not a 'everything open source' zealot - I happily run the Nvidia Binary driver blob for my video card on FreeBSD, but media formats -- ESPECIALLY WEB FORMATS -- SHOULD BE OPEN!
Where you live, maybe.
In the UK, the cost-bottleneck with ADSL is the local-loop provided by BT. The ISP's 'sub contract' the local-loop from BT, and this is the part that is causing ISP's to restrict services, not the internet part of the link.
There are a number of things wrong with YOUR post - all based on the false assumption that I was attacking all forms of lossy-compression, which I wasn't.
I'm talking about the MANY sources that are 128Kbs mp3, or even 96Kbps mp3 (stereo music radio too), and also often encoded using an encoder that isn't very good.
Are you really trying to say that download music services (for this is what we're talking about due to the conext of piracy and encryption) provide good quality 192kb/s or 256kb/s downloads ?
You then banging on on your crusade about 256kb/s and 192kb/s is therefore irrelevant, and a strawman argument.
And again, with tracks of the typical quality we're talking about, any added jitter will be minimal to negligable. Incidently, you'll find the music SOURCE was analogue originally, so there will already have been one A->D conversion done.
wrong. There would be a comma after "computer" if your alternative meaning was correct.
I've always said the same thing with audio. Even if the best encryption in the world comes about, simply feed the analogue line-out into the analogue line-in.
This 'one time' analogue loop (without tapes and so on in the mix) will still sound FAR better than most of the retarded low-bitrate lossy-compresssion algorithms we are expected to accept.
Errrr, who said it was ?
It's not a vote.
1.5 million out of roughly 60 million population have gone to the website, and made their views shown. More than enough *TO* put it to a vote if required.
The anti-congestion charge one has racked up over 1.5 million signatures, and that too is going to be ignored.
:(
Last week I created a petition asking the government to actually pay notice to the petition service that *THEY* set up, and not just give it lip-service when it suits them... That petition request was rejected.
So much for democracy
Not at all. As programs such as 'vcool' http://www.softpedia.com/get/Tweak/CPU-Tweak/VCoo
The performance of my machine hasn't changed, and if under constant load, the power usage/temperature is the same as before 'fvcool' too. but as soon as that cpu has some idle bits, the temperature goes down, and using only 10% of the cpu, the cpu actaully gets 10degrees C cooler.
a win-win situation
Another one who has trouble reading... Sigh, anyone would think I criticised the GPL with all this blind zealotry.
Those 2 comments contradict themselves. How can it make things SOO much harder for legitimate things, but not make it any harder for illicit things?
Off the top of my head, if something installs a trojan, the hacker needs to know what IP to connect to - that information could be slotted into an innocent looking email, sent via the isp. With Nat, the trojan has no choice but to open a direct connection to somewhere so the ip can be logged - far more likely to be spotted by local firewall security on the pc.
I'm not a NAT lover, I dislike NAT, but I do stand by my original statements, that in the broader scheme of things, it has helped secure joe public more than if he didn't have it.
You seem so blind in your anti-nat passion, you can't see the wood for the trees. - I guess that is why you also deliberately misread my 'defending' of nat in the first place...
There should be some law where anyone blindly holding some view like a religious zealot loses by default, but I guess that would ruin Slashdot, no ?
Well, in your situation, you can do just that - remove the NAT. As I said (time and time again, I'm talking about Mr. Joe public - the guy ripe to end up owning a zombie machine. And yes, it causes YOU problems and other nerds problems, but that very fact means that Joe publics machine (time five million for all the other joe publics who don't have a nerd to support them) are just that little bit more insulated from messing up things for the rest of us.
I know nats are a problem, and I've used ipv6 on ALL my machines for years, and I know nat doesn't make joe public invincible, I just think it has helped *US* more than you appreciate
With a NAT box in the standard 'home' configuration, where the local network uses private-ip address space, NATed to the single, common IP address, there *is* effective packet filtering (incoming, at least) - whether it's by design or consequence is not relevent!
Also, unlike a firewall, some viruses and things which may need to determine their 'public' IP address will find the situation harder behind a nat.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with the sentiments here, and personally have been using IPv6 on all my servers, and all my home machines for many years, and have been involved in big networking projects for many more.. Yes, NAT can be a pain in the butt, but it HAS helped keep Joe Public a little bit more secure!
Cheers
Typical of the Linux cabal to mod that post down - the truth hurts, no ?
> And last, it seems to lag/spinlock (or whatever it's called) all the time. Every time, without fail, I initiate a chat window w/ someone, it hangs for 5-to-15 seconds (giving me the KDE "not responding -- terminate or keep running?" dialog 50% of the time). Every single time. Never any such lag with the other 2 apps mentioned above. I've used Kopete 100% for over a year on 3 different machines, i386 and AMD64, but all of them FreeBSD.
