Because the my.mp3.com service stopped working for me, I was forced to look around for alternatives, now I've got my own system, and there is nobody to track it, or anything. I suspect there are a lot more ways of doing music distribution caused by this lapse in the presense of less evil. (The big record companies could at least track the one big server... but now that the've forced fate, and fostered people to do it on their own... look out.)
If you recently recieved spam from anyone, and happend to be using Windows, do a net view \\ip.address.of.offenting.spammer, and you might be surprised to see open drives. For example, if you see: Received: from Comp1 (max1-31.losangeles.corecomm.net [216.214.106.XXX]) by cfexchange.ccff.ca with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2232.9) id JY36QKNM; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 09:17:35 -0400 To: ghguy@dffhgj.com
You would then do net view \\216.214.106.XXX. You might see something like: Shared resources at \\216.214.106.XXX
Sharename Type Comment C Disk EPSON Print The command was completed successfully.
The real question is, what next? There are a wide range of options available, from the calling of authorities (The ISP in question) all the way down to revenge. Where is the happy medium?
Per the thread a few days ago... if you can't say something nice about someone... or this show... It MUST suck! {I've never seen it, and now that thier lawyers have proven it sucks, why would I??) --Mike--
This is precisely the type of thing that makes QoS (Quality Of Service) such a bad idea. All internet traffic should be handled on the first come, first serve basis, with no discrimination or preferences being supported along the way. Imagine being a system administrator, trying to figure out why your packets were being lost, when ping still worked, etc. Equal rights for all packets! --Mike--
I've used Netscape (4.5) to talk to the Exchange server at work, just told it it was an LDAP server (which is enabled on the exchange server as well), and there it was. No fuss, no muss, no Outlook. I wonder what it would take to get a project going to offer a free open source clone of Office97, so that we can all be compatable, yet get on with our lives. --Mike--
I suspect this will lead to a new social convention, if you can't say something nice about someone... leave a comment saying you can't say something nice about them.;-) Something has to give, and it will, I have faith. --Mike--
The more layers of the final cake that are visible, and open source, the better. In a perfect world, everyone can see and some can help fix the layers, if they so desire. If an application takes off in Linux space, there will be open source alternatives, that provide some competition, and keep things alive. The trend seems to be toward open source, for a number of reasons including culture. I hope it's a stable trend. As long as we keep people from hijacking standards, we'll be ok. Now if we could find a way to fund a complete, free, replacement for Office97, it would be a very good thing. --Mike--
Long ago I wrote several programs, among them a version of Forth for OS/2 Forth/2, which was a fun project for me. It turns out several people actually started using it for real work. When I realized I wasn't going to play with it any more, I did something similar, released a new version (with the fixes I had done) with all of the source code in it, so that someone else could take up the banner, if they so intended. It was a fun project, I'm glad I helped out people, and was especially please to have a nice way to end the project. I highly recommend this approach to any of you who have a project you're done with, for whatever reason. --Mike--
If you have taxation, then apply it in a fair and uniform manner. An across-the-board net sales tax makes sense. If the net is such an efficient mechanism, why does it need the extra unfair advantage over bricks and mortar stores of being tax exempt?
I can't speak for everyone else, but I have always wanted consistent laws and rules. I've opposed silly patents (such as software and alogrithms), etc. We have tax laws in place which deal with interstate commerce. I just placed an order with Dell across the net... as we::: gasp::: paid sales taxes!
This book has the "ring" of truth to it. You can tell it's right, it's instictive. I read it eagerly, and plan to re-read it at least once in the future. I've also taken it to the marketing person at work, (for her reaction, and a reality check) and She said "That's what I've been trying to tell people"... which caught me off guard, but made me feel MUCH better about my job. --Mike--
This is a good thing, to be able to write a program to do anything you want, without constraints. With all of the incursions into our rights as of late, especially with all the weirdness with patents of software, etc.. It's refreshing to know we might not have to do things like printing the source code to PGP as a book, to distribute ideas, and advance the state of the art.
Back in the nonexistent good old days, there were programs which allowed you to make a tradeoff, in exchange for a performance hit, you could compress the redundant bits out of a sector of data, and store more data on a hard drive. The magic was that it was transparent to the user of the system (outside of the performance hit). Now we are presented with a new version of the same decision, a performance hit in exchange for transparently taking the redundant files out of a filesystem. The magic, again, is that it ends up transparent to the user. Which is why this is not the same as symlinks, which require user (or system) management. As much as I dislike the monopoly, this is an interesting, apparently novel application of a metaconcept. The overall concept (data compression) is clearly old, this instance (file system compression) appears new, raising the question: Should it be patentable? --Mike--
Hasn't anyone noticed that the psychology required to be a great hacker is the opposite of that required to function effectively in the military?
