Indeed, basing it on gold, or any other tangible object is prone to problems like shaving, and can easily be messed up when we run out of gold, or if someone mines a crapload of gold. We'd still want the convenience of using plastic cards to access our money, so why would we need some physical object to base it on? Debt does sound reasonable, until you realize that the only way to get ahead of the incoming debt monster is to create *more* debt.
That monster's getting bigger, and closer.
For the record, it was not 'always backed by debt'. Making money from money used to be called Usury, and usury used to be considered immoral, and was illegal and/or irreligious to practice. While I don't agree with that, I do believe that our current debt-based system is doomed to fail. I suspect it's likely to happen in our lifetimes.
I said nothing about abolishing debt, or loans. Ideally, in a government run system that doesn't involve inventing credit out of thin air would be able to give out loans, *interest free*.
Debt still exists, principle is preserved, and the banks don't end up owning everything.
Because the bank has more money on hand, it can loan someone else money to open a bakery
Banks do not need 'money on hand' to create a loan. A Loan, currently, based on fiat, is created out of a ratio of money on hand, and in many cases, out of nothing! If a bank can create money at will, based on nothing, then where does the money to pay interest come from?
For that matter, if you lower the price of milk by producing more of it, then all milk producers earn less, overall. Less is available to pay their workers, and thus, the milk industry loses in proportion to the amount of milk produced. Thus, the system creates no new value at all. Also, if you're opening the dairy, where does the capital come from? The bank? If you take out a loan, your Dairy belongs to the bank. In order to pay it off, you need to pay off the debt, which includes the principle *AND* the interest. But in a system founded on debt, the interest represents an amount that cannot exist.
So, inevitably, all things will eventually belong to the bank, since the system *must* crash, eventually.
Yes. the great depression. A direct result of loans drying up, and debt coming to collect. Our current system only works because the banks dish out credit, and the government lets them.
Well, yeah. I agree. Such a system would work in a short term, but in a long term, it becomes conducive to a "throw people at a problem to solve it" We've seen how this already falls down simply by looking at the software industry. More people doesn't a problem solve faster.
Sure. But taking the patent problem at face value, we need to ask, why are the banks so powerful that the government is considering giving the banks immunity by buying the problem away? Should the bankers have this much power? Why would the bankers effectively have so much control that the citizens need to pay to deal with their problem, irrespective of what the problem actually *is*?
I agree that patents on software aren't necessarily a great thing, but the problem is inconsequential to the fact that we're beholden to the banks, and debt.
And a system based on something other than debt, such as *value* need not replace any of those points. While value of tangible objects isn't reasonable (after all, we got into this mess by trying to avoid having to carry around gold,) we need to consider that the government should be the one assigning value, not the banks.
In such a system, the government would be responsible for taxing the citizens to reduce inflation, and simply printing money by giving interest free loans to people to produce new things. This would ensure that the economy was stable, and remained in control, and how well a government manages the economy would be directly reflected by how high the taxes are, vs how high the inflation rate during their term was.
No-one's suggesting that this would be easy, and it would require a substantial investment of manpower by a few people, who aren't likely to be viewed too favorably by the bank-controlled interests.
But hey, social upheaval has paved the way for change before. Why not for the better? Only because enough people do not try. Feel free to remain cynical, but a cynic should be born from fire, not from apathy.
Ah, but there lies the problem. Politicians cannot print money! The banks have been granted the power to create money, but money cannot be printed out of nothing in the present system, as all it does is lead to inflation, which solves nothing.
Ideally, the government should control the currency, but it does not. All it controls is the mint, which, in fact, does not create money at all, only paper representations of debt.
The problem is, backing it by debt is inherently untenable in the long term. Once the debt is paid off (a noble goal, but not actually possible in practice,) there is no longer *any* money, resulting in the downfall of the economy.
This problem is compounded when you consider that even if the economy is based on some amount of principle, and money is created out of the principle, and adds overhead of interest, then the only way to pay back any loans requires the creation of more principle. But when all principle is created out of debt, then there can never be enough money to pay off the interest. It's worse than a zero sum game.
Obviously, we cannot base the economy on physical objects either. They're not convenient, and we'd wind up replacing them with some kind of convenient representation, and we'd wind up back where we started, as the representation would need to be controlled. There are things that cannot be replicated however. Work is one of them. See LETS (Local Exchange Trading System) for instance. It's unfortunate that it sounds similar to communism, yet you can easily turn it into a capitalist-like society, since it can be built without government control (and thus, is not actually communist either)
I don't, on hand, no, but see referenced video in my previous post, it mentions a few, and there are probably references for them available.
There are various schemes based on units of work, etc, although I'm not optimistic about those personally.
