Dis clients of the ISP had free traffic to his nntp server ? Did they not paid for time spent on downloading and posting articles on ISP's nntp-server ?
Or would that ISP now charge extra money for access to any site with nntp port ?
I agree, usenet overflooded with spam and i for years do not use it. Instead i use nntp servers of communities i'm interested to talk and listen to. And sometimes i use gmane.org - and i'm sure while usenet might die - NNTP will live. So, personally, i already lost usenet, but would not use effective way top use forums:)
It would not be earlier that i call IPv6 same mature as current IPv4, than we found ourselves running out of IPv6 addressses and switching to IPv8:)
Now, seriously, NAT is not only limiting, it is protecting also. The problem is that we have no ZeroConf or UPnP port forwarding up to an outer gate. If at home my campus network operator allowed me to demand some port - then it would make me easy to send/receive files with jabber, etc. I pay per-megabyte, and i guess i i had direct IP, all those port scanning, virus attacks and crackers trying to zombie my PC, would at very least make me traffic i would have to pay 10 times more than now. And perhaps they will find a hole and infect my PC. So i am not that against the NAT. It is limitaition, but it is saving my money also;)
Majority does care. If i'd say you're asshole you would be a bit harder to listen for the rest of my words. For most people emotions are more weightful than logic.
You, personally, would not notice, if i call Your asshole? That's because Your emotion, willing to find the truth is overcoming emotion, unplesance to hear my rude words. But i do not think that would be the same for majority.
PS: BTW scientists are usually not that fone refined rationale minds. Many new ideas in hostory met quite wild reaction, when some basics of mainstream were questioned by new ideas. Axioms is what we choose to believe, yes? Since we rarely have time to rejustify axioms, they became a kind of religion to us. Feeling oneself as a part of a big, great Science makes it easy to ignore attacks to yourself, but you might take very personal any attack to the well-knowns of that Science.
In Russia there is a serie of books by Mark Zholondz.
About cancer, he tooks a number of biology books, counts forces of immune system, and even in ideal scenario, where immune system is not required to deal with diseases, poisons of outer environment, nor old and dead cells of our body - even then immune system would have enough soldiers to defeat only 33% of cancer cells. So there is another enti-cancer system in our bodies.
Perdon my English.
I wonder if some medical student with good knowledge of russian was interested to translate those broshures to English:-)
Microsoft Messenger is already told to use SIP to connect:-)
Personally i'd like to see at last SIP over XMPP. so my Jabber client would be easily enhanced with VoIP client.
Indeed, let's look out. Skype is providing analogue to SMS - it is instant messaging. Microsoft in its Live Server brings together Windows Messenger and NetMeeting. ICQ 5, basing on it's huge user's base want to prevent them from Skype and adds Push-to-Talk feature.
Free software is somewhere behind yet.:-(
I wish some project designed bridges between XMPP and VoIP. And i wish VoIP people designed some low-bandwidth codec, that helped free software to talk on bad lines, where only Skype is capable now. And, of oourse, P2P and roaming must extend both SIP and XMPP protocols. If Jabber server is down, i wish i could to log onto some other server, and let my mates find me with my usual JID.
AS: afair Mono has an interpreter, along with x86 JIT. Afair same is DotGNU. So it does not make the differences. Though interpreters of Mono and DotGNU really was made differently www.southern-storm.com.au/download/pnet-engine.pdf
"just call us hostile only because we have a different implementation from yours."
i'd put a quote from http://gnu.vlsm.org/projects/dotgnu/pnet.html --- Do you cooperate with the Mono project?
In April 2002, we added I18N (internationalization) support to Portable.NET, under the usual "GPL plus linking exception" license. We were looking for ways to increase cooperation with Mono, and Mono has a policy of not accepting code under our usual license. As an experiment in co-operation, the DotGNU Steering Committee offered the I18N code to Mono under the X11 license.
Mono did use this code, but contributed very few changes to it. Meanwhile, we did a lot more work on this library, more than doubling its size. So we decided to go back to our standard license for the new version. The original version remains, of course, available under the X11 license.
