New evidence can be entered after discovery is closed but it's got to be something that would cause a great injustice if not considered. The ruling SCO is protesting was Judge Wells ruling that SCO did NOT comply with Kimball's earlier ruling that the parts of Linux that infringe be defined in DETAIL, with filename, line #, actual code, relation to code SCO "owns" must also be shown. IIRC, SCO tried to skate around this requirement for about a year with various motions and delays. When discovery closed after SCO being allowed a look at the IBM code archives for Dynix, AIX and IBM's Linux contibutions (such as JFS) and taking dozens of depositions from IBM the BEST SCO could come up with was about 25-30 items that meet the burden of proof. Of those 25-30 most were things like.h files, the ELF binary format (which is public), and some Error Codes.
Critical to the case, even more so than showing infringement, is the issue of IF SCO even OWNS the copyrights on said System V UNIX code found in Linux, and IF they did (big IF) IBM has a contract with Novell (orginal owner or current owner depending on if you are SCO or IBM) that allows IBM an irrevokable right to use the System V UNIX code as they pleased since they paid for that sort of license. SCO is cooked about six different ways but whether they are roasted, boiled, BarBQ'd, broiled, fried, etc. will have to wait until after the close of discovery in the SCO vs Novell case. If the court (same judge by the way) decides in that instance SCO does NOT own the copyrights on UNIX code the case against IBM is over and IBM wins. The only issue to settle would be IBM's counterclaims, which wouldn't be worth much as SCO would be bankrupt without a win (or another infusion of cash in exchange for "IP" from the Microsoft fairy).
I mentioned the exothermic bonding reaction in my reply. Can you define "rapid curing", I've done it on my dogs and it cures in about a minute maybe two and we've never had any tissue necrosis. From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanoacrylate)
The original Eastman formula was not FDA approved for medical use, however, because of a tendency to cause skin irritation and to generate heat. In 1998 the FDA approved 2-octyl cyanoacrylate for use in closing wounds and surgical incisions. Closure Medical have developed medical cyanoacrylates such as Dermabond, Sooth-N-Seal and Band-Aid Liquid Adhesive Bandage.
Your math assumes the base (surface of the earth) of the triangle is a straight line (i.e flat). The earth curves, so I think your 700 km numbers would be best case. Probably not a significant change from 700km doing it using the curvature of the earth. Just means you can't do it with geometry.
I suspect SuperGlue is an exothermic reaction (yields heat) so the "burning" could have been the heat of bonding and not a chemical burn. If it was some other type of very strong adhesive (my wife uses something called E6000 in her jewelry business that will bond ANYTHING) then who knows. Were you able to get your foot out of the sandal before they became one?
Based on what I have seen (on TV) about the ballon missions from the Antartic float in a circle of 3-400 miles circumfrence about the South Pole. Unless penguins have cell phones and have learned to use them I doubt you'll get UFO reports. Even at 38km high (125000 ft) you wouldn't see it from populated areas (New Zealand being the nearest population center) I'm sure there is a formula for how far away you can see something at 125K feet but I don't feel like googling it today.
You don't "Pour it into an open wound". You actually brush a little on the skin on each side of the wound and hold the sides together for a few seconds. I'm also calling Bullshit on this as I have gotten SuperGlue on my fingers many times and it didn't hurt a bit.
I thought the secret weapon to kill off the Chinese was Marlboro's and Camels. They all die of lung cancer in 30 years and we walk right in and take over. Either that or we open a bunch of Wal-Marts and sell them Made in the USA stuff;)
Cyanoacrylate is the active ingredient, the organic solvents are just carriers and agents to speed up or retard the time for the glue to set. I KNOW the results are the same, I've done it with SG and the Fingernail glue.
Not that expensive compared with bleeding out. I'd gladly pay a few 100 bucks to live but fortunately it's not that expensive.
Check out the prices on QuickClot at: http://www.z-medica.com/ordering/ordering.asp
Super Glue has the same ingredients are "Tissue Glue" they use after surgery instead of external stitches to close the skin. Using Tissue glue seems to help minimize the scars. I've also used it on my dogs to glue a wound together (small wound) and save a trip to the vet for stitches. Just using SuperGlue out of the tube could be risky as it may not be sterile and you could get a nasty infection, thats the only downside. The glue that is used to attach artifical fingernails is the same as SuperGlue so if you have some of that, it IS Sterile.
