Unics, Unix, UNIX, unix, posix, bsd, linux, minix, plan9, etc. They all come from the same basic design philosophy, and it is a very good starting point, simple, clean, wonderful.
Then you want applications to run on it. Then you get performance issues. Then you get security issues. Then you get new types of peripherals. Then you get new types of processors and memory architectures. Then it shrinks to be a raspberry PI, then it grows to be massively parallel and fill a room.
After all that, tell me again about what mistakes you are not going to make.
The chemical process for producing Polaroid film, or any film for that matter, is an ecological chemical nightmare. Digital image sensors are currently better than *any* polaroid film and don't spew acids and solvents into theearth for each picture taken. Oh, and yes, digital is practically free on a per picture basis.
Historically, there's been things like the original Andrew filesystem module: a standard filesystem that really wasn't written for Linux in the first place, and just implements a UNIX filesystem. Is that derived just because it got ported to Linux that had a reasonably similar VFS interface to what other UNIXes did? Personally, I didn't feel that I could make that judgment call. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but it clearly is a gray area.
Personally, I think that case wasn't a derived work, and I was willing to tell the AFS guys so.
ZFS was clearly developed for a different operating system, and I don't think Linus would care. If he does, I'd like to see something he has written on the subject.
Unless there is a copyright holder with reason and "standing" to sue, there is no violation.
One of the problems the creationists and the anti-science anti-global warming people exploit is that complex scientific theories (not conjecture, BTW) can be difficult to understand and often require familiarization with a wide range of other validated scientific theories. The process of evolution is a fact. Its a done deal. Everything we find in the fossil record is also found in the DNA of a species. We can claim to know things with a degree of certitude that would be hard to defend to people who DON'T understand carbon dating, DNA, thermodynamics, etc.
Debating the "strengths and weaknesses," particularly of global warming and evolution, require a degree of education that I don't believe a high school science teacher would have.
Consider that hundreds of years ago, most common people could not read or write. It was not necessary for survival. They could speak a language and that was all that was necessary. Reading and writing became necessary. Now, most common people can read and write. That doesn't mean that they will be doing it professionally.
Maybe a better analogy is advanced maths. 99% of people need only to add, subtract, multiply, and divide. Most people live quite well without calculus. We teach advanced maths in our schools so that familiarization of the concepts will expose those with talent to see their potential. CS will work the same way. Some people will have talent and some won't. Those who don't will stop taking CS after "Introduction to CS"
An "engineer" is someone who "engineers," i.e. performs engineering. The guys who design dialog boxes and make things attractive, while quite valuable, are not "engineering." The guys who design stuff like motor control software, who use math and science to develop their algorithms and can "prove" their algorithm logically, they are "engineering" a solution and thus are "engineers."
Like all false choices, the "some are and some aren't" rule always works.
You need two raspberry PI2B computers, dynamic dns, and openvpn.
Dynamc DNS service to tack B side ip addresses OpenVPN to create the VPN Leave the VPN on all the time using the raspberryPIs ip route add 192.168.2.0/24 via 192.168.1.100
(assumes your A side raspberrypi is.100, and your net is 192.168.1.0 and their net is.2.0)
If you can't port-forward VPN through your ISP, you can fool it by "router hole punching"
I really enjoy Lawrence Krauss, and Richard Dawkins, and, alas, Christopher Hitchens etc. I am an "anti-theist" and someone who has absolutely no belief in god. That being said, I have spoken at my wfe's church, cooked for their dinners, and was friends with the last pastor. He and I accepted that we had no common ground in the spiritual world, but we both agreed that community is good, and that creating friends and being good friends and neighbours is good. How could that not be? I stood up in front of the church and said I was an Atheist and that I enjoyed the community. I got applause. This is a true story.
Lawrence, Richard, an others obviously need to continue the Atheism work that they do, but they also need to understand that this was a HUGE movement by the catholic church. HUGE. The pope is a chemist. A scientist. If you judge this pope by his words and his actions, he may be the sort of man that can lead a sizeable portion of the world population in a better direction.