We were still interested in ways of increasing cooperation with the Mono developers, in ways that would be mutually beneficial to Portable.NET and Mono, and therefore another attempt at establishing cooperation was made in October 2003. This also failed.
I foreseeing myself beeing beaten like the poor Pingu, so i'd like to state: The opinions expressed here are not mine but of my employer.
Oooohh... Did i really told that. No, the above lines were not my opinion as well.
Now, to be serious, i'd like to put my 2 cents over some points, i often meet around. Some of them are fro mthe article, others are not.
1) We should choose language... No. We should choose runtime library. Personally i'd prefer to code in Component Pascal or Borland Pascal rather than C/C#/Java branch. Just because i dislike C look-and-feel. Is it serious? i think everyone will say 'no'. So the question is about library, it is library functions/objects that developer constructs his program with. And they are at his fingertips' cache. Moving to another library makes him significantly less productive, as he has to think 'what am i to use for my task' or even browse the manual and FAQ and so on. Let as take MS Visual C++ and Borland C++ Builder - both of them are more-or-less C++ compilers for Win32 - and they are incompatible for any complex app, since they use (and make developer used to) different rtl's. Let as take GCC with GTK+ and Qt and wxWindows - again, GTK pro will work slow forced to use Qt library.
Broad support for languages is very good for small tasks, such as those, solved by scripting languages. But for serious development ine will need to learn GTK+ - and it will count much less what language does he prefer.
But if we want to support many languages were are to desing RTL the proper way, so that every language will have bridges to the features above Least Common.
For example Class Factories in 90% of cases are workaround for C++ lack of class refernece type and virtual constructor. So if RTL will make use of them - then for C++ they are to look like some special simple auto-generated Class Factory. And the opposite, such a Class Factory implemented in C++, is to be class reference to a class with virtual constructor for less restricted language.
That is very hard, and usually it is not even atttempted. Usually ether
a> RTL is Least Common for all the language - and is not comfort to any of them, so languages are quickly added with there own libraries and RTL does not guard the cross-language compatibility no more. That is not a choice at all IMHO.
b> RTL is designed for C++ (or any othe language, but oinly sole one). That makes it uncomfort for all the other laguages, hence that main language becomes the only widely used one. This way we only refactor existing GTK and maybe change C++ for some other language. If that is all - does it worth the efforts on refactoring?
IMHO RTL is to be _designed_ for some set of languages agreed before, and is to allow bridges for all the features that are not natively supported in the languages.
I do not say that ECMA.NET is good at this, but it is the only major project i know that stated cross-language support as one of its targets.
And since GTK+ set of classes might be refactored but will never be abondoned - it might try to become a standard RTL for free.NET Though i doubt it will, there are alread ycross-platform incompatbile RTL's like Apacje's one and Mozilla's one (mostly at middle level of applications), as well as GTK and Qt (mostly as UI level of applications). Will GTK.NET or whatever be fine and be the 1st one - it will become standard de facto, otherwise i see no chance to have one standard RTL, when we alread yahs a lot of competing ones now - will any of them want to die? only some new Terra can be base for standard RTL.
2> Free.Net implementations will speed-up MS.NET I can't agree. Do projects like WinE and Odin spped-up Win32 ? I think it is quite the opposite! While projects like DotGNU and Mono are weak - the real programs are designed over MS new ideas and DotGNU and Mono are eternal step-behind compatibility layers
There is also LEGPL (GPL with Linking Excpetions), that will easy constraints. But i do not talk of those.
I tell the user - install this library, i even give him extra CD with that library, sources and so one - by the price of CD-R blank.
After that he installs my app, thal loads that DLL library, which is (from the app's point of view) was already pre-installed on PC.
So, my app do not contain the library, they are shipped separately. My ap is not derived - it does not contain single bit of library. You can run it without library, though functionality will be reduced to, say, sonme presentation. User is not to accept GPL, since it is not EULA, but even he has - he's done nothing wrong.
Who is violating GPL, and where exactly ?