The only people less suitable to the military than hackers might might be scientists, and we know the military could never do anything on a big scale with scientists.
Ok... with that point made...
"Now we're all son's of bitches" - Kenneth Tomkins Bainbridge to J. Robert Oppenheimer after the first atomic test.
Give me a break, they want us to give up 64Bit I/O transfers at 66Mhz (the article computes 264 Mega Bytes/second for PCI 2.1)... for a serial standard? This is 2.1 Gigabits/second folks.... and it's a heck of a lot easier to push this in parallel than it is to use specialized Gallium Arsenide components to try to spit it out a serial port. At the least we're talking about signals with a clock rate of 2 Ghz.
If you throw the "double clocking" trick on to PCI (seems fair to me), you get the amazing speed of almost a gigabyte/second! Where are we going to get 10Ghz network clocks? Why waste the effort, when it should be relatively easy to extend the 64x performance increase in Parallel bus design for a very long time into the future?
I'll tell you why... Intel, and others, want to keep the cost of entry high, and since there is no other way to do it, they are willing to have us pay for an unnecessary layer of hardware that only they can afford the research to create, to keep their market share!
I say no to this obvious attempt to raise the price of computing. We need to keep hardware prices falling in line with Moore's law, and not restrained in such a stupid manner. Serial may be fine for external interfaces, but parallel remains the only sane choice for a very long time to come.
In my opinion, this idea of making internal busses all serial is NUTS!
Internal Server Error The date specified (01-01-1900) is impossible. If you have forced this error condition, you may be in violation of state, federal, and/or civil laws. Those outside the United States should check with their respective governments concerning their country's extradition treaty. Dissemination of this error is also strictly prohibited.
If you believe you have received this message in error, please reload the page and try again.
CDW has 25 Gb IBM Hard drives for the amazing, Moore's law inspired, price of $363.62
If we take 24 of these drives, in a RAID array, allowing $1000 for a controller... the price works out to: 24 * 365 ---> $8760 Controller -> $1000 ------------------- Total price $9876 They want more than 10 times this price... time for a reality check!
Slashdot Mirror
It's been six months... still waiting for the Y2k power failure to end life as we knew it. ;-)
--Mike--
Does CDDB track usage, or am I paranoid?
--Mike--
For example, if you see:
Received: from Comp1 (max1-31.losangeles.corecomm.net [216.214.106.XXX]) by cfexchange.ccff.ca with SMTP
(Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2232.9)
id JY36QKNM; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 09:17:35 -0400
To: ghguy@dffhgj.com
You would then do
net view \\216.214.106.XXX.
You might see something like:
Shared resources at \\216.214.106.XXX
Sharename Type Comment
C Disk
EPSON Print
The command was completed successfully.
The real question is, what next? There are a wide range of options available, from the calling of authorities (The ISP in question) all the way down to revenge. Where is the happy medium?
--Mike--
Per the thread a few days ago... if you can't say something nice about someone... or this show...
It MUST suck! {I've never seen it, and now that thier lawyers have proven it sucks, why would I??)
--Mike--
This is precisely the type of thing that makes QoS (Quality Of Service) such a bad idea. All internet traffic should be handled on the first come, first serve basis, with no discrimination or preferences being supported along the way. Imagine being a system administrator, trying to figure out why your packets were being lost, when ping still worked, etc.
Equal rights for all packets!
--Mike--
I've used Netscape (4.5) to talk to the Exchange server at work, just told it it was an LDAP server (which is enabled on the exchange server as well), and there it was. No fuss, no muss, no Outlook.
I wonder what it would take to get a project going to offer a free open source clone of Office97, so that we can all be compatable, yet get on with our lives.
--Mike--
I suspect this will lead to a new social convention, if you can't say something nice about someone... leave a comment saying you can't say something nice about them. ;-)
Something has to give, and it will, I have faith.
--Mike--
The more layers of the final cake that are visible, and open source, the better. In a perfect world, everyone can see and some can help fix the layers, if they so desire. If an application takes off in Linux space, there will be open source alternatives, that provide some competition, and keep things alive. The trend seems to be toward open source, for a number of reasons including culture. I hope it's a stable trend.
As long as we keep people from hijacking standards, we'll be ok.
Now if we could find a way to fund a complete, free, replacement for Office97, it would be a very good thing.
--Mike--
Long ago I wrote several programs, among them a version of Forth for OS/2 Forth/2, which was a fun project for me. It turns out several people actually started using it for real work. When I realized I wasn't going to play with it any more, I did something similar, released a new version (with the fixes I had done) with all of the source code in it, so that someone else could take up the banner, if they so intended. It was a fun project, I'm glad I helped out people, and was especially please to have a nice way to end the project. I highly recommend this approach to any of you who have a project you're done with, for whatever reason.