If I'm do General Purpose computing I would trade the 10W difference in power consumption for the redundancy and flexibility of the 4-way Opteron. With two 4 way boxes you can use one as the failover for the other, or load balance between them keeping low CPU use on each. General purpose computing really doesn't need the power of an 8-way SMP solution even with 1000's of users. You can virtualize either the 4 way or the 8 way with VMWare or Zen or Solaris Containers so that (IMHO) is a wash.
It's really back to the old Horizontal vs Vertical scaling argument which involves a lot of factors along with power consumption. If floor space in your data center is a premium you probably want the 8ways as you can double your server density per rack (assumes you have the power and cooling). If your servers idle most of the time, space is not an issue and you are at close margins on data center power and cooling the Opteron 4way might be a better choice. There are also cost differences to consider. Opterons are usally priced below Xeons so if the botton line hardware costs are important that pushes to Opterons. You also have to look at the number of HBAs and network connections a 4way and an 8way will support. There are SO many combinations to consider including how much IT growth will occur it is mind boggling! It all depends on the strategic and tactical decisions made by the Data Center Team and the IT Organization, some places are all about performance and some are all about cost and others try to get a knife edge balance. Also keep in mind what you buy today is probably obsolete in 18 months and likely will be replaced in 36-48 months.
There is also a 3rd Option. If you don't mind running on Sun SPARC equipment then the SPARC T1 based severs blow both options out of the water in terms of power consumption (just don't do a lot of floating point..they suck at that). If you are running Java and other products that have SPARC and Solaris 10 (Linux soon) versions then changing to a SPARC architecture might get some really big gains. However if you are a.NET shop or a Windows server shop you are stuck with the X86 Architecture with Xeon or Opteron.
Union of Concerned Scientists is a well known ultra liberal bunch of left wing scientists. Your Nobel lauretes are not that impressive, when Mohammed El-Baradi and IAEA are named as a Laureate something is wrong. The scientists are all from liberal bastions like Stanford, MIT, CalTech, Salk Institute, etc. I also see NO indications of there ever being political interference with Science before 2002 in your reference site. That's VERY sneaky as the Clintons were not really kind to science either cutting many areas of research. The "politics of science" has gone on for a long time dating back to the Manhattan Project, but the site cleverly fails to mention that. I'm betting half of them had no idea what they were signing up for. They just want to attack the current administration.
If you are going to argue a point make it precise and correct in all matters. Crap in one area really makes the reader suspect of your arguments in another even if they may be 100% correct.
Prove the supression of scientific results by the Government...last I saw the scientists in the USA were free to publish whatever they found assuming it passes peer review of the Journals. Try publishing any results that may be the slighest bit controversial in China for example. If it can't stand up to peer review then the Gov't should NOT accept it regardless of it Eistein came back from the grave and did the work. That's not supressing good science that is preventing bad science from spreading.
Not always, I have seen directed grants in legislation. I will guarantee you that if the Congressman from State X sees to it that money for research in his state is in the bill it damn well better go to his state, or else. Robert Byrd is very very good at doing this. For the size of the state, its population and it's academic reputation West Va gets far and away more than it should in grants.
Jimm-ny F'ing Christmas the story is all about that blowhard Dr Hansen is mouthing off again. You really need to get the whole story behind his "issues" he has been crying about for years. It's a bunch of BS on his part. He did crappy unsupported research, it wouldn't pass internal peer review. He got a bunch of his "Global Warning" buddies to sign the petition, most of them are nobodies, and the other are well known activists or GW freaks. This isn't anything new.
I still can't believe the lack of knowledge on here (oops..wait this IS Slashdot..home of the ignorant and anonymous) about how the US Government works. The executive branch has little control over what gets researched. The LEGISLATIVE branch writes and funds ALL the Bills that provide the funds for Government research, if they don't like it they won't fund it (aka "it died in committie"). The "fourth branch" aka The Agencies have a great deal of control over what they PROPOSE to Congress to get funding in the budget requests they submit each year that get turned into Bills that are then funded (Authorization and Appropriations process). It is true the Exec Branch gets to name the heads of the Agencies but Congress confirms them and the long-term civil servants at the mid-levels really run the Agencies. Yes, the President also sends a "Budget" to Congress but that really has no bearing on what gets passed and most of the time the numbers are not real. Oh, and don't forget all the "pork" your Senator or Representative slips into the Bills. Having been the recipient of some "pork" when I was at NASA so I can tell you how the pig gets born, raised, slaughtered and sent to market.