Since then we need to value a job in terms of units of work as well, which means we need to accurately determine how much work is required. What's more, we'd need to consider whether we scale work appropriately based on ability of the participants. Is a smarter and/or more capable person worth more work units? if so, that makes less capable people worthless, and doomed to remain worthless.
If you consider that pretty much all money in existence today is backed solely by debt, is anyone really surprised?
Why does anyone entertain the idea that the banks need to be bailed out? I would be inclined to let the economy finally crumble, and rebuild it. Sure, it'll suck, but we'll be better off because of it, if we fix it the right way.
It's a little from column A, and a little from column B in this area, if memory serves.
Last time I checked the terms, the general deal was that on the original unit you bought the content, it would be usable by anyone with an account on that unit. Additionally, if you logged in with your Xbox live account on someone else's unit, you would be able to download the content again, but only you would be able to use it on that unit, if someone else logged in instead, the content would be unavailable
I haven't verified this, however, and I may have misread the terms (and it may only have been the item I was getting at the time, IIRC, some tracks for GH3)
Uh. Debian *can* use initng. I'm pretty sure it's not being installed by default, unless they've made this decision in testing (I don't have any testing/unstable boxes atm). That seems like a fairly irregular thing for debian to agree to do.
Hmm. odd. The few months that I used them I didn't have any problems with SSH or the socks proxy i was running over SSH (for BT tracker traffic redirection)
None of those were bulk transfers for the most part tho, so I can't say for sure if they are.
Sure, that's a good idea, and probably what a lot of ISP's do in practice. prioritise traffic.
It should be noted, however, that this is *not* what comcast is doing.
Comcast are deliberately cutting connections when a user attempts to seed bittorrent. Most users can still download, but they can no longer upload, without encrypting the tracker's traffic and individual connections. (I was able to get mine working again, after a fashion, once i setup a tunnel for the tracker (not all) traffic was able to go through)
This sucks for people trying to distribute stuff, like, say, linux ISO's, or their own music/media, etc.
I now use verizon as a direct result of these pathetic practices.
Steam had issues? Curious, that must have been a while ago. For the past few months at least, Steam's got a newer version with better vista support built in.
Basically, Steam cheats, by installing a service that runs as SYSTEM that performs updates, so that the user doesn't get prompted, or even require, admin privs, but can still run games, can still click steam:// links, etc.
The games still run unelevated, however, as does the steam client itself, just the service.
It's a reasonable compromise (although, according to some of my friends here at microsoft, some of the file permissions could be tighter, but they're not a gaping hole)
Of course, it only takes one hole that Valve forgot to close... If I had the know-how handy, I'd start ripping it apart looking for potential holes.
Don't get your pants off too quickly, you might want to just settle for a crotch-grab. It's TSearch2 integrated in-tree, with some extra SQL features to make using it easier. It's not completely new, you could do most of it before 8.3.
Last time I set up slony-I myself, it required a _replication schema. That's hardly intrusive, it's a *separate schema*.
The main difficulty is that it then tends to attach itself via a number of REFERENCES. Of course, since we're not actually discussing long-term usage, but short-term usage for purposes of migration, this is hardly a major problem. You add in slony's replication details, trigger replication, wait until replication has succeeded, promote the slave and shut down the master, test carefully, potentially running the old master as a slave temporarily, and then once you're satisified, *turn off slony and remove it*
It's not that hard to do, I've done that part as well, you just need to understand FK's, constraints and triggers.
It's true that pre-SP1 had issues with copying lots of small files in some situations, but most of the other performance problems were often perceived, not actual, problems, since XP did things like closing the copy dialog before it had actually written the last byte to disk, for instance.
Most of the admins I know that deal with large PostgreSQL databases use slony-I to do their migrations.
Of course, if you're tight on hardware/disk resources, you're probably in trouble, no matter what, but slony can get you the migration/sync period down to a minimum of "shutdown, change setting, restart", if done correctly. Don't forget that PostgreSQL can easily be run side-by-side with another version of PostgreSQL on the same box, so long as they aren't sharing a data tree (duh) or network ports. This migration doesn't necessarily require a new system, just enough disk space, and enough spare bandwidth to setup the migration. Slony shouldn't require a restart to get up and running (although it's delicate, you'll want to practice it in a set of VM's fairly rigourously if you can!)
Well, this does ship with Bucardo in tree. That does multi-master replication.
Admittedly, "in tree" isn't the same as "built in", and I have no idea what the performance is like, and I don't know if it requires any application logic modifications to utilize.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, basing it on gold, or any other tangible object is prone to problems like shaving, and can easily be messed up when we run out of gold, or if someone mines a crapload of gold. We'd still want the convenience of using plastic cards to access our money, so why would we need some physical object to base it on? Debt does sound reasonable, until you realize that the only way to get ahead of the incoming debt monster is to create *more* debt.
