Lets see... your comment would be useful and interesting except... it's so utterly and completely out of context it's not even funny.
In the first case, he was talking about implementation. Just "Good Enough" implementation is a very bad thing, leaves all sorts of issues open.
In the second case, he's talking about a specific conflict of design consideration in the context of inherit security to a given design.
He doesn't think that either design has any inherit benefit as far as security goes, as long as the implementation is more than "just good enough".
Perfectly consistent.
oh no... I've been trolled... damn
oh well.
-T
One of the big wars is monlithic vs micro kernel design. Both offer all sorts of interesting things.
I could really see some interest in a kernel level corba server...
Most specifically, something that hasn't really been looked at (or at least, in my lay research, i haven't found much about)...
A heavy micro kernel... Where there kernel is relatively robust, but maintains a richer interface for userlevel code... everything from device drivers to http servers.
Another interesting thing you could do here, is implement an LDAP server in corba to handle security... You could have a network wide user and resource directory, with organizational groups tied to machines...
This could bring unified ACL's and user/resource management across an entire network...
And if those 90k terminals are running any other thing, what do you say? There's no fix yet, but the next version of windows which should be out sometime in the next 5 years should fix the problem...
This is a question that in todays software environment simply doesn't have an answer.
The "who do i sue" question is always nobody, regardless of what model produced the software.
The actors in the mini-series don't seem to have any understanding of their characters... especially paul. He was never a real person, he didn't make mistakes, and he was never suprised in any obvious way.
The conflict within paul is his humanity vs his divinity, not his "coming of age" any such bull shit.
This film could have been written by the holy spirit, had jesus in the lead role, and been directed by god himself... and you would have been disappointed.
There is a very simple reason for this. You went into the theatre with expectations. This is the classic error of all people who see movies looking for something...
I would be willing to bet, that had this movie been released first, and sixth sence second, you would be posting the exact same comments.
The trick to enjoying any performance, is to go in with no expectations, and then you can (as objectively as anyone can) truly enjoy and comment on the film.
Otherwise your views and enjoyment will be so ladden with inappropriate garbage that your opinion becomes worthless to anyone, including yourself.
Let me start out, i'm platform agnostic, in all that that implies.
There is a falsehood that is constantly pepetuated that windows networks are some how easier to administer.
As server machines, no. They're actually about equally as hard. The learning curve for setting up services correctly and properly tuning a machine for windows and for linux is about equal.
Now, something odd... as a desktop machine... windows is much harder to administer. The average user on a windows machine has a much higher chance of fucking up their system than that same user would on a linux machine. Additionally, the remote admin features inherit to any unix (telnet in and fix it) makes life much easier on tech support.
The ease of administration, and the TCO arguments for windows, are complete crap.
A large part of writing a novel is creating a believeable backdrop. If you've ever read essays by David Drake, or Robert Eddings, the riven codex, you'd know that most of the work in a novel is the research, and fabricating the world that the characters and events take place in.
Writing a novel in an existing world gives an auther a serious break, and allows them to focus on quality writing, quality characters, and creating a quality story within an already rich and consistant backdrop.
Think about it in terms of programming.
The backdrop is the platform on which the application runs, and the applicaion itself the novel, and the characters and what not are system resources.
New books write a new os, create new resources, and new applications every time.
Works within "foriegn" worlds are just applications doing new and interesting things with on an old and beloved platform.
Theoretically, if any author or collaboration of authors could be put together to handle the Butlerian Jihad, since you'd also have to handle alot of the back drop too the whole thing as well, I'd love to see something like a 3 or 5 book collaboration between good ole brian, David Drake, and Robert Jordan... that is, as soon as he finishes his own damn series. Mumble.
I'm platform agnostic. I work in all environments. There is nothing inherently easier about winnt 4/5 as far as back end services go.
It's merely a question of weather you're given a headache by a command line, or a dialog box. The complexity is still present, and a deeper understanding of the software (along with the requisite learning curve) is still required.
Many backend services are actually easier to setup and maintain on unix platforms because the parts are strangely dependent on a dll cesspool, or interdependent with... web browsers?.
Everyone always assumes however, that a GUI = easy to use. That is definitly not so. Anyone who's attempted to work with nt5's network load balacing knows that that statement is hooey.
Actually, if you plan your displays before implementing them in xsl, and nail down your xml formats, xml/xsl is a very elegent, extremely maintainable way of managing display on very large sites. If your working on a site large enough to justify it, then the processing overhead isn't a big concern, you have the iron for it. And as for the added level of complexity at initial development... like all development tasks, the better you do it the first time, the easier it is to maintain on into the future.
On the other hand, if all your doing is web counters, message boards, and fancy dhtml crapola... then you care about this [] much.
