would not this mirror have a very short lifespan as lunar dust covers/mixes with the liquid surface?
There's no atmosphere on the moon, hence no wind to whip up dust. Except for the odd meteorite impact, any dust settled to the surface a long time ago. Just keep it covered when any sort of spacecraft (for service/maintenance/whatever) is near.
MS won't risk it. No, the FUD value is *far* more valuable to them. They can scare people away from F/OSS and scare others into making their own deals.
$800 per workstation (Vista+Office) is nothing if I can get more out of my workers and not have to retrain them on OpenOffice.
Don't forget about the vendor lock-in though. That $800 per workstation may look like "nothing" to you now, but what happens X years down the track when you finally do decide to change to something else? You have to convert more documents and possibly do more retraining (more people and/or more entrenched experience).
He's clearly not calling for gov intervention like the TV version.
The problem is that the poster seems to take for granted the CC on TV, which is there because of government regulation, but somehow wants CC on web video without regulation. Like a lot of libertarians and other anti-regulation folk, the poster appears to forget about the *good* stuff that regulation has achieved whilst railing against *all* regulation.
I personally don't think CC on web video can be regulated. But that's because the internet is global and we've already seen companies move their servers to a different country to get around local regulations. I'm not going to be a hypocrite and attack regulation (in general) whilst taking advantage of so many regulations at the same time.
4. Could I be forced to publish this code by some 3-d party?
I heard Eben Moglen explain this in a presentation he gave a few years ago about the SCO mess. The GPL is only a license. You either abide by it or you don't. It can't force you to do anything.
Even if you included some GPL code in your app (which from the sounds of it, you want to avoid), you have two choices. You either release your source code under the GPL so you can continue distributing your app (binary), OR you don't distribute anything. It's your choice. A third choice would be to remove the infringing code.
I didn't get that error. An empty dialog popped up and I noticed its title was "7-Z" or something. The executable extracted using 7zip:
$ 7z x./SafariSetup.exe
The "SafariSetupAdmin.exe" executable didn't do anything but I noticed two.msi files. I went looking in my Wine binary directory and found "msiexec". After fiddling with that a bit, this worked:
$ msiexec/i./Safari.msi
It seemed to install ok, except for a bunch of warning messages. Then I tried to run it with Wine:
$ wine/data/wine/dos/c/Program\ Files/Safari/Safari.exe
err:module:LdrInitializeThunk "MSVCR80.dll" failed to initialize, aborting
err:module:LdrInitializeThunk Main exe initialization for L"C:\\Program Files\\Safari\\Safari.exe" failed, status c0000142
There is a "msvcr80.dll" file in the Safari install directory, so I don't know what's going wrong. I really would like to be able to test my websites with Safari. So far I've been working on the assumption that Konqueror was identical or very close, but I want to make sure.
Of course in the server case you want public IPs but you're far from the majority - joe sixpack just wants to browse the web and pick up email. He couldn't care less whether his IP was public or not.
Web and email may be fine with NAT. But public addressability is not just a problem for "servers". What about VOIP? That's impossible if all of an ISP's ADSL or Cable modems are already NAT'd on a private address space before getting to the customer.
The 128-bit addresses of IPv6 are broken into two 64-bit parts - network prefix and host. A network thus has 16 billion billion addresses. Put another way, you could fit all 4 billion of the 32-bit IPv4 addresses into each IPv6 network and still have (on average) 4 billion unused addresses between each host. Even your largest corporation or institute would have at most a few thousand hosts in its network. If you could scan 1k addresses a second, it would take on average 584k years to hit *one* address in a 1k host network.
But the host part of IPv6 addresses are usually derived from the MAC address of the interface (see RFC 2464). The first three bytes of the 48-bit MAC address is assigned to vendors, assuming a "universally administered address" and not a "locally administered" one. Assuming you knew a network had equipment from a particular vendor, that still leaves 40 bits to scan, still larger than the current internet. With the same 1k host network (all with the same MAC address vendor prefix) and scanning 1k hosts a second (very fast), it would still take on average 12.7 days to find one host.