That approach has been used before. Remember the stock scam guy Micheal Milliken (sp?)from the 1990s? The Gov't banned him from ever working in the Securities industry as a broker. So what does he do, he makes millions as a "Consultant" to firms showing them how to avoid the scams like he ran and also showing them the loopholes he found that he didn't get caught for using. Kinda like hiring the hacker to show you how not to get hacked which has happened many times.
The ability of the Enron execs to make any sort of living after they serve time is going to be compromised, not many firms want to hire a well-known felon. When Skilling gets out of prison he'll still get his Social Security plus anything he had before Enron that his soon-to-be-ex-wife doesn't get in the divorce.[NOTE == this assumes SS is still around in 30 yrs)
Those insurance companies are slick, you got to read the fine print. If you look closely in Appendix A, Page 19, Paragraph 10, titled Limitations of this Policy you will find this statement:
This policy shall be uneforceable and all claims will be invalid if damage was caused by any robotic device from Microsoft, or by a robot executing any code designed, developed, marketed or otherwise provided for use in said robot by Microsoft, its' partners or any successors in interest.
The whole network stack is called the Open Systems Interconnection Reference Model, the OSI Reference Model, or even just the OSI Model. It was published in 1984 by both the ISO, as standard ISO 7498, TCP/IP is an implementation of parts of this stack. The actual definition of TCP/IP is contained in and RFC 793 and many others are called out as extensions. Wow..split that hair, what W3C reccomends becomes know and referred to as the "Standard" even if it's not offically published and given a name or number
ROTFLMAO...I suspect Vista will be almost as full of security holes as XP. The M$ process, try as they may, is just not focused to build a secure OS. So kernel viruses will exist.
On your second point, kernels swap pages to disk all the time and load/unload services. All the virus has to do it mask itsef as Service X, and when the OS loads Service X and Service X has kernel level authority then the virus installs. You can prevent this by not allowing any services to run at the kernal level (which is how Linux/Unix) work. I'm not sure Vista can do that and be backwards compatiable with older software.
Thats exactly the point. It's a bastardization of the TCP/IP standard by M$. They want everything to operate to the M$ standard not the approved W3C/ISO standards. Which means that if someone implements an opensource version then M$ sues them. This should be a Security Service that runs in the background and annoys the user that they may be using an "insecure" connection.
The first time the CEO can't get his email because his laptop wasn't patched to the right level all hell will break loose and this will be turned off.
It's also insecure as hell, someone could write a virus that does nothing but shut off this checking and then erases itself. Then you got a lot of time spent by the Help Desk and/or Techs trying to figure out why no one can connect! And unless the techs are ultra sharp about how the "new" TCP/IP stack operates they are going to be really puzzled and frustrated.
The Federal Communications Commission is charged with enforcing jamming laws. However, the agency has not yet prosecuted anyone for cell-phone jamming.
(http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Radio_Frequency _(RF)_Jammers)
It's kinda like pirating software, a lot of people do it and few get caught. I know for a fact that buildings that house sensitive Defense projects jam cell signals either by a fuzzer or some type of EM shielding (Farady cage) so there must be exceptions to the rule. Just adding a few sheets of thin steel in a few select spots can block the signals, and there is also a paint that has the effect of blocking signals. PASSIVELY blocking cell signals is NOT against the law.
Cell calls from inside the building were impossible.
Yes, and that is for a reason. So students can't send text messages with Test Answers or interrupt class to take calls. They install devices called "fuzzers" that disrupt cell signals inside the building and for some distance around the building. We even have them in the High Schools here in the Dallas area.