I think "Atheism" and "Climate Change" are separate. If this pope did not do enough, reach out. He isn't the nazi-youth that was there previously, this is a man trained in chemistry and seems earnest. I think this is the best chance science and a major religion have ever had to work together to address a real problem facing human kind. Rather than snipe at the pope for not going far enough, holy shit guys, 1 billion people claim to listen to this guy, convince him to do better.
Hundreds of years ago, both parties would choose their best man, and it wold be settled on the field of battle. No appeal. Just think about how much less corporate malfeasance there would be if CEOs and board members had to defend themselves with a broad sword.
C++ is a VERY powerful system, but it is too much. The C language has 90% of what you need. Any non-trivial C application will end up re-implementing basic features in C++. The problem comes when C++ becomes, in the eyes of its developers, its own language. If used as "C with classes," many of the problematic issues are gone.
All that being said, bad developers will find a way to write bad code.
They have been doing this with sound for some time. Radio is just faster. (Yes, I know that is WAY oversimplified). At radio frequencies, any electrical engineer will tell you there is no such thing as digital. The edge of a square wave is not perfectly straight. It is a noisy curve based on the impedance of the circuit and the current used to drive the transition. There is inductance and capacitance in every conveyance of electricity. In a "clean" circuit, the effect of this parasitic L/C is either negligible or compensated for.
A radio antenna is, by definition, an analog part which electrically resembles a coil with some capacitance . So even the title misleading. The fact that they can us algorithms to control the digital signal in such a way that the antenna will smooth it out into a radio wave is kind of cool, but it isn't a crazy breakthrough. You can see almost every computer on a spectrum analyzer as radio wave source. This is just a neat trick, like getting the line printer to sound like music by sending the right stuff to print.
Just saying, "anyone can write code, be careful" gets you out of a lot of trouble. Saying "We've checked these and they are good" buys you a lot of headaches. That's the first problem. Who's going to test the extensions? Who's going to be liable when a "tested" extension is malware? It WILL happen, you know it. Who is going to maintain the cert?
No user work-around? That's pure insanity. What happens when a vendor says "This is too much trouble, we can afford to support firefox anymore," their customers will have to switch browsers.
Lastly, having any group of people dictating what others can do is against the whole notion of free and open source software. I have absolutely no problem popping up a dialog that says, "This extension has not been tested by the Mozilla Organization, Proceed at your own risk," but not even having that option is totally and completely bogus.
Dropbox had a great claim, originally, that your data was secure not even "dropbox" could see it. Well, it turned out that was a lie.
The bigger issue is privacy protection. If I upload non-public information to one of these services, which one can I trust to keep that private? If there is no clear answer, then price is the only differentiator. Who's going to protect your privacy when presented with an NSL? Answer: no one. After that, who cares?
I believe that if a storage company wants to stand out and charge a premium, it needs to hire lawyers, a lot of them, to defend the rights of its customers. When you store your data on your property, you are protected by the 4th amendment, the warrant requirement, and the legal right to a defense, when you store your data in the cloud, you have little, if any, protection, and the service provider has no duty to protect your data from government requests.
Criminals, lawyers, and the general public have the same needs. If you can't protect criminals, you can't protect the general public. Data storage has never been about the bits. It has always been about the meta requirements: security, longevity, recoverability, and yes, cost. The google/amazon threat is about cost, what about the other requirements?
Tech companies want to make sure the Zuckerbergs make a gazillion dollars, but tech wages get driven down. 501(C) organization like FWD.us are all about getting "immigration reform" which includes a lot more H1B, which means you distort the intellectual capital market by bringing in more workers and thus driving down pay. Why pay money to an american with school loans when you can lobby government to get someone who can work for less as an H1B serf.
Paying kids is a new twist on this game. So, why even pay people who have careers, lets pay our employees even less by hiring children?
It is a race to the bottom, and make no mistake, it is so the rich can get richer. I don't want to sound like an "occupy wall street" loony, but don't workers deserve reward for their work just as much as industrialists. 40 years ago, CEOs only made a few hundred times more than their average employee, and that was scandalous.