Your worm is not going to spread very quickly, and that's in ideal conditions. Your average organisation is likely to have NIC's from several vendors. There's also RFC 3041 which defines ways to randomise the host part of the address. In short, scanning will likely disappear with IPv6.
I wanted to discuss this one... I've heard this particular criticism of PHP many times, although I haven't seen any suggestions about what precisely PHP should do to fix this. (Or what precisely is wrong with having a lot of functions in the "core," a term which is also unclear.)
What I see as wrong with having lots of built-in functions:
It's difficult to remember them. This is compounded by the inconsistent naming, and the inconsistent arguments and return values. It means you have to keep referring to some sort of reference... or just copy-and-paste code from other people like a lot of PHP users appear to do.
It reduces the set of names that you can use for your own functions, and increases the chance of an accidental collision.
The answer is modularisation. Looking at the long list of functions in the PHP manual, I think that all but a few core groups should be handled in modules that are loaded at run-time. That'd clean things up, but would be yet another backwards-incompatible change to the language. Frankly it'd be easier in the long term to switch to a proper language with a good framework e.g Java (Struts), Perl (Catalyst), Python (Django, TurboGears), or Ruby (RoR). Your code will be clearer and easier to maintain because of the MVC separation and you won't have to fuck around with your language changing underneath you (or be stuck with PHP 4 because your $5.95/mo web host doesn't want the hassle of breaking customer's web sites).
Honestly, if I were to reach for another language to get something done, I'd go for Python or Ruby before I even considered Perl as an option. Both are far more elegant choices.
True, I'd even agree with you there. I simply picked Perl because I've done a lot of work with it and someone had made a really good page comparing the built-in functions of both PHP and Perl. And the core of the PHP language is clearly heavily influenced by Perl. Sadly the original PHP developers show none of the care and insight that Larry Wall shows with Perl. And they took a "hands off" approach to growing the language, allowing people to add cruft with little oversight. Which is why PHP is such a huge mess.
x86-64 not only has 64-bit registers, but has more of them than the original x86.
x86-64 has guaranteed SSE/SSE2, also with more floating point registers (instead of 8087 with a stack).
Distros for x86-64 can compile stuff with optimisations for these and other features, instead of using the lowest common denominator 386/486 optimisations.
So unless you're using Gentoo (or LFS), Linux on x86-64 gets a good optimisation boost compared to the x86 version. It basically sets a new lowest common denominator for everyone to optimise to.
The first is that a lawfully armed professor / student could have ended his rampage sooner.
Emphasis on "could". It's no guarantee. What if there were gun-carrying students or faculty members at VA Tech? What if that didn't stop Cho? Would the pro-gun people then say that more armed students would have stopped him? I just don't see "more guns" to be the solution to gun violence. The guns are the problem, so get rid of them. And don't think that's impossible. Many countries have very tight controls on gun ownership that work. It's just a very difficult proposition for the U.S. coming from its current state.
This is a group that has passed several background checks, studied the law regarding the use of lethal force in their jurisdiction, and demonstrated non-trivial proficiency with a firearm.
Don't forget that Cho obtained his guns and ammo legally and supposedly went through (most of) what you suggest. If anything comes of the VA Tech shooting, hopefully they will at least close off the loop-hole that left his background record clean just because he didn't submit himself to psychiatric therapy. He should have never gotten the guns he had.
In general, there is added deterrent to say armed robbery, if the robber's mark might shoot back.
Yes, which leads to a kind of arms race between the law-abiding civilian population and the criminal element. I'd much rather have a criminal feel nice and safe with a simple handgun than feel he has to be armed with a semi-automatic or fully-automatic gun. I'd much rather give a thief what he wants and get away with my life than get into a shoot-out or stand-off with someone who has less to lose than myself. I'm not a superhero and a gun won't make me into one. The gun may be called the "great equalizer", but criminals can just as easily get bigger and more dangerous guns while I couldn't. What's so equal about that?
