To note that in most IP parsing libraries (or at least the ones I'm familiar with) 1.1.1.1 can be also expressed as 1.1 (if less than four numbers the last number is interpreted on as many bits are left till 32). So you can now be cool and ping 1.1 or dig google.com @1.1., making the old favourite, 8.8.8.8, quite a mouthful in comparison.
I'd expect someone reporting on IETF standards to know that "Internet Standard" is a different maturity level that "Proposed Standard". I get that "proposed standard" sounds less definitive for someone not used with the lingo, but surely one could have come with a different expression.
Same here. I am apalled that this criticism doesn't feature more frequently in G+ games reviews. Having 3rd party developers have full information about my account and contacts was the main reason I ditched my FB account. I'd be okay if some features required extra permissions (like friends leaderoboard and so on), I'd even be willing to show the game a particular circle of friends, but not like this.
This and the "identity service, not social networking" thing are the two major letdowns from this service. And I think i can imagine the tsunami of cash pushing on the other side, so my hopes are really low.
Some of the stuff, yes. All of the stuff? Next to impossible.
I've been online "only" for about 13 years. Most of these years I posted on the mailing lists of a local Linux community. In time I ended up the administrator of the services and mailing lists, and I've tried for years to gather a complete archive of all the emails, a task that has so far proven impossible ( a couple of server crashes and upgrades, nobody with such an extensive personal email archive, so on). Bits and pieces are still there (one of the lists was archived on mail-archive.com for a while, other things have been cross-posted, so on).
So yeah, there are a lot of stupid (and some smart) things that I said out there, but I'm absolutely positive I can't gather everything, as much as I'd try.
Come on, at least try to read the whole phrase before moaning. It says it would revolutionize our views on Meditations on First Philosophy. It's not the digital age, it's the Twitter age:-(
Well, kill-ing with SIGCHLD the zombie parents is more efficient and elegant, usually.
The first rule of kill -9 is that you should not use kill -9 in the first place.
Maybe it's because I'm not a native English speaker, but this sounds very much like redundancy (I think the correct grammatical term is "tautology"), probably induced by some so-called SEO expert: "screw common sense, just toss in the keyword 'video' as much as possible".
I'd like to point out that long before xkcd there was userfriendly, and that in my circle we still like to and this sort of joke by saying "magnets" and giggle. The "Edward Lorenz, the butterfly and the chaos theory" punchline seems a bit forced (unless you go for the 'M-x butterfly' twist to make the emacs guy get the attention;) )
Actually a mirror doesn't add any information, it just reflects photons:)
So even for perfect parallel mirrors, at best you'll be able to trap photons that move perfectly perpendicular to them (and keep for a finite period of time others which are close).
IMO the only possible perfect simulation of the Universe that would be contained in it is the Universe itself, anything other would have less entropy by definition so it won't be a perfect simulation.
Going to RTFA now, because the first part actually seems to be interesting.
Benchmarks dude, I would like to know what you are running to take a 25gb dvd into your pc using ANY cable (usb, firewire...) I would like to see that happen in 30 seconds...pls show me the proof.
I can do it in 5 seconds, without a cable! It's a special technology called "DVD tray":)
This would have been just a 'me too' post, but you made me aware that there are follow-ups to the novel, thanks!
To be on-topic, I'd be more interested in a technology that can shorten sleep times in grown-ups (specifically me), although I'd probably waste the new time on late night pr0n:)
Here's one. Actually I know his name as the guy appearing from time to time in a balloon in XKCD comics, with the cape and glasses. What's the joke or reference? I didn't bother to search.
I think I did read one of his short stories once but it didn't leave a mark or make me look for more of his writings. My memory has him filed under "internet celebrities, bloggers and web2.0 pundits" not under "SF authors".
Ms. LeGuin is definitely under the latter label, as well as a lot of other SF giants like Heinlein, Clarke, Asimov, Herbert, Dick, et. al., not to mention a lot of more obscure authors of various nationalities which I've enjoyed and actively sought both online and offline.
To end in a similar tone: ms. LeGuin is a SF author, mr. Doctorow is a blogger:) (at least to me).
Theoretically it's doable, once you have the TLD, you can have whatever you want in that zone.
However most (all?) resolvers out there when being confronted with a hostname with no dots in in assume it needs to be qualified an try appending the entries specified in the search domain list. They'll probably try it as a TLD only after exhausting the alternatives. BTW, nothing prevents using your fancy TLDs in your private network, just declare them in your nameserver.
Oh, and I've not even touched how some browsers default to some non-dns interpretations of "bare words". Try putting "coryking" in the location bar in Firefox and you'll be taken straight to google without even trying any of the DNS stuff I mentioned above.
Agreed, but this is different from the attitude of "poor them, all that work without getting paid".
Also, most OSS licenses have restrictions on the kind of bundling one can do between free and non-free components, so they need to be really careful to fully own what they're trying to sell, otherwise there might be a lot of other people entitled to a place at that table.
I'm not saying Mozilla is incorrect in this, I was just making a point regarding your pretty broad statement. Also I'm a happy Iceweasel user for about two years, I am interested in this only because it might redraw the fine line between proprietary and OSS interests.