These guys complain about the "economy," but that facts are clear, the U.S. economy was better when we had more wealth distribution, stronger unions, and a growing middle class. They want us to be China, and unless we figure out how to stop it, we will be.
So you're a Mohawk and you think it would be a good gesture for the European aggressors to make up for the centuries of genocide by... not calling a football team the Redskins?
It would be a fantastic start for the "European aggressors" to stop thinking of the indigenous peoples as something other than mascots, yes. Once they realize the blood they spilled taking this continent from its rightful owners was, in fact, human blood, the blood of people, they may be more humane.
Yea, Mohawk. LOL. Seriously, the French call themselves French, being "European" is fairly a new thing.
The Mohawk are part of the Iroquois which is huge number for tribes from Canada down to Florida on the east coast who share a basic language. The Lakota are in the midwestern USA in the dakotas and Sioux is probably the tribe you know best. There were over 500 different nations with a population more than twice Europe before Columbus came here. It wasn't until the white's diseases came here that decimated the indigenous populations.
Remember what the "black death" did to europe in the 1350s, the diseases the white man brought to this continent did about the same to its population. In europe every one got it at roughly the same time, so no invaders could capitalize on it. The indigenous people of this continent were not so lucky.
My great grandfather was Mohawk. I typically say I'm part Mohawk, not indian or native American.
What is going on is the idea that a race of people were/are in the process of genocide against the native population of a continent for over 500 years. The whites have dehumanized the various peoples to the point where individual customs and ways are nothing more than trendy new-age fads. Rather than a proud people, the whites depict them as mascots and comic book characters. When they take offense to being dehumanized, they are told to get over it.
The whites did not win the Americas (stupid name), it was the european diseases that did. If the natives were not in decline because of new diseases, the europeans would never have token hold. The whites merely capitalized on continent wide pandemic that they brought here.
So, if the people who had democratic representation and centralized trade routes BEFORE the magna carta, whos only offense is being in the way of white european aggression, say stop dehumanizing them, maybe it would be a good gesture.
From the fate of other 'search' companies (some of which were very good), I'd say the board at FAST were correct - and that you're the idiot.
So, you are saying, two competing companies doing about the same thing. One quits the business, the other goes on to be HUGELY successful, and I'm the idiot for calling the quitting company's manegement idiots? Sorry Bjorn and Larvik screwed the pooch and killed a potentially golden goose.
Google isn't a multi-billion dollar company because they're exceedingly good at search - they're a multi-billion dollar company that's exceedingly good at delivering advertisements (only a fraction of which are on their search pages).
You may have missed what I wrote: "Google sells ads, nothing else even comes close on their books."
In 1999 Fast Search and Transfer was neck and neck with google for speed, volume, and accuracy. The board at FAST were idiots and said there was no money in search and basically stopped trying and let google win.
What I learned in this time is that Google was no better than FAST, and is no better than any other company. They won because viable competition walked away. Google's only real innovation was thier revenue model. Right now, Google has BILLIONS to toss at projects. We hear about a LOT of successful or nearly successful projects, but how many failures are there that we never hear about? Its easy to be innovative when you are grossly profitable.
For any "hiring practice" to be better than any other, you need to *prove* that the cost of labor compared to productivity (innovation, etc.) that is directly related to revenue has a better ratio than that in other companies. Frankly, I don't see it. Google sells ads, nothing else even comes close on their books.
Google is just the Microsoft of the late '80 and early '90s. A pundit's darling, a fictional yardstick by which the ignorant measure what they don't understand.
Slashdot Mirror
Unics, Unix, UNIX, unix, posix, bsd, linux, minix, plan9, etc. They all come from the same basic design philosophy, and it is a very good starting point, simple, clean, wonderful.
Then you want applications to run on it. Then you get performance issues. Then you get security issues. Then you get new types of peripherals. Then you get new types of processors and memory architectures. Then it shrinks to be a raspberry PI, then it grows to be massively parallel and fill a room.