OK, you seem like one of the more articulate pro-gun nuts I've come across. So I'll raise two issues:
This whole "VA Tech massacre wouldn't have happened if other people were armed" idea just seems nuts to me. Is there a limit to this idea? In a hospital should doctors, nurses, and other staff members be armed? In court should the judge, jurors, lawyers, and gallery be armed? Should congress, the senate, and the viewing gallery be armed? Should teachers be armed? College/university students? High school students? Primary school students? Taken to an extreme it seems ludicrous. So just where does it stop? To me it makes sense for nobody to have guns, except police and the like. That's something everyone can abide by, no matter their age or ability. Less tension and less chance for accidents.
This idea that shooters choose unarmed areas doesn't seem to entirely stand up to the evidence. So, ok, you have that Amish school incident last year and I think there's been school shootings where non-students came in (Ecole). And I guess there's been cases where people shoot up shopping malls and such. But most school shootings appear to be perpetrated by (ex-)students wishing to take revenge. I'm sure Cho Seung-hui could have gone to a local mall or somewhere else and shot lots of people. But he wanted to take revenge so he shot up his University. Same with Columbine. They didn't choose their school because it was gun-free. They wanted revenge on the people (and place) responsible for their suffering. So the idea that the VA Tech campus was a gun-free area and hence "unprotected" is moot. If people were armed Cho probably still would tried to do something. He wasn't a terrorist looking for a "soft target", he was an angry and self-deluded young man out to exact revenge on those he saw as the cause of his problems.
Twitter, you're the own who is being rabid here. You're attacking a guy for making factually correct posts from five years ago! You're giving the rest of us Linux/FOSS supporters a bad name. Please stop it.
This policy isnt written in stone. MS has many times pushed out an out of cycle patch if it was urgent.
Like the time their WMP DRM was cracked. Sure, something like DRM is given high priority and the fix is pushed out in a day or two. But stuff that can result in compromised systems across the Internet (like spam bots)? Nah, wait until next month to fix that. Makes you wonder about their priorities
But trying to take away my guns won't make anyone safer.
Even if that were true, that doesn't necessarily mean that anyone is safer if you get to keep your guns. What happens if your guns get stolen? What happens if they end up being sold to criminals or gang members? That does not help the situation.
How about some open source hardware company take this up and develop a LinChip?
I am the great OpenCores genie! Your wish has been granted: OpenRISC 1000 core.
Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 1
Eventually, as it always happens, there will be bug releases and new drivers for Windows Vista. Upgrading to them is as easily as doing "Windows Update." Linux (and BSD) distros will never be this easily patched due to the very nature of being open source. I only have to go to 1 web site to update my PC's - Windows Update
Ba ha ha ha ha!
Ba ha ha ha ha!
Ba ha ha ha ha!
Ba ha ha ha ha!
Ba ha ha ha ha!
Ok, if you're not being a troll and really are that stupid, here's how it really works under Linux and BSD. Because of the source being available, I can update all of the software on my systems using Debian's APT. Not just the "operating system" (translation: kernel, desktop, some tools, media player, and web browser). Pretty much every piece of software (minus the nVidia driver and a few esoteric bits of software) comes out of Debian's huge repository of software. And it's not just updated once a month either.
I can't even begin to think how "the very nature of being open source" would stop system updates from happening. Open Source isn't anarchy.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean the FIC Neo1973. OpenMoko is the software stack.
Just what is the Linux world? Are you referring to Linux developers? Users? Supporters?
This is just a company making a product that just happens to run Linux. Stupid troll.
And here's my tip: learn to take a joke. Sheesh, what a fanboy response.
There's no atmosphere on the moon, hence no wind to whip up dust. Except for the odd meteorite impact, any dust settled to the surface a long time ago. Just keep it covered when any sort of spacecraft (for service/maintenance/whatever) is near.