That monster's getting bigger, and closer.
For the record, it was not 'always backed by debt'. Making money from money used to be called Usury, and usury used to be considered immoral, and was illegal and/or irreligious to practice. While I don't agree with that, I do believe that our current debt-based system is doomed to fail. I suspect it's likely to happen in our lifetimes.
I said nothing about abolishing debt, or loans. Ideally, in a government run system that doesn't involve inventing credit out of thin air would be able to give out loans, *interest free*.
Debt still exists, principle is preserved, and the banks don't end up owning everything.
Because the bank has more money on hand, it can loan someone else money to open a bakery
Banks do not need 'money on hand' to create a loan. A Loan, currently, based on fiat, is created out of a ratio of money on hand, and in many cases, out of nothing!
If a bank can create money at will, based on nothing, then where does the money to pay interest come from?
For that matter, if you lower the price of milk by producing more of it, then all milk producers earn less, overall. Less is available to pay their workers, and thus, the milk industry loses in proportion to the amount of milk produced. Thus, the system creates no new value at all. Also, if you're opening the dairy, where does the capital come from? The bank? If you take out a loan, your Dairy belongs to the bank. In order to pay it off, you need to pay off the debt, which includes the principle *AND* the interest. But in a system founded on debt, the interest represents an amount that cannot exist.
So, inevitably, all things will eventually belong to the bank, since the system *must* crash, eventually.
Yes. the great depression. A direct result of loans drying up, and debt coming to collect. Our current system only works because the banks dish out credit, and the government lets them.
Well, yeah. I agree. Such a system would work in a short term, but in a long term, it becomes conducive to a "throw people at a problem to solve it" We've seen how this already falls down simply by looking at the software industry. More people doesn't a problem solve faster.
Sure. But taking the patent problem at face value, we need to ask, why are the banks so powerful that the government is considering giving the banks immunity by buying the problem away? Should the bankers have this much power? Why would the bankers effectively have so much control that the citizens need to pay to deal with their problem, irrespective of what the problem actually *is*?
I agree that patents on software aren't necessarily a great thing, but the problem is inconsequential to the fact that we're beholden to the banks, and debt.
And a system based on something other than debt, such as *value* need not replace any of those points. While value of tangible objects isn't reasonable (after all, we got into this mess by trying to avoid having to carry around gold,) we need to consider that the government should be the one assigning value, not the banks.
In such a system, the government would be responsible for taxing the citizens to reduce inflation, and simply printing money by giving interest free loans to people to produce new things. This would ensure that the economy was stable, and remained in control, and how well a government manages the economy would be directly reflected by how high the taxes are, vs how high the inflation rate during their term was.
No-one's suggesting that this would be easy, and it would require a substantial investment of manpower by a few people, who aren't likely to be viewed too favorably by the bank-controlled interests.
But hey, social upheaval has paved the way for change before. Why not for the better? Only because enough people do not try. Feel free to remain cynical, but a cynic should be born from fire, not from apathy.
Ah, but there lies the problem. Politicians cannot print money! The banks have been granted the power to create money, but money cannot be printed out of nothing in the present system, as all it does is lead to inflation, which solves nothing.
Ideally, the government should control the currency, but it does not. All it controls is the mint, which, in fact, does not create money at all, only paper representations of debt.
The problem is, backing it by debt is inherently untenable in the long term. Once the debt is paid off (a noble goal, but not actually possible in practice,) there is no longer *any* money, resulting in the downfall of the economy.
This problem is compounded when you consider that even if the economy is based on some amount of principle, and money is created out of the principle, and adds overhead of interest, then the only way to pay back any loans requires the creation of more principle. But when all principle is created out of debt, then there can never be enough money to pay off the interest. It's worse than a zero sum game.
Obviously, we cannot base the economy on physical objects either. They're not convenient, and we'd wind up replacing them with some kind of convenient representation, and we'd wind up back where we started, as the representation would need to be controlled. There are things that cannot be replicated however. Work is one of them. See LETS (Local Exchange Trading System) for instance. It's unfortunate that it sounds similar to communism, yet you can easily turn it into a capitalist-like society, since it can be built without government control (and thus, is not actually communist either)
I don't, on hand, no, but see referenced video in my previous post, it mentions a few, and there are probably references for them available.
There are various schemes based on units of work, etc, although I'm not optimistic about those personally.
Since then we need to value a job in terms of units of work as well, which means we need to accurately determine how much work is required. What's more, we'd need to consider whether we scale work appropriately based on ability of the participants. Is a smarter and/or more capable person worth more work units? if so, that makes less capable people worthless, and doomed to remain worthless.