Debian is a community organized around making a free operating system. One of its main tenets is the lack of restrictions for its users, and so far is has achieved two somewhat contradicting feats: biggest number of packages and biggest number of supported architectures.
Ubuntu chose to optimize a part of Debian (a subset of packages, the main architectures) to produce a marketable distribution. How profitable this approach is, remains to be seen.
What I'd like to point out is that the much larger "market" of Debian is totally non-profitable and thus reachable only by means of voluntary work. I'm still amazed by the number of languages Debian is translated in, and I believe for a number of them it's the only OS translated, because it's not profitable to invest money in translating your software for a population of a few thousand souls.
Yet again, re-reading your previous comment, we probably have different definitions for "success". I'd like you to think what "success" means for Unicef or Greenpeace or WWF or other non-profit organizations. Not everything in this world revolves around money, you know...
Do you think they should give us all this software, dedicate all their hours of time, spend their own money for development hardware and testing and various bits that go along with making a software package...
And not get paid?
Well, yes, if they claim the product to be free software.
You see, most of the development and testing man-hours were not paid by them, were donated by members of the community, in exchange for the promise that the end-product would be freely shared as well. I'm not a lawyer, but the way I understand free software licences, it works like this: the founder of the project chooses one (or more) licenses for it and then invites people to contribute, basically saying "It's ok to send me your work, see, there are some restrictions on what I or someone else does with it". At least that's what I have in mind when sending bugs or patches to different OSS projects, no matter who leads them.
So while I agree with the second part, that manufacturers should not be held liable for the stupidity of their users, I'm pretty sure that a openness promise should be respected, meaning that money/work ratio should be propagated across the whole chain, not just "the last mile".
In even simpler words: just as well as you should be allowed to sell your own work, you shouldn't try to sell what you got for free.
Don't nitpick, please, I'm not a lawyer and not a native speaker, so there might be some detail lost in translation, I hope I got my point across.
I know you are just trying to make a point, but I hope that deep down you realise that Debian is not a company and it's a fundamentally non-profit organization, right?
A man-in-the-middle attack was described in "Count of Monte Cristo" (purposeful fake information caused a stock crash and the bancruptcy of a particular villain).
I wonder if they have done any work with time-compression on this audio generation technique, so people could produce a X minute audio clip every Y minutes, could be handy to listen to a 5 minute track every day to get a quick outline of how a day went.
That's why graphs are for. In less than a second you can inspect a graph and locate right away the moment of trouble.
The continuous sound is ok for identifying wrong patterns as they occur, most likely before the machine-detectable patterns already come through your e-mail or rss or mobile or pager or seat-embedded-tazers or whatever alerting technique you use. But to listen for the sound of the whole day of my network's feng shui takes too damn long.
Not to mention that the compressed 'normal' sound probably would sound different than the live status sound I'm used to.
A picture (graph) is worth a thousand words (sounds), right?
Slashdot Mirror
1.1.1.1 can be also expressed as 1.1
And by 1.1.1.1 I meant 1.0.0.1, of course, and why does Slashdot still not allow comment editing?
Nah. it's valid. If you have the IP routed to your device, there are ways to listen and respond on it.
To note that in most IP parsing libraries (or at least the ones I'm familiar with) 1.1.1.1 can be also expressed as 1.1 (if less than four numbers the last number is interpreted on as many bits are left till 32). So you can now be cool and ping 1.1 or dig google.com @1.1., making the old favourite, 8.8.8.8, quite a mouthful in comparison.
I'd expect someone reporting on IETF standards to know that "Internet Standard" is a different maturity level that "Proposed Standard". I get that "proposed standard" sounds less definitive for someone not used with the lingo, but surely one could have come with a different expression.
I am reading the Baroque Cycle these days, it made me extremely giddy to recognize the context of the book :)
Same here. I am apalled that this criticism doesn't feature more frequently in G+ games reviews. Having 3rd party developers have full information about my account and contacts was the main reason I ditched my FB account. I'd be okay if some features required extra permissions (like friends leaderoboard and so on), I'd even be willing to show the game a particular circle of friends, but not like this.
This and the "identity service, not social networking" thing are the two major letdowns from this service. And I think i can imagine the tsunami of cash pushing on the other side, so my hopes are really low.
"Do no evil" my foot.
Some of the stuff, yes. All of the stuff? Next to impossible.
I've been online "only" for about 13 years. Most of these years I posted on the mailing lists of a local Linux community. In time I ended up the administrator of the services and mailing lists, and I've tried for years to gather a complete archive of all the emails, a task that has so far proven impossible ( a couple of server crashes and upgrades, nobody with such an extensive personal email archive, so on). Bits and pieces are still there (one of the lists was archived on mail-archive.com for a while, other things have been cross-posted, so on).
So yeah, there are a lot of stupid (and some smart) things that I said out there, but I'm absolutely positive I can't gather everything, as much as I'd try.
Come on, at least try to read the whole phrase before moaning. It says it would revolutionize our views on Meditations on First Philosophy. It's not the digital age, it's the Twitter age :-(
Well, kill-ing with SIGCHLD the zombie parents is more efficient and elegant, usually. The first rule of kill -9 is that you should not use kill -9 in the first place.