MS won't risk it. No, the FUD value is *far* more valuable to them. They can scare people away from F/OSS and scare others into making their own deals.
Don't forget about the vendor lock-in though. That $800 per workstation may look like "nothing" to you now, but what happens X years down the track when you finally do decide to change to something else? You have to convert more documents and possibly do more retraining (more people and/or more entrenched experience).
The problem is that the poster seems to take for granted the CC on TV, which is there because of government regulation, but somehow wants CC on web video without regulation. Like a lot of libertarians and other anti-regulation folk, the poster appears to forget about the *good* stuff that regulation has achieved whilst railing against *all* regulation.
I personally don't think CC on web video can be regulated. But that's because the internet is global and we've already seen companies move their servers to a different country to get around local regulations. I'm not going to be a hypocrite and attack regulation (in general) whilst taking advantage of so many regulations at the same time.
I heard Eben Moglen explain this in a presentation he gave a few years ago about the SCO mess. The GPL is only a license. You either abide by it or you don't. It can't force you to do anything.
Even if you included some GPL code in your app (which from the sounds of it, you want to avoid), you have two choices. You either release your source code under the GPL so you can continue distributing your app (binary), OR you don't distribute anything. It's your choice. A third choice would be to remove the infringing code.
I didn't get that error. An empty dialog popped up and I noticed its title was "7-Z" or something. The executable extracted using 7zip:
The "SafariSetupAdmin.exe" executable didn't do anything but I noticed two .msi files. I went looking in my Wine binary directory and found "msiexec". After fiddling with that a bit, this worked:
It seemed to install ok, except for a bunch of warning messages. Then I tried to run it with Wine:
There is a "msvcr80.dll" file in the Safari install directory, so I don't know what's going wrong. I really would like to be able to test my websites with Safari. So far I've been working on the assumption that Konqueror was identical or very close, but I want to make sure.
Web and email may be fine with NAT. But public addressability is not just a problem for "servers". What about VOIP? That's impossible if all of an ISP's ADSL or Cable modems are already NAT'd on a private address space before getting to the customer.
The 128-bit addresses of IPv6 are broken into two 64-bit parts - network prefix and host. A network thus has 16 billion billion addresses. Put another way, you could fit all 4 billion of the 32-bit IPv4 addresses into each IPv6 network and still have (on average) 4 billion unused addresses between each host. Even your largest corporation or institute would have at most a few thousand hosts in its network. If you could scan 1k addresses a second, it would take on average 584k years to hit *one* address in a 1k host network.
But the host part of IPv6 addresses are usually derived from the MAC address of the interface (see RFC 2464). The first three bytes of the 48-bit MAC address is assigned to vendors, assuming a "universally administered address" and not a "locally administered" one. Assuming you knew a network had equipment from a particular vendor, that still leaves 40 bits to scan, still larger than the current internet. With the same 1k host network (all with the same MAC address vendor prefix) and scanning 1k hosts a second (very fast), it would still take on average 12.7 days to find one host.
Your worm is not going to spread very quickly, and that's in ideal conditions. Your average organisation is likely to have NIC's from several vendors. There's also RFC 3041 which defines ways to randomise the host part of the address. In short, scanning will likely disappear with IPv6.
I would have thought that population would be a better measurement than land area. All pollution is ultimately produced for and by people, not land.
No, but there's gotta be all sorts of metals and minerals in the asteroid belt. That might be worth something.
What I see as wrong with having lots of built-in functions:
The answer is modularisation. Looking at the long list of functions in the PHP manual, I think that all but a few core groups should be handled in modules that are loaded at run-time. That'd clean things up, but would be yet another backwards-incompatible change to the language. Frankly it'd be easier in the long term to switch to a proper language with a good framework e.g Java (Struts), Perl (Catalyst), Python (Django, TurboGears), or Ruby (RoR). Your code will be clearer and easier to maintain because of the MVC separation and you won't have to fuck around with your language changing underneath you (or be stuck with PHP 4 because your $5.95/mo web host doesn't want the hassle of breaking customer's web sites).