I can't help you specifically, but I can say that I use kopete extensively too, and it does NOT do this on my system (FreeBSD/i386)
That sounds typical of the current "proprietary" linux philosophy.
Linux people are now going off the standard-path just like they accuse microsoft of doing - ok, so they may provide the source-code but for 99.999% of people, it's still proprietry linux-only stuff.
Seems like they now want the standard sound-api to be "ALSA" where the "L" stands for "linux"
And the new flash-player for 'linux' will use the alsa api.
There was a time that Linux was a decent Unix player........ Extras, and enhancements are fine, but now Linux thinks it's the only kid in the block worth considering.... It's MS with source-code.
> We could possily end up using hybrid solid state and magnetic hard drvies. Write a GB to the disk and it stores
:)
> it in the solid state cache within seconds, then writes it over the next minute to the magnetic disk. To a user
> it would be seamless. Best of both worlds. You culd also use the solid state area for your OS. Hmmm...
But then, the next Gb of your backup would have to wait for the cache to empty.... and so on.
Ultimately, no real speed increase for a sustained backup... unless you also have a couple of TB of flash
Damn, I even PREVIEWED before posting..... Of course in the case I mention, the user WON'T get a "404" - they'd get their browser/proxy 'no such host' page.
What I meant was the user will get the standard error page they are used to getting when they normally mistype a domain etc. not a '404' which is of course the server generated 'page not found' received from a valid server.
> And on top of this, let's all congratulate these guys on breaking the RFCs by "helping"
u lar-domains .
u lar-domain site would simply me NX'ed so the user would get a 404.
> shovel us to the address we "meant" to type in.. Let's not report back an error and help
> the end user correct their mistake, but transparently forward them so they never know.
Good point.
Also, said user may then pass the incorrect address along to people, who themselves DON'T use the service, so ultimately causing more failed accesses than successes!
I was actually thinking of the viability of setting up a similar service to this a few weeks ago.
However, I was thinking simply of blocking fraud/phishing/purposely-misspelt-versions-of-pop
Administratively, bad sites would be 'voted on' by an open community I guess, or have some 'trusted' group, such as those that do mail blackhole lists, with a form option where someone can request their block removed.
Technically, though, any domain decided to be a fraud/phishing/purposely-misspelt-versions-of-pop
Other domains would resolve as normal.
No other service - no backend, no fake dns A or CNAME records, just a NX.
That's all that's needed!
It is much less likely to break non-dns services, and also, in the case of a misspelt-version, users will realise they've mistyped an address (just as they do now if they mistype an address that HASN'T been registered)
And in the case of a fraud site, they'll get the 404 just as they would if the authorities/hosting company had shut down the site.
Of course, there's no way to get revenue from such a service, but I have 2 dedicated co-located servers I'd be willing to allow to be used in a pool for such a service
He was fired ? I'm sure he wasn't so passionate based on personal interest in keeping the customer.
I'm also sure that if this publicity hadn't occured, and if the customer had been kept, he'd have kept his job, even if the 'bigwigs' happened to have heard the call.
scapegoat.
Haha, you're funny.
> * You don't understand how Wikipedia works (the "made up of contributions" part)
Look up "peer review".
> * You think some people's input is "more trustworthy" than others'
Errr, of course.. And you don't ?
I wondered what type of people spammers targetted...
By the way, if you ever buy a used car... Get a friend to help you!
> * You want everything handed to you 100% baked
Ahhh! Here cometh the strawman. Nothing I said or even implied could lead a sane person to deduce that.
> * You think you should be able to trust what other people say just because it's in an encyclopedia
Not quite - but it's certainly more trustworthy that something that lets any old troll post their contributions, without reference or real knowledge.
> * You think vandalism keeps the encyclopedia from being useful
Not totally, but somewhat. Anyone can identify and ignore "HAZ BIG PENIS LOL LOL" and similar, but if you have to scour the history for more subtle vandalism that may have been missed by subsequent updates, then it does impede it, yes.
> Wikipedia isn't broken - it's working exactly as it was designed to. The recent changes in policy are a
> response to the recent increases in the AMOUNT of expected abuses, not the type.
>
> Your problem is your expectations! If you accept Wikipedia's caveats, it's right about where it should be in its evolution.
I never said it wasn't working as designed, though I'm sure they hoped for less vandalism and in-house fighting.
And I think Wikipedia has it's place, and I do use it occasionaly. But YOU (or at least, the original Mr. Anon) have problem with your expectations, not me!
It's NOT the most amazing, world-peace and harmony envoking thread to all encyclopedias that you Wiki-fanboys spout.
But it's fun watching you all try!