Slashdot Mirror
New evidence can be entered after discovery is closed but it's got to be something that would cause a great injustice if not considered. The ruling SCO is protesting was Judge Wells ruling that SCO did NOT comply with Kimball's earlier ruling that the parts of Linux that infringe be defined in DETAIL, with filename, line #, actual code, relation to code SCO "owns" must also be shown. IIRC, SCO tried to skate around this requirement for about a year with various motions and delays. When discovery closed after SCO being allowed a look at the IBM code archives for Dynix, AIX and IBM's Linux contibutions (such as JFS) and taking dozens of depositions from IBM the BEST SCO could come up with was about 25-30 items that meet the burden of proof. Of those 25-30 most were things like .h files, the ELF binary format (which is public), and some Error Codes.
Critical to the case, even more so than showing infringement, is the issue of IF SCO even OWNS the copyrights on said System V UNIX code found in Linux, and IF they did (big IF) IBM has a contract with Novell (orginal owner or current owner depending on if you are SCO or IBM) that allows IBM an irrevokable right to use the System V UNIX code as they pleased since they paid for that sort of license. SCO is cooked about six different ways but whether they are roasted, boiled, BarBQ'd, broiled, fried, etc. will have to wait until after the close of discovery in the SCO vs Novell case. If the court (same judge by the way) decides in that instance SCO does NOT own the copyrights on UNIX code the case against IBM is over and IBM wins. The only issue to settle would be IBM's counterclaims, which wouldn't be worth much as SCO would be bankrupt without a win (or another infusion of cash in exchange for "IP" from the Microsoft fairy).
I mentioned the exothermic bonding reaction in my reply. Can you define "rapid curing", I've done it on my dogs and it cures in about a minute maybe two and we've never had any tissue necrosis. From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanoacrylate) The original Eastman formula was not FDA approved for medical use, however, because of a tendency to cause skin irritation and to generate heat. In 1998 the FDA approved 2-octyl cyanoacrylate for use in closing wounds and surgical incisions. Closure Medical have developed medical cyanoacrylates such as Dermabond, Sooth-N-Seal and Band-Aid Liquid Adhesive Bandage.
Your math assumes the base (surface of the earth) of the triangle is a straight line (i.e flat). The earth curves, so I think your 700 km numbers would be best case. Probably not a significant change from 700km doing it using the curvature of the earth. Just means you can't do it with geometry.
I suspect SuperGlue is an exothermic reaction (yields heat) so the "burning" could have been the heat of bonding and not a chemical burn. If it was some other type of very strong adhesive (my wife uses something called E6000 in her jewelry business that will bond ANYTHING) then who knows. Were you able to get your foot out of the sandal before they became one?
Based on what I have seen (on TV) about the ballon missions from the Antartic float in a circle of 3-400 miles circumfrence about the South Pole. Unless penguins have cell phones and have learned to use them I doubt you'll get UFO reports. Even at 38km high (125000 ft) you wouldn't see it from populated areas (New Zealand being the nearest population center) I'm sure there is a formula for how far away you can see something at 125K feet but I don't feel like googling it today.
You don't "Pour it into an open wound". You actually brush a little on the skin on each side of the wound and hold the sides together for a few seconds. I'm also calling Bullshit on this as I have gotten SuperGlue on my fingers many times and it didn't hurt a bit.
I thought the secret weapon to kill off the Chinese was Marlboro's and Camels. They all die of lung cancer in 30 years and we walk right in and take over. Either that or we open a bunch of Wal-Marts and sell them Made in the USA stuff ;)
Cyanoacrylate is the active ingredient, the organic solvents are just carriers and agents to speed up or retard the time for the glue to set. I KNOW the results are the same, I've done it with SG and the Fingernail glue.
Not that expensive compared with bleeding out. I'd gladly pay a few 100 bucks to live but fortunately it's not that expensive. Check out the prices on QuickClot at: http://www.z-medica.com/ordering/ordering.asp
Super Glue has the same ingredients are "Tissue Glue" they use after surgery instead of external stitches to close the skin. Using Tissue glue seems to help minimize the scars. I've also used it on my dogs to glue a wound together (small wound) and save a trip to the vet for stitches. Just using SuperGlue out of the tube could be risky as it may not be sterile and you could get a nasty infection, thats the only downside. The glue that is used to attach artifical fingernails is the same as SuperGlue so if you have some of that, it IS Sterile.