True, I'd even agree with you there. I simply picked Perl because I've done a lot of work with it and someone had made a really good page comparing the built-in functions of both PHP and Perl. And the core of the PHP language is clearly heavily influenced by Perl. Sadly the original PHP developers show none of the care and insight that Larry Wall shows with Perl. And they took a "hands off" approach to growing the language, allowing people to add cruft with little oversight. Which is why PHP is such a huge mess.
Perl, for one.
To summarise:
Which all adds up to one thing: PHP is a simple language that's actually rather hard to program in. Or maintain.
- x86-64 not only has 64-bit registers, but has more of them than the original x86.
- x86-64 has guaranteed SSE/SSE2, also with more floating point registers (instead of 8087 with a stack).
- Distros for x86-64 can compile stuff with optimisations for these and other features, instead of using the lowest common denominator 386/486 optimisations.
So unless you're using Gentoo (or LFS), Linux on x86-64 gets a good optimisation boost compared to the x86 version. It basically sets a new lowest common denominator for everyone to optimise to.Emphasis on "could". It's no guarantee. What if there were gun-carrying students or faculty members at VA Tech? What if that didn't stop Cho? Would the pro-gun people then say that more armed students would have stopped him? I just don't see "more guns" to be the solution to gun violence. The guns are the problem, so get rid of them. And don't think that's impossible. Many countries have very tight controls on gun ownership that work. It's just a very difficult proposition for the U.S. coming from its current state.
Don't forget that Cho obtained his guns and ammo legally and supposedly went through (most of) what you suggest. If anything comes of the VA Tech shooting, hopefully they will at least close off the loop-hole that left his background record clean just because he didn't submit himself to psychiatric therapy. He should have never gotten the guns he had.
Yes, which leads to a kind of arms race between the law-abiding civilian population and the criminal element. I'd much rather have a criminal feel nice and safe with a simple handgun than feel he has to be armed with a semi-automatic or fully-automatic gun. I'd much rather give a thief what he wants and get away with my life than get into a shoot-out or stand-off with someone who has less to lose than myself. I'm not a superhero and a gun won't make me into one. The gun may be called the "great equalizer", but criminals can just as easily get bigger and more dangerous guns while I couldn't. What's so equal about that?
OK, you seem like one of the more articulate pro-gun nuts I've come across. So I'll raise two issues:
Thoughts?
Twitter, you're the own who is being rabid here. You're attacking a guy for making factually correct posts from five years ago! You're giving the rest of us Linux/FOSS supporters a bad name. Please stop it.
Like the time their WMP DRM was cracked. Sure, something like DRM is given high priority and the fix is pushed out in a day or two. But stuff that can result in compromised systems across the Internet (like spam bots)? Nah, wait until next month to fix that. Makes you wonder about their priorities
Even if that were true, that doesn't necessarily mean that anyone is safer if you get to keep your guns. What happens if your guns get stolen? What happens if they end up being sold to criminals or gang members? That does not help the situation.
No, gun control is about disarming *everyone* - "good guys", "bad guys", all of them. This isn't the wild west any more. Grow up, America.
I am the great OpenCores genie! Your wish has been granted: OpenRISC 1000 core.
Ba ha ha ha ha!
Ba ha ha ha ha!
Ba ha ha ha ha!
Ba ha ha ha ha!
Ba ha ha ha ha!
Ok, if you're not being a troll and really are that stupid, here's how it really works under Linux and BSD. Because of the source being available, I can update all of the software on my systems using Debian's APT. Not just the "operating system" (translation: kernel, desktop, some tools, media player, and web browser). Pretty much every piece of software (minus the nVidia driver and a few esoteric bits of software) comes out of Debian's huge repository of software. And it's not just updated once a month either.
I can't even begin to think how "the very nature of being open source" would stop system updates from happening. Open Source isn't anarchy.