--Mike--
DeCSS is akin to a tool that breaks the lock on your house.
Since when does the MPAA have a right to put a lock on my house?!?!
Why did I get "troll"???
http://warot.com/freedom/kerbspec.pdf
What happens now?
--Mike--
If you have taxation, then apply it in a fair and uniform manner. An across-the-board net sales tax makes sense. If the net is such an efficient mechanism, why does it need the extra unfair advantage over bricks and mortar stores of being tax exempt?
I can't speak for everyone else, but I have always wanted consistent laws and rules. I've opposed silly patents (such as software and alogrithms), etc. We have tax laws in place which deal with interstate commerce. I just placed an order with Dell across the net... as we ::: gasp ::: paid sales taxes!
No new taxes.
--Mike--There are sales taxes already in place... there should be no new taxes, to borrow the phrase from the former Prez.
--Mike--
This book has the "ring" of truth to it. You can tell it's right, it's instictive. I read it eagerly, and plan to re-read it at least once in the future. I've also taken it to the marketing person at work, (for her reaction, and a reality check) and She said "That's what I've been trying to tell people"... which caught me off guard, but made me feel MUCH better about my job.
--Mike--
This is a good thing, to be able to write a program to do anything you want, without constraints. With all of the incursions into our rights as of late, especially with all the weirdness with patents of software, etc.. It's refreshing to know we might not have to do things like printing the source code to PGP as a book, to distribute ideas, and advance the state of the art.
Back in the nonexistent good old days, there were programs which allowed you to make a tradeoff, in exchange for a performance hit, you could compress the redundant bits out of a sector of data, and store more data on a hard drive. The magic was that it was transparent to the user of the system (outside of the performance hit).
Now we are presented with a new version of the same decision, a performance hit in exchange for transparently taking the redundant files out of a filesystem. The magic, again, is that it ends up transparent to the user. Which is why this is not the same as symlinks, which require user (or system) management.
As much as I dislike the monopoly, this is an interesting, apparently novel application of a metaconcept. The overall concept (data compression) is clearly old, this instance (file system compression) appears new, raising the question:
Should it be patentable?
--Mike--
I'm going to have to kiss Delphi goodbye, and it won't be easy.
Goodbye Turbo Pascal, goodbye Dephi. I will miss you. ::: sniff :::
Hasn't anyone noticed that the psychology required to be a great hacker is the opposite of that required to function effectively in the military?
The only people less suitable to the military than hackers might might be scientists, and we know the military could never do anything on a big scale with scientists.
Ok... with that point made...
"Now we're all son's of bitches" - Kenneth Tomkins Bainbridge to J. Robert Oppenheimer after the first atomic test.
Do we really want hackers to join that club?
--Mike--
Give me a break, they want us to give up 64Bit I/O transfers at 66Mhz (the article computes 264 Mega Bytes/second for PCI 2.1)... for a serial standard? This is 2.1 Gigabits/second folks.... and it's a heck of a lot easier to push this in parallel than it is to use specialized Gallium Arsenide components to try to spit it out a serial port. At the least we're talking about signals with a clock rate of 2 Ghz.
If you throw the "double clocking" trick on to PCI (seems fair to me), you get the amazing speed of almost a gigabyte/second! Where are we going to get 10Ghz network clocks? Why waste the effort, when it should be relatively easy to extend the 64x performance increase in Parallel bus design for a very long time into the future?
I'll tell you why... Intel, and others, want to keep the cost of entry high, and since there is no other way to do it, they are willing to have us pay for an unnecessary layer of hardware that only they can afford the research to create, to keep their market share!
I say no to this obvious attempt to raise the price of computing. We need to keep hardware prices falling in line with Moore's law, and not restrained in such a stupid manner. Serial may be fine for external interfaces, but parallel remains the only sane choice for a very long time to come.
In my opinion, this idea of making internal busses all serial is NUTS!
--Mike--
Internal Server Error
The date specified (01-01-1900) is impossible. If you have forced this
error condition, you may be in violation of state, federal, and/or civil
laws. Those outside the United States should check with their respective
governments concerning their country's extradition treaty. Dissemination
of this error is also strictly prohibited.
If you believe you have received this message in error, please reload
the page and try again.
Pretty odd, eh?
--Mike--
If we take 24 of these drives, in a RAID array, allowing $1000 for a controller... the price works out to:
24 * 365 ---> $8760
Controller -> $1000
-------------------
Total price $9876
They want more than 10 times this price... time for a reality check!
--Mike--