The democratic party has been heading right for quite a while now. Go back and look at the things that Clinton and Ducacis (however you spell that) espoused years ago, and compare that with the current party line. Democrats and republicans are far closer today than they've probably ever been in the past.
This is utterly amusing too me. It's the reverse of the situation GW's pop was in. Remember the '92 election? A vote for perot was a vote for billy the cigar sodomist.... and big bush lost by less than the margin of perot's support.
Alpha's aren't really concerned with price points, since they're expensive as shit anyway.
EV6 was a completely point to point protocal and i assume that EV7 will be as well. If the processer, bus, and man memory all use compatible point to point packet switching and addressing, you end up with an incredibly fast incredibly scalable platform for systems with lots and lots of processors...
It would be good for intel and rambus to part company completely....
The thing that irritates me about this article however, is that it implies that the rambus technology was actually somehow superior, or performed better. Superiority is a matter of opinion, it wasn't superior, just different. From a performance perspective however, it has been proven time and again, that the performance gains of rambus are negligable to negative, when compared to SDRAM... compared to DDR SDRAM will be a whole nother issue.
Both the celeron and the duron are "dress down" versons of their bigger brothers (P2 and athlon respectively.)
The athlon supports smp, the duron supports smp. The p2 supports smp, the celeron supports smp... except, intel attempted to hobble the celeron by attempting to remove it's smp support. The main reasons were marketing reasons, not even vaguely technical, and are rather obvious.
They didn't just "scribble one up" of their own. The SMP standard they are using comes from the EV6 Bus protocal (same as the alpha) that they liscensed from compaq.
The short answer to your question, is no, the iSMP stuff won't work... however the alphaSMP stuff is already there, and shouldn't require too too much porting to x86 for the athlon.
Yes, you will need a new kernel that doesn't currently exist.
Slashdot Mirror
pcAnywhere survives and thrives, despite the existance of vnc...
I suspect that VMWare will do the same.
-T
Lets see... your comment would be useful and interesting except... it's so utterly and completely out of context it's not even funny. In the first case, he was talking about implementation. Just "Good Enough" implementation is a very bad thing, leaves all sorts of issues open. In the second case, he's talking about a specific conflict of design consideration in the context of inherit security to a given design. He doesn't think that either design has any inherit benefit as far as security goes, as long as the implementation is more than "just good enough". Perfectly consistent. oh no... I've been trolled... damn oh well. -T
One of the big wars is monlithic vs micro kernel design. Both offer all sorts of interesting things.
I could really see some interest in a kernel level corba server...
Most specifically, something that hasn't really been looked at (or at least, in my lay research, i haven't found much about)...
A heavy micro kernel... Where there kernel is relatively robust, but maintains a richer interface for userlevel code... everything from device drivers to http servers.
Another interesting thing you could do here, is implement an LDAP server in corba to handle security... You could have a network wide user and resource directory, with organizational groups tied to machines...
This could bring unified ACL's and user/resource management across an entire network...
Just some (probably worthless) thoughts...
-T
And if those 90k terminals are running any other thing, what do you say? There's no fix yet, but the next version of windows which should be out sometime in the next 5 years should fix the problem...
This is a question that in todays software environment simply doesn't have an answer.
The "who do i sue" question is always nobody, regardless of what model produced the software.
He's right though.
XML isn't the document format itself... it's a meta-format.
Simply structuring, not layout or display in any way....
you then use XSL or XSLT to convert you happy content into whatever form you want...
You can mess with your content, it's contextual structure, and it's layout, all seperately..
The actors in the mini-series don't seem to have any understanding of their characters... especially paul. He was never a real person, he didn't make mistakes, and he was never suprised in any obvious way.
The conflict within paul is his humanity vs his divinity, not his "coming of age" any such bull shit.
-T
rofl, I love this!
i think you meant "being a great public speaker doesn't make you anthony freakin hopkins"
Cheerio
-T
This film could have been written by the holy spirit, had jesus in the lead role, and been directed by god himself... and you would have been disappointed.
There is a very simple reason for this. You went into the theatre with expectations. This is the classic error of all people who see movies looking for something...
I would be willing to bet, that had this movie been released first, and sixth sence second, you would be posting the exact same comments.
The trick to enjoying any performance, is to go in with no expectations, and then you can (as objectively as anyone can) truly enjoy and comment on the film.
Otherwise your views and enjoyment will be so ladden with inappropriate garbage that your opinion becomes worthless to anyone, including yourself.
-t
I don't understand why either is still in use...
We have lynx... we have html... why are we using man and info...
Let me start out, i'm platform agnostic, in all that that implies.
There is a falsehood that is constantly pepetuated that windows networks are some how easier to administer.
As server machines, no. They're actually about equally as hard. The learning curve for setting up services correctly and properly tuning a machine for windows and for linux is about equal.