If I'm do General Purpose computing I would trade the 10W difference in power consumption for the redundancy and flexibility of the 4-way Opteron. With two 4 way boxes you can use one as the failover for the other, or load balance between them keeping low CPU use on each. General purpose computing really doesn't need the power of an 8-way SMP solution even with 1000's of users. You can virtualize either the 4 way or the 8 way with VMWare or Zen or Solaris Containers so that (IMHO) is a wash.
.NET shop or a Windows server shop you are stuck with the X86 Architecture with Xeon or Opteron.
It's really back to the old Horizontal vs Vertical scaling argument which involves a lot of factors along with power consumption. If floor space in your data center is a premium you probably want the 8ways as you can double your server density per rack (assumes you have the power and cooling). If your servers idle most of the time, space is not an issue and you are at close margins on data center power and cooling the Opteron 4way might be a better choice. There are also cost differences to consider. Opterons are usally priced below Xeons so if the botton line hardware costs are important that pushes to Opterons. You also have to look at the number of HBAs and network connections a 4way and an 8way will support. There are SO many combinations to consider including how much IT growth will occur it is mind boggling! It all depends on the strategic and tactical decisions made by the Data Center Team and the IT Organization, some places are all about performance and some are all about cost and others try to get a knife edge balance. Also keep in mind what you buy today is probably obsolete in 18 months and likely will be replaced in 36-48 months.
There is also a 3rd Option. If you don't mind running on Sun SPARC equipment then the SPARC T1 based severs blow both options out of the water in terms of power consumption (just don't do a lot of floating point..they suck at that). If you are running Java and other products that have SPARC and Solaris 10 (Linux soon) versions then changing to a SPARC architecture might get some really big gains. However if you are a
Union of Concerned Scientists is a well known ultra liberal bunch of left wing scientists. Your Nobel lauretes are not that impressive, when Mohammed El-Baradi and IAEA are named as a Laureate something is wrong. The scientists are all from liberal bastions like Stanford, MIT, CalTech, Salk Institute, etc. I also see NO indications of there ever being political interference with Science before 2002 in your reference site. That's VERY sneaky as the Clintons were not really kind to science either cutting many areas of research. The "politics of science" has gone on for a long time dating back to the Manhattan Project, but the site cleverly fails to mention that. I'm betting half of them had no idea what they were signing up for. They just want to attack the current administration.
If you are going to argue a point make it precise and correct in all matters. Crap in one area really makes the reader suspect of your arguments in another even if they may be 100% correct.
Prove the supression of scientific results by the Government...last I saw the scientists in the USA were free to publish whatever they found assuming it passes peer review of the Journals. Try publishing any results that may be the slighest bit controversial in China for example. If it can't stand up to peer review then the Gov't should NOT accept it regardless of it Eistein came back from the grave and did the work. That's not supressing good science that is preventing bad science from spreading.
Not always, I have seen directed grants in legislation. I will guarantee you that if the Congressman from State X sees to it that money for research in his state is in the bill it damn well better go to his state, or else. Robert Byrd is very very good at doing this. For the size of the state, its population and it's academic reputation West Va gets far and away more than it should in grants.
Jimm-ny F'ing Christmas the story is all about that blowhard Dr Hansen is mouthing off again. You really need to get the whole story behind his "issues" he has been crying about for years. It's a bunch of BS on his part. He did crappy unsupported research, it wouldn't pass internal peer review. He got a bunch of his "Global Warning" buddies to sign the petition, most of them are nobodies, and the other are well known activists or GW freaks. This isn't anything new.
I still can't believe the lack of knowledge on here (oops..wait this IS Slashdot..home of the ignorant and anonymous) about how the US Government works. The executive branch has little control over what gets researched. The LEGISLATIVE branch writes and funds ALL the Bills that provide the funds for Government research, if they don't like it they won't fund it (aka "it died in committie"). The "fourth branch" aka The Agencies have a great deal of control over what they PROPOSE to Congress to get funding in the budget requests they submit each year that get turned into Bills that are then funded (Authorization and Appropriations process). It is true the Exec Branch gets to name the heads of the Agencies but Congress confirms them and the long-term civil servants at the mid-levels really run the Agencies. Yes, the President also sends a "Budget" to Congress but that really has no bearing on what gets passed and most of the time the numbers are not real. Oh, and don't forget all the "pork" your Senator or Representative slips into the Bills. Having been the recipient of some "pork" when I was at NASA so I can tell you how the pig gets born, raised, slaughtered and sent to market.