After all that, tell me again about what mistakes you are not going to make.
The chemical process for producing Polaroid film, or any film for that matter, is an ecological chemical nightmare. Digital image sensors are currently better than *any* polaroid film and don't spew acids and solvents into theearth for each picture taken. Oh, and yes, digital is practically free on a per picture basis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Historically, there's been things like the original Andrew filesystem
module: a standard filesystem that really wasn't written for Linux in the
first place, and just implements a UNIX filesystem. Is that derived just
because it got ported to Linux that had a reasonably similar VFS interface
to what other UNIXes did? Personally, I didn't feel that I could make that
judgment call. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but it clearly is a gray
area.
Personally, I think that case wasn't a derived work, and I was willing to
tell the AFS guys so.
http://yarchive.net/comp/linux...
ZFS was clearly developed for a different operating system, and I don't think Linus would care. If he does, I'd like to see something he has written on the subject.
Unless there is a copyright holder with reason and "standing" to sue, there is no violation.
One of the problems the creationists and the anti-science anti-global warming people exploit is that complex scientific theories (not conjecture, BTW) can be difficult to understand and often require familiarization with a wide range of other validated scientific theories. The process of evolution is a fact. Its a done deal. Everything we find in the fossil record is also found in the DNA of a species. We can claim to know things with a degree of certitude that would be hard to defend to people who DON'T understand carbon dating, DNA, thermodynamics, etc.
Debating the "strengths and weaknesses," particularly of global warming and evolution, require a degree of education that I don't believe a high school science teacher would have.
Until which time it is just like Microsoft Pen Computing for Windows.
Consider that hundreds of years ago, most common people could not read or write. It was not necessary for survival. They could speak a language and that was all that was necessary. Reading and writing became necessary. Now, most common people can read and write. That doesn't mean that they will be doing it professionally.
Maybe a better analogy is advanced maths. 99% of people need only to add, subtract, multiply, and divide. Most people live quite well without calculus. We teach advanced maths in our schools so that familiarization of the concepts will expose those with talent to see their potential. CS will work the same way. Some people will have talent and some won't. Those who don't will stop taking CS after "Introduction to CS"
Backups suck! tape sucks, raid has "backed up data" but is not, it itself, a backup.
The ONLY real and reliable backup is deduplicated off-site replication, ala something like "Actifio."
An "engineer" is someone who "engineers," i.e. performs engineering. The guys who design dialog boxes and make things attractive, while quite valuable, are not "engineering." The guys who design stuff like motor control software, who use math and science to develop their algorithms and can "prove" their algorithm logically, they are "engineering" a solution and thus are "engineers."
Like all false choices, the "some are and some aren't" rule always works.
https://copyright.cornell.edu/...
You need two raspberry PI2B computers, dynamic dns, and openvpn.
Dynamc DNS service to tack B side ip addresses
OpenVPN to create the VPN
Leave the VPN on all the time using the raspberryPIs
ip route add 192.168.2.0/24 via 192.168.1.100
(assumes your A side raspberrypi is .100, and your net is 192.168.1.0 and their net is .2.0)
If you can't port-forward VPN through your ISP, you can fool it by "router hole punching"
I really enjoy Lawrence Krauss, and Richard Dawkins, and, alas, Christopher Hitchens etc. I am an "anti-theist" and someone who has absolutely no belief in god. That being said, I have spoken at my wfe's church, cooked for their dinners, and was friends with the last pastor. He and I accepted that we had no common ground in the spiritual world, but we both agreed that community is good, and that creating friends and being good friends and neighbours is good. How could that not be? I stood up in front of the church and said I was an Atheist and that I enjoyed the community. I got applause. This is a true story.
Lawrence, Richard, an others obviously need to continue the Atheism work that they do, but they also need to understand that this was a HUGE movement by the catholic church. HUGE. The pope is a chemist. A scientist. If you judge this pope by his words and his actions, he may be the sort of man that can lead a sizeable portion of the world population in a better direction.