One more example - i install WinAmp or WindowsCommander - and add GPL plugin into it. Does it turn WinAmp or WinCmd into derived work, has i to request sources of those ?
Soooo, intel is trying to make subtle and silent the fact about 64bit computing.
I think it is good. What will think John the Customer seeing "IA32e" ? He's taught that "number does matter", so he think that nop 64 bit is there. And just want someone to proove he is genios, making this conclusion himself. So AMD PR is to help him feel himself supermind - and then he will start showting about lack of 64 in intel at every street. And intel will have shout 'we have 64 too' - and no more silence.
PS: i wish there be Opteron DoubleThreading. Maybe slots, like 1st athlons and P2 were. Socket gives 2 memory feeds and 2 HT feeds. Let ceramic case has 2 chips within, connected by inner HT wire. And then let each of them has one outer memory wire and one outer peripherals wire:-)
There is need for one more pattern: "Eric-the-Troll, Half-Brained"
A kind of a person who 1.a) Thinks computer is a dumb piece of shift, so he won't spend time learning its ways 1.b) Thinks that the computer is genious and any software is RealTime-aware so there is no excuse if there is no personal bar. 2.a) Don't want tremote computer accept it's printing jobs right out of the box, with no single second spent for setup. 2.b) Would be angry after that remote box will also accepts jobs from all the rest PCs in the building. 3.a) Will be angry about issues in alpha-verions like Fedora 3.b) Will kill anyone who will tell them to use some stable release that is 2-days obsolete, and if You will dare to say that some bleeding-edge hald-constucted software kit will be to complex to their superminds 4.a) will not be ever able to understand the inners of CUPS and compile it from sources and install without 'make' 4.b) when any trouble , they dare to know the work 'CUPS' and will annoy CUPS developersm not distro-maker
Thouse hypocriths are not to be dealt with hackers. CUPS team was to slap Eric-the-troll with a bit stick and through him to the RedHat support team.
If You are user - do not use alpha-versions. If You are user - you must noi know the word 'Linux' at all. You must know that You're runnoing RedHat Fedora, or SuSE, or Knoppix, or Alt or whatever - and forward Yourq questions to those you paid for distro.
If Ypu're hacker, playing with alpha toys and is proud that you know the word 'CUPS' and where there developers can be found - then be hacker and be humble and polite and reasonable as a hacker.
Bu when You're riding to different horses at itime - You will (and must!) be tored apart by them.
If Adobe compromised there PDF-pseudoprotection in court, their are compromising the stuff they sell. And yet they did.
What's wrong with Corbis.
Also 95% of people in our brave old world does not like thining, since it's hurts sometimes. And they will believe in any Oprah-blessed nonsense, even about absolutely unbreakable software, that was cracked by malicious vandal.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
...and they are divided into three classes: those who learnt to count to three, and those who are not.
Dis clients of the ISP had free traffic to his nntp server ? Did they not paid for time spent on downloading and posting articles on ISP's nntp-server ?
:)
Or would that ISP now charge extra money for access to any site with nntp port ?
I agree, usenet overflooded with spam and i for years do not use it. Instead i use nntp servers of communities i'm interested to talk and listen to.
And sometimes i use gmane.org - and i'm sure while usenet might die - NNTP will live. So, personally, i already lost usenet, but would not use effective way top use forums
It would not be earlier that i call IPv6 same mature as current IPv4, than we found ourselves running out of IPv6 addressses and switching to IPv8 :)
;)
Now, seriously, NAT is not only limiting, it is protecting also. The problem is that we have no ZeroConf or UPnP port forwarding up to an outer gate. If at home my campus network operator allowed me to demand some port - then it would make me easy to send/receive files with jabber, etc.
I pay per-megabyte, and i guess i i had direct IP, all those port scanning, virus attacks and crackers trying to zombie my PC, would at very least make me traffic i would have to pay 10 times more than now. And perhaps they will find a hole and infect my PC. So i am not that against the NAT. It is limitaition, but it is saving my money also
So if i purchase Windows - i will make banners.