Two words can refute all you just said about science being less prone to intellectal whoredom.
Cold Fusion
or
Global Warming
Pick one and explain HOW neither one is/was subject to intellectal whoredom either for or against the premise. When scientists whore they whore big.
That approach has been used before. Remember the stock scam guy Micheal Milliken (sp?)from the 1990s? The Gov't banned him from ever working in the Securities industry as a broker. So what does he do, he makes millions as a "Consultant" to firms showing them how to avoid the scams like he ran and also showing them the loopholes he found that he didn't get caught for using. Kinda like hiring the hacker to show you how not to get hacked which has happened many times. The ability of the Enron execs to make any sort of living after they serve time is going to be compromised, not many firms want to hire a well-known felon. When Skilling gets out of prison he'll still get his Social Security plus anything he had before Enron that his soon-to-be-ex-wife doesn't get in the divorce.[NOTE == this assumes SS is still around in 30 yrs)
Those insurance companies are slick, you got to read the fine print. If you look closely in Appendix A, Page 19, Paragraph 10, titled Limitations of this Policy you will find this statement:
This policy shall be uneforceable and all claims will be invalid if damage was caused by any robotic device from Microsoft, or by a robot executing any code designed, developed, marketed or otherwise provided for use in said robot by Microsoft, its' partners or any successors in interest.
The whole network stack is called the Open Systems Interconnection Reference Model, the OSI Reference Model, or even just the OSI Model. It was published in 1984 by both the ISO, as standard ISO 7498, TCP/IP is an implementation of parts of this stack. The actual definition of TCP/IP is contained in and RFC 793 and many others are called out as extensions. Wow..split that hair, what W3C reccomends becomes know and referred to as the "Standard" even if it's not offically published and given a name or number
ROTFLMAO...I suspect Vista will be almost as full of security holes as XP. The M$ process, try as they may, is just not focused to build a secure OS. So kernel viruses will exist.
On your second point, kernels swap pages to disk all the time and load/unload services. All the virus has to do it mask itsef as Service X, and when the OS loads Service X and Service X has kernel level authority then the virus installs. You can prevent this by not allowing any services to run at the kernal level (which is how Linux/Unix) work. I'm not sure Vista can do that and be backwards compatiable with older software.
Thats exactly the point. It's a bastardization of the TCP/IP standard by M$. They want everything to operate to the M$ standard not the approved W3C/ISO standards. Which means that if someone implements an opensource version then M$ sues them. This should be a Security Service that runs in the background and annoys the user that they may be using an "insecure" connection.
The first time the CEO can't get his email because his laptop wasn't patched to the right level all hell will break loose and this will be turned off.
It's also insecure as hell, someone could write a virus that does nothing but shut off this checking and then erases itself. Then you got a lot of time spent by the Help Desk and/or Techs trying to figure out why no one can connect! And unless the techs are ultra sharp about how the "new" TCP/IP stack operates they are going to be really puzzled and frustrated.
The Federal Communications Commission is charged with enforcing jamming laws. However, the agency has not yet prosecuted anyone for cell-phone jamming. (http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Radio_Frequency _(RF)_Jammers)
It's kinda like pirating software, a lot of people do it and few get caught. I know for a fact that buildings that house sensitive Defense projects jam cell signals either by a fuzzer or some type of EM shielding (Farady cage) so there must be exceptions to the rule. Just adding a few sheets of thin steel in a few select spots can block the signals, and there is also a paint that has the effect of blocking signals. PASSIVELY blocking cell signals is NOT against the law.
In 2038 I will be 77 yrs old and I hope I'm alive and I sure as hell hope I don't need to work in IT to survive.
Cell calls from inside the building were impossible.
Yes, and that is for a reason. So students can't send text messages with Test Answers or interrupt class to take calls. They install devices called "fuzzers" that disrupt cell signals inside the building and for some distance around the building. We even have them in the High Schools here in the Dallas area.