If you consider that pretty much all money in existence today is backed solely by debt, is anyone really surprised?
Why does anyone entertain the idea that the banks need to be bailed out? I would be inclined to let the economy finally crumble, and rebuild it. Sure, it'll suck, but we'll be better off because of it, if we fix it the right way.
It's a little from column A, and a little from column B in this area, if memory serves.
Last time I checked the terms, the general deal was that on the original unit you bought the content, it would be usable by anyone with an account on that unit. Additionally, if you logged in with your Xbox live account on someone else's unit, you would be able to download the content again, but only you would be able to use it on that unit, if someone else logged in instead, the content would be unavailable
I haven't verified this, however, and I may have misread the terms (and it may only have been the item I was getting at the time, IIRC, some tracks for GH3)
Debian uses initng
Uh. Debian *can* use initng. I'm pretty sure it's not being installed by default, unless they've made this decision in testing (I don't have any testing/unstable boxes atm). That seems like a fairly irregular thing for debian to agree to do.
ash
Assuming you haven't been forced to give them your password on pain of anal probes and missed flights.
TPM and Bitlocker won't help then.
ash
Hmm. odd. The few months that I used them I didn't have any problems with SSH or the socks proxy i was running over SSH (for BT tracker traffic redirection)
None of those were bulk transfers for the most part tho, so I can't say for sure if they are.
Sure, that's a good idea, and probably what a lot of ISP's do in practice. prioritise traffic.
It should be noted, however, that this is *not* what comcast is doing.
Comcast are deliberately cutting connections when a user attempts to seed bittorrent. Most users can still download, but they can no longer upload, without encrypting the tracker's traffic and individual connections. (I was able to get mine working again, after a fashion, once i setup a tunnel for the tracker (not all) traffic was able to go through)
This sucks for people trying to distribute stuff, like, say, linux ISO's, or their own music/media, etc.
I now use verizon as a direct result of these pathetic practices.
ash
Steam had issues? Curious, that must have been a while ago. For the past few months at least, Steam's got a newer version with better vista support built in.
Basically, Steam cheats, by installing a service that runs as SYSTEM that performs updates, so that the user doesn't get prompted, or even require, admin privs, but can still run games, can still click steam:// links, etc.
The games still run unelevated, however, as does the steam client itself, just the service.
It's a reasonable compromise (although, according to some of my friends here at microsoft, some of the file permissions could be tighter, but they're not a gaping hole)
Of course, it only takes one hole that Valve forgot to close... If I had the know-how handy, I'd start ripping it apart looking for potential holes.
ash
Don't get your pants off too quickly, you might want to just settle for a crotch-grab. It's TSearch2 integrated in-tree, with some extra SQL features to make using it easier. It's not completely new, you could do most of it before 8.3.
ash
Intrusive? Eh?
Last time I set up slony-I myself, it required a _replication schema. That's hardly intrusive, it's a *separate schema*.
The main difficulty is that it then tends to attach itself via a number of REFERENCES. Of course, since we're not actually discussing long-term usage, but short-term usage for purposes of migration, this is hardly a major problem. You add in slony's replication details, trigger replication, wait until replication has succeeded, promote the slave and shut down the master, test carefully, potentially running the old master as a slave temporarily, and then once you're satisified, *turn off slony and remove it*
It's not that hard to do, I've done that part as well, you just need to understand FK's, constraints and triggers.
ash
Yeah, that particularly overly inflated number will be adjusted to have a sane estimate and performance in SP1.
It's true that pre-SP1 had issues with copying lots of small files in some situations, but most of the other performance problems were often perceived, not actual, problems, since XP did things like closing the copy dialog before it had actually written the last byte to disk, for instance.
Most of the admins I know that deal with large PostgreSQL databases use slony-I to do their migrations.
Of course, if you're tight on hardware/disk resources, you're probably in trouble, no matter what, but slony can get you the migration/sync period down to a minimum of "shutdown, change setting, restart", if done correctly.
Don't forget that PostgreSQL can easily be run side-by-side with another version of PostgreSQL on the same box, so long as they aren't sharing a data tree (duh) or network ports. This migration doesn't necessarily require a new system, just enough disk space, and enough spare bandwidth to setup the migration. Slony shouldn't require a restart to get up and running (although it's delicate, you'll want to practice it in a set of VM's fairly rigourously if you can!)
ash
I'm curious, since I haven't poked at it yet.
What's missing from it, such that it misses out on the feature-list, in your opinion?
Well, this does ship with Bucardo in tree. That does multi-master replication.
Admittedly, "in tree" isn't the same as "built in", and I have no idea what the performance is like, and I don't know if it requires any application logic modifications to utilize.
closest name for a page
So... mod_speling for apache would be an accurate representation of prior art of some of that patent, then...
ash