;)
And if You don't - You would watch my banners. Bid.
Windows is going to be largest advertisement network, and the 1st one to merge p2p with ads.
I wonder, does Billy pay for Windows ? And how he will fill, seeing MacOS banner at the windows of his famouse Digital House ?
Can MySQL AB get InnoDB sources on non-GPL basis ?
Of course Inno can be forked in GPL-only version, but what to do with non-GPL business, when MySQL sells engine for proprietary non-GPL projects ?
This might be a hit, not free projects where GPL is ok.
If anyhow Oracle will harm Inno, will they have only Berkely for transactional databases ? Hmm, MySQL is not very RDBMS still :)
But compare how long it takes to install itself and fixpacks for it...
:-)
I remember installing programs using MSDE - it was loooong!
I'd prefer they used Firebird SQL, that takes seconds to install
One does not buy a Windows, a program.
One buys a right to use the WIndows, perhaps a service from Microsoft.
It is a question if i have a right to re-sell right.
Majority does care.
l #keepcool
If i'd say you're asshole you would be a bit harder to listen for the rest of my words.
For most people emotions are more weightful than logic.
You, personally, would not notice, if i call Your asshole? That's because Your emotion, willing to find the truth is overcoming emotion, unplesance to hear my rude words. But i do not think that would be the same for majority.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.htm
Read this section and the next one. Does it suit You? fine! but not the majority, believe me.
PS: BTW scientists are usually not that fone refined rationale minds.
Many new ideas in hostory met quite wild reaction, when some basics of mainstream were questioned by new ideas. Axioms is what we choose to believe, yes? Since we rarely have time to rejustify axioms, they became a kind of religion to us. Feeling oneself as a part of a big, great Science makes it easy to ignore attacks to yourself, but you might take very personal any attack to the well-knowns of that Science.
In Russia there is a serie of books by Mark Zholondz.
:-)
About cancer, he tooks a number of biology books, counts forces of immune system, and even in ideal scenario, where immune system is not required to deal with diseases, poisons of outer environment, nor old and dead cells of our body - even then immune system would have enough soldiers to defeat only 33% of cancer cells. So there is another enti-cancer system in our bodies.
Perdon my English.
I wonder if some medical student with good knowledge of russian was interested to translate those broshures to English
Microsoft Messenger is already told to use SIP to connect :-)
:-(
Personally i'd like to see at last SIP over XMPP. so my Jabber client would be easily enhanced with VoIP client.
Indeed, let's look out.
Skype is providing analogue to SMS - it is instant messaging.
Microsoft in its Live Server brings together Windows Messenger and NetMeeting.
ICQ 5, basing on it's huge user's base want to prevent them from Skype and adds Push-to-Talk feature.
Free software is somewhere behind yet.
I wish some project designed bridges between XMPP and VoIP.
And i wish VoIP people designed some low-bandwidth codec, that helped free software to talk on bad lines, where only Skype is capable now.
And, of oourse, P2P and roaming must extend both SIP and XMPP protocols. If Jabber server is down, i wish i could to log onto some other server, and let my mates find me with my usual JID.
i have here all the rights to reverse-engineer program, for sole purpose of bugfixing or improvong compatibility with new hardware or software.
Even students can do that: http://www.phystechsoft.com/
I wonder if FAT32 is the only noteciable update in Dr.DOS 8
BTW, does DR DOS or FreeDOS has some scripting like REXX in IBM DOS ?
That might be true if i read MSDN about FAT32. But FAT32 isn't that hard to re-implement using reverse engeneering.
AS: afair Mono has an interpreter, along with x86 JIT.f
-
Afair same is DotGNU.
So it does not make the differences.
Though interpreters of Mono and DotGNU really was made differently www.southern-storm.com.au/download/pnet-engine.pd
"just call us hostile only because we have a different implementation from yours."
i'd put a quote from http://gnu.vlsm.org/projects/dotgnu/pnet.html
--
Do you cooperate with the Mono project?