Now, something odd... as a desktop machine... windows is much harder to administer. The average user on a windows machine has a much higher chance of fucking up their system than that same user would on a linux machine. Additionally, the remote admin features inherit to any unix (telnet in and fix it) makes life much easier on tech support.
The ease of administration, and the TCO arguments for windows, are complete crap.
-T
The unfortunate thing here is... you're wrong. IE is currently the model browser.
Nothing beats it.
I have an additional bone to pick here.
A large part of writing a novel is creating a believeable backdrop. If you've ever read essays by David Drake, or Robert Eddings, the riven codex, you'd know that most of the work in a novel is the research, and fabricating the world that the characters and events take place in.
Writing a novel in an existing world gives an auther a serious break, and allows them to focus on quality writing, quality characters, and creating a quality story within an already rich and consistant backdrop.
Think about it in terms of programming.
The backdrop is the platform on which the application runs, and the applicaion itself the novel, and the characters and what not are system resources.
New books write a new os, create new resources, and new applications every time.
Works within "foriegn" worlds are just applications doing new and interesting things with on an old and beloved platform.
-T
ps. dont hate because i cna't spel.
Theoretically, if any author or collaboration of authors could be put together to handle the Butlerian Jihad, since you'd also have to handle alot of the back drop too the whole thing as well, I'd love to see something like a 3 or 5 book collaboration between good ole brian, David Drake, and Robert Jordan... that is, as soon as he finishes his own damn series. Mumble.
this is only a factor on the desktop.
I'm platform agnostic. I work in all environments. There is nothing inherently easier about winnt 4/5 as far as back end services go.
It's merely a question of weather you're given a headache by a command line, or a dialog box. The complexity is still present, and a deeper understanding of the software (along with the requisite learning curve) is still required.
Many backend services are actually easier to setup and maintain on unix platforms because the parts are strangely dependent on a dll cesspool, or interdependent with... web browsers?.
Everyone always assumes however, that a GUI = easy to use. That is definitly not so. Anyone who's attempted to work with nt5's network load balacing knows that that statement is hooey.
-T
Actually, if you plan your displays before implementing them in xsl, and nail down your xml formats, xml/xsl is a very elegent, extremely maintainable way of managing display on very large sites. If your working on a site large enough to justify it, then the processing overhead isn't a big concern, you have the iron for it. And as for the added level of complexity at initial development... like all development tasks, the better you do it the first time, the easier it is to maintain on into the future.
On the other hand, if all your doing is web counters, message boards, and fancy dhtml crapola... then you care about this [] much.
Unfortunately, I don't believe that ReiserFS supports ACL's....
The democratic party has been heading right for quite a while now. Go back and look at the things that Clinton and Ducacis (however you spell that) espoused years ago, and compare that with the current party line. Democrats and republicans are far closer today than they've probably ever been in the past.
This is utterly amusing too me. It's the reverse of the situation GW's pop was in. Remember the '92 election? A vote for perot was a vote for billy the cigar sodomist.... and big bush lost by less than the margin of perot's support.
How apprapo.
Thats actually rather interesting...
Alpha's aren't really concerned with price points, since they're expensive as shit anyway.
EV6 was a completely point to point protocal and i assume that EV7 will be as well. If the processer, bus, and man memory all use compatible point to point packet switching and addressing, you end up with an incredibly fast incredibly scalable platform for systems with lots and lots of processors...
It would be good for intel and rambus to part company completely....
The thing that irritates me about this article however, is that it implies that the rambus technology was actually somehow superior, or performed better. Superiority is a matter of opinion, it wasn't superior, just different. From a performance perspective however, it has been proven time and again, that the performance gains of rambus are negligable to negative, when compared to SDRAM... compared to DDR SDRAM will be a whole nother issue.
This isn't meant to be taken as flamebait. Just some constructive criticism.
How do you figure that?
You cut up his post, attack his intellect, accuse him of karma whoring, and then tell him he's not part of a community.
All athlon based chips (athlons, thunderbirds, durons, whatever) are SMP capable.
Both the celeron and the duron are "dress down" versons of their bigger brothers (P2 and athlon respectively.)
The athlon supports smp, the duron supports smp. The p2 supports smp, the celeron supports smp... except, intel attempted to hobble the celeron by attempting to remove it's smp support. The main reasons were marketing reasons, not even vaguely technical, and are rather obvious.
-t
They didn't just "scribble one up" of their own. The SMP standard they are using comes from the EV6 Bus protocal (same as the alpha) that they liscensed from compaq.
The short answer to your question, is no, the iSMP stuff won't work... however the alphaSMP stuff is already there, and shouldn't require too too much porting to x86 for the athlon.
Yes, you will need a new kernel that doesn't currently exist.