I think "Atheism" and "Climate Change" are separate. If this pope did not do enough, reach out. He isn't the nazi-youth that was there previously, this is a man trained in chemistry and seems earnest. I think this is the best chance science and a major religion have ever had to work together to address a real problem facing human kind. Rather than snipe at the pope for not going far enough, holy shit guys, 1 billion people claim to listen to this guy, convince him to do better.
Hundreds of years ago, both parties would choose their best man, and it wold be settled on the field of battle. No appeal. Just think about how much less corporate malfeasance there would be if CEOs and board members had to defend themselves with a broad sword.
C++ is a VERY powerful system, but it is too much. The C language has 90% of what you need. Any non-trivial C application will end up re-implementing basic features in C++. The problem comes when C++ becomes, in the eyes of its developers, its own language. If used as "C with classes," many of the problematic issues are gone.
All that being said, bad developers will find a way to write bad code.
You want to produce power with clothing? Just bring back cheap polyester clothing. The static discharge alone would power an iWatch.
Yes, lets call it an iWatch just to piss off apple marketing and branding idiots.
They have been doing this with sound for some time. Radio is just faster. (Yes, I know that is WAY oversimplified). At radio frequencies, any electrical engineer will tell you there is no such thing as digital. The edge of a square wave is not perfectly straight. It is a noisy curve based on the impedance of the circuit and the current used to drive the transition. There is inductance and capacitance in every conveyance of electricity. In a "clean" circuit, the effect of this parasitic L/C is either negligible or compensated for.
A radio antenna is, by definition, an analog part which electrically resembles a coil with some capacitance . So even the title misleading. The fact that they can us algorithms to control the digital signal in such a way that the antenna will smooth it out into a radio wave is kind of cool, but it isn't a crazy breakthrough. You can see almost every computer on a spectrum analyzer as radio wave source. This is just a neat trick, like getting the line printer to sound like music by sending the right stuff to print.
Just saying, "anyone can write code, be careful" gets you out of a lot of trouble. Saying "We've checked these and they are good" buys you a lot of headaches. That's the first problem. Who's going to test the extensions? Who's going to be liable when a "tested" extension is malware? It WILL happen, you know it. Who is going to maintain the cert?
No user work-around? That's pure insanity. What happens when a vendor says "This is too much trouble, we can afford to support firefox anymore," their customers will have to switch browsers.
Lastly, having any group of people dictating what others can do is against the whole notion of free and open source software. I have absolutely no problem popping up a dialog that says, "This extension has not been tested by the Mozilla Organization, Proceed at your own risk," but not even having that option is totally and completely bogus.
Time to fork.
Dropbox had a great claim, originally, that your data was secure not even "dropbox" could see it. Well, it turned out that was a lie.
The bigger issue is privacy protection. If I upload non-public information to one of these services, which one can I trust to keep that private? If there is no clear answer, then price is the only differentiator. Who's going to protect your privacy when presented with an NSL? Answer: no one. After that, who cares?
I believe that if a storage company wants to stand out and charge a premium, it needs to hire lawyers, a lot of them, to defend the rights of its customers. When you store your data on your property, you are protected by the 4th amendment, the warrant requirement, and the legal right to a defense, when you store your data in the cloud, you have little, if any, protection, and the service provider has no duty to protect your data from government requests.
Criminals, lawyers, and the general public have the same needs. If you can't protect criminals, you can't protect the general public. Data storage has never been about the bits. It has always been about the meta requirements: security, longevity, recoverability, and yes, cost. The google/amazon threat is about cost, what about the other requirements?
Tech companies want to make sure the Zuckerbergs make a gazillion dollars, but tech wages get driven down. 501(C) organization like FWD.us are all about getting "immigration reform" which includes a lot more H1B, which means you distort the intellectual capital market by bringing in more workers and thus driving down pay. Why pay money to an american with school loans when you can lobby government to get someone who can work for less as an H1B serf.