In April 2002, we added I18N (internationalization) support to Portable.NET, under the usual "GPL plus linking exception" license. We were looking for ways to increase cooperation with Mono, and Mono has a policy of not accepting code under our usual license. As an experiment in co-operation, the DotGNU Steering Committee offered the I18N code to Mono under the X11 license.
Mono did use this code, but contributed very few changes to it. Meanwhile, we did a lot more work on this library, more than doubling its size. So we decided to go back to our standard license for the new version. The original version remains, of course, available under the X11 license.
We were still interested in ways of increasing cooperation with the Mono developers, in ways that would be mutually beneficial to Portable.NET and Mono, and therefore another attempt at establishing cooperation was made in October 2003. This also failed.
got www.DotGNU.org and read PDF about Portable.NET , particularly why the 1st goal is unroller and only after it, maybe, there appears JIT.
.NET from DotGNU - and will get only restricted Compact Framework from Microsoft :-)
Result is that Windows CE may one day get full-featured
I foreseeing myself beeing beaten like the poor Pingu, so i'd like to state:
.NET is good at this, but it is the only major project i know that stated cross-language support as one of its targets.
.NET
.Net implementations will speed-up MS .NET
The opinions expressed here are not mine but of my employer.
Oooohh... Did i really told that. No, the above lines were not my opinion as well.
Now, to be serious, i'd like to put my 2 cents over some points, i often meet around. Some of them are fro mthe article, others are not.
1) We should choose language...
No. We should choose runtime library.
Personally i'd prefer to code in Component Pascal or Borland Pascal rather than C/C#/Java branch. Just because i dislike C look-and-feel. Is it serious? i think everyone will say 'no'.
So the question is about library, it is library functions/objects that developer constructs his program with. And they are at his fingertips' cache. Moving to another library makes him significantly less productive, as he has to think 'what am i to use for my task' or even browse the manual and FAQ and so on.
Let as take MS Visual C++ and Borland C++ Builder - both of them are more-or-less C++ compilers for Win32 - and they are incompatible for any complex app, since they use (and make developer used to) different rtl's.
Let as take GCC with GTK+ and Qt and wxWindows - again, GTK pro will work slow forced to use Qt library.
Broad support for languages is very good for small tasks, such as those, solved by scripting languages. But for serious development ine will need to learn GTK+ - and it will count much less what language does he prefer.
But if we want to support many languages were are to desing RTL the proper way, so that every language will have bridges to the features above Least Common.
For example Class Factories in 90% of cases are workaround for C++ lack of class refernece type and virtual constructor.
So if RTL will make use of them - then for C++ they are to look like some special simple auto-generated Class Factory. And the opposite, such a Class Factory implemented in C++, is to be class reference to a class with virtual constructor for less restricted language.
That is very hard, and usually it is not even atttempted. Usually ether
a> RTL is Least Common for all the language - and is not comfort to any of them, so languages are quickly added with there own libraries and RTL does not guard the cross-language compatibility no more. That is not a choice at all IMHO.
b> RTL is designed for C++ (or any othe language, but oinly sole one). That makes it uncomfort for all the other laguages, hence that main language becomes the only widely used one. This way we only refactor existing GTK and maybe change C++ for some other language. If that is all - does it worth the efforts on refactoring?
IMHO RTL is to be _designed_ for some set of languages agreed before, and is to allow bridges for all the features that are not natively supported in the languages.
I do not say that ECMA
And since GTK+ set of classes might be refactored but will never be abondoned - it might try to become a standard RTL for free
Though i doubt it will, there are alread ycross-platform incompatbile RTL's like Apacje's one and Mozilla's one (mostly at middle level of applications), as well as GTK and Qt (mostly as UI level of applications).
Will GTK.NET or whatever be fine and be the 1st one - it will become standard de facto, otherwise i see no chance to have one standard RTL, when we alread yahs a lot of competing ones now - will any of them want to die? only some new Terra can be base for standard RTL.
2> Free
I can't agree. Do projects like WinE and Odin spped-up Win32 ?
I think it is quite the opposite!
While projects like DotGNU and Mono are weak - the real programs are designed over MS new ideas and DotGNU and Mono are eternal step-behind compatibility layers
There is also LEGPL (GPL with Linking Excpetions), that will easy constraints. But i do not talk of those.
I tell the user - install this library, i even give him extra CD with that library, sources and so one - by the price of CD-R blank.
After that he installs my app, thal loads that DLL library, which is (from the app's point of view) was already pre-installed on PC.
So, my app do not contain the library, they are shipped separately. My ap is not derived - it does not contain single bit of library. You can run it without library, though functionality will be reduced to, say, sonme presentation.
User is not to accept GPL, since it is not EULA, but even he has - he's done nothing wrong.
Who is violating GPL, and where exactly ?
One more example - i install WinAmp or WindowsCommander - and add GPL plugin into it.
Does it turn WinAmp or WinCmd into derived work, has i to request sources of those ?
He-he.
Soooo, intel is trying to make subtle and silent the fact about 64bit computing.
:-)
I think it is good.
What will think John the Customer seeing "IA32e" ? He's taught that "number does matter", so he think that nop 64 bit is there. And just want someone to proove he is genios, making this conclusion himself.
So AMD PR is to help him feel himself supermind - and then he will start showting about lack of 64 in intel at every street.
And intel will have shout 'we have 64 too' - and no more silence.
PS: i wish there be Opteron DoubleThreading.
Maybe slots, like 1st athlons and P2 were.
Socket gives 2 memory feeds and 2 HT feeds.
Let ceramic case has 2 chips within, connected by inner HT wire. And then let each of them has one outer memory wire and one outer peripherals wire
l-Zip - isn't it the archiver You've been looking for? :-D
GPL is against static linking of GPL and not-GPL libraries into one same executable binary file.
But novadys, in word of DLL and SO - what can stop my proprietary software from using GPL code ?
I think this war has not point at half of flames.
"personal bar" -> "true time scale progress bar"
joe-schmoe, ant tillie, Joe Sixpack....
There is need for one more pattern: "Eric-the-Troll, Half-Brained"
A kind of a person who
1.a) Thinks computer is a dumb piece of shift, so he won't spend time learning its ways
1.b) Thinks that the computer is genious and any software is RealTime-aware so there is no excuse if there is no personal bar.
2.a) Don't want tremote computer accept it's printing jobs right out of the box, with no single second spent for setup.
2.b) Would be angry after that remote box will also accepts jobs from all the rest PCs in the building.
3.a) Will be angry about issues in alpha-verions like Fedora
3.b) Will kill anyone who will tell them to use some stable release that is 2-days obsolete, and if You will dare to say that some bleeding-edge hald-constucted software kit will be to complex to their superminds
4.a) will not be ever able to understand the inners of CUPS and compile it from sources and install without 'make'
4.b) when any trouble , they dare to know the work 'CUPS' and will annoy CUPS developersm not distro-maker
Thouse hypocriths are not to be dealt with hackers.
CUPS team was to slap Eric-the-troll with a bit stick and through him to the RedHat support team.
If You are user - do not use alpha-versions.
If You are user - you must noi know the word 'Linux' at all.
You must know that You're runnoing RedHat Fedora, or SuSE, or Knoppix, or Alt or whatever - and forward Yourq questions to those you paid for distro.
If Ypu're hacker, playing with alpha toys and is proud that you know the word 'CUPS' and where there developers can be found - then be hacker and be humble and polite and reasonable as a hacker.
Bu when You're riding to different horses at itime - You will (and must!) be tored apart by them.
Bill Gates
Business at the speed of thought.
It was not so expressive there, of course
Does Corbis *sell* the technology ? i think no.
:-)
If Adobe compromised there PDF-pseudoprotection in court, their are compromising the stuff they sell. And yet they did.
What's wrong with Corbis.
Also 95% of people in our brave old world does not like thining, since it's hurts sometimes.
And they will believe in any Oprah-blessed nonsense, even about absolutely unbreakable software, that was cracked by malicious vandal.