Paying kids is a new twist on this game. So, why even pay people who have careers, lets pay our employees even less by hiring children?
It is a race to the bottom, and make no mistake, it is so the rich can get richer. I don't want to sound like an "occupy wall street" loony, but don't workers deserve reward for their work just as much as industrialists. 40 years ago, CEOs only made a few hundred times more than their average employee, and that was scandalous.
These guys complain about the "economy," but that facts are clear, the U.S. economy was better when we had more wealth distribution, stronger unions, and a growing middle class. They want us to be China, and unless we figure out how to stop it, we will be.
It needs to be a complete phone with all the bells and whistles, just with a small screen.
Extra credit, it should plug into a bigger display for things like maps, chat, pictures, and email.
So you're a Mohawk and you think it would be a good gesture for the European aggressors to make up for the centuries of genocide by... not calling a football team the Redskins?
It would be a fantastic start for the "European aggressors" to stop thinking of the indigenous peoples as something other than mascots, yes. Once they realize the blood they spilled taking this continent from its rightful owners was, in fact, human blood, the blood of people, they may be more humane.
Yea, Mohawk. LOL. Seriously, the French call themselves French, being "European" is fairly a new thing.
The Mohawk are part of the Iroquois which is huge number for tribes from Canada down to Florida on the east coast who share a basic language. The Lakota are in the midwestern USA in the dakotas and Sioux is probably the tribe you know best. There were over 500 different nations with a population more than twice Europe before Columbus came here. It wasn't until the white's diseases came here that decimated the indigenous populations.
Remember what the "black death" did to europe in the 1350s, the diseases the white man brought to this continent did about the same to its population. In europe every one got it at roughly the same time, so no invaders could capitalize on it. The indigenous people of this continent were not so lucky.
My great grandfather was Mohawk. I typically say I'm part Mohawk, not indian or native American.
What is going on is the idea that a race of people were/are in the process of genocide against the native population of a continent for over 500 years. The whites have dehumanized the various peoples to the point where individual customs and ways are nothing more than trendy new-age fads. Rather than a proud people, the whites depict them as mascots and comic book characters. When they take offense to being dehumanized, they are told to get over it.
The whites did not win the Americas (stupid name), it was the european diseases that did. If the natives were not in decline because of new diseases, the europeans would never have token hold. The whites merely capitalized on continent wide pandemic that they brought here.
So, if the people who had democratic representation and centralized trade routes BEFORE the magna carta, whos only offense is being in the way of white european aggression, say stop dehumanizing them, maybe it would be a good gesture.
From the fate of other 'search' companies (some of which were very good), I'd say the board at FAST were correct - and that you're the idiot.
So, you are saying, two competing companies doing about the same thing. One quits the business, the other goes on to be HUGELY successful, and I'm the idiot for calling the quitting company's manegement idiots? Sorry Bjorn and Larvik screwed the pooch and killed a potentially golden goose.
Google isn't a multi-billion dollar company because they're exceedingly good at search - they're a multi-billion dollar company that's exceedingly good at delivering advertisements (only a fraction of which are on their search pages).
You may have missed what I wrote: "Google sells ads, nothing else even comes close on their books."
In 1999 Fast Search and Transfer was neck and neck with google for speed, volume, and accuracy. The board at FAST were idiots and said there was no money in search and basically stopped trying and let google win.
What I learned in this time is that Google was no better than FAST, and is no better than any other company. They won because viable competition walked away. Google's only real innovation was thier revenue model. Right now, Google has BILLIONS to toss at projects. We hear about a LOT of successful or nearly successful projects, but how many failures are there that we never hear about? Its easy to be innovative when you are grossly profitable.
For any "hiring practice" to be better than any other, you need to *prove* that the cost of labor compared to productivity (innovation, etc.) that is directly related to revenue has a better ratio than that in other companies. Frankly, I don't see it. Google sells ads, nothing else even comes close on their books.
Google is just the Microsoft of the late '80 and early '90s. A pundit's darling, a fictional yardstick by which the ignorant measure what they don't understand.