Maybe it's because I'm not a native English speaker, but this sounds very much like redundancy (I think the correct grammatical term is "tautology"), probably induced by some so-called SEO expert: "screw common sense, just toss in the keyword 'video' as much as possible".
I'd like to point out that long before xkcd there was userfriendly, and that in my circle we still like to and this sort of joke by saying "magnets" and giggle. The "Edward Lorenz, the butterfly and the chaos theory" punchline seems a bit forced (unless you go for the 'M-x butterfly' twist to make the emacs guy get the attention ;) )
Actually a mirror doesn't add any information, it just reflects photons :)
So even for perfect parallel mirrors, at best you'll be able to trap photons that move perfectly perpendicular to them (and keep for a finite period of time others which are close).
IMO the only possible perfect simulation of the Universe that would be contained in it is the Universe itself, anything other would have less entropy by definition so it won't be a perfect simulation.
Going to RTFA now, because the first part actually seems to be interesting.
I think his point was "... and most likely, neither do you, so quit acting like you do".
There were films made? Interesting, I loved the book.
Benchmarks dude, I would like to know what you are running to take a 25gb dvd into your pc using ANY cable (usb, firewire...) I would like to see that happen in 30 seconds...pls show me the proof.
I can do it in 5 seconds, without a cable! It's a special technology called "DVD tray" :)
This would have been just a 'me too' post, but you made me aware that there are follow-ups to the novel, thanks!
To be on-topic, I'd be more interested in a technology that can shorten sleep times in grown-ups (specifically me), although I'd probably waste the new time on late night pr0n :)
Here's one. Actually I know his name as the guy appearing from time to time in a balloon in XKCD comics, with the cape and glasses. What's the joke or reference? I didn't bother to search.
I think I did read one of his short stories once but it didn't leave a mark or make me look for more of his writings. My memory has him filed under "internet celebrities, bloggers and web2.0 pundits" not under "SF authors".
Ms. LeGuin is definitely under the latter label, as well as a lot of other SF giants like Heinlein, Clarke, Asimov, Herbert, Dick, et. al., not to mention a lot of more obscure authors of various nationalities which I've enjoyed and actively sought both online and offline.
To end in a similar tone: ms. LeGuin is a SF author, mr. Doctorow is a blogger :) (at least to me).
Theoretically it's doable, once you have the TLD, you can have whatever you want in that zone.
However most (all?) resolvers out there when being confronted with a hostname with no dots in in assume it needs to be qualified an try appending the entries specified in the search domain list. They'll probably try it as a TLD only after exhausting the alternatives. BTW, nothing prevents using your fancy TLDs in your private network, just declare them in your nameserver.
Oh, and I've not even touched how some browsers default to some non-dns interpretations of "bare words". Try putting "coryking" in the location bar in Firefox and you'll be taken straight to google without even trying any of the DNS stuff I mentioned above.
Agreed, but this is different from the attitude of "poor them, all that work without getting paid".
Also, most OSS licenses have restrictions on the kind of bundling one can do between free and non-free components, so they need to be really careful to fully own what they're trying to sell, otherwise there might be a lot of other people entitled to a place at that table.
I'm not saying Mozilla is incorrect in this, I was just making a point regarding your pretty broad statement. Also I'm a happy Iceweasel user for about two years, I am interested in this only because it might redraw the fine line between proprietary and OSS interests.
Ok, let me try again:
Debian is a community organized around making a free operating system. One of its main tenets is the lack of restrictions for its users, and so far is has achieved two somewhat contradicting feats: biggest number of packages and biggest number of supported architectures.
Ubuntu chose to optimize a part of Debian (a subset of packages, the main architectures) to produce a marketable distribution. How profitable this approach is, remains to be seen.
What I'd like to point out is that the much larger "market" of Debian is totally non-profitable and thus reachable only by means of voluntary work. I'm still amazed by the number of languages Debian is translated in, and I believe for a number of them it's the only OS translated, because it's not profitable to invest money in translating your software for a population of a few thousand souls.
Yet again, re-reading your previous comment, we probably have different definitions for "success". I'd like you to think what "success" means for Unicef or Greenpeace or WWF or other non-profit organizations. Not everything in this world revolves around money, you know...
Do you think they should give us all this software, dedicate all their hours of time, spend their own money for development hardware and testing and various bits that go along with making a software package ...
And not get paid?
Well, yes, if they claim the product to be free software.
You see, most of the development and testing man-hours were not paid by them, were donated by members of the community, in exchange for the promise that the end-product would be freely shared as well. I'm not a lawyer, but the way I understand free software licences, it works like this: the founder of the project chooses one (or more) licenses for it and then invites people to contribute, basically saying "It's ok to send me your work, see, there are some restrictions on what I or someone else does with it". At least that's what I have in mind when sending bugs or patches to different OSS projects, no matter who leads them.
So while I agree with the second part, that manufacturers should not be held liable for the stupidity of their users, I'm pretty sure that a openness promise should be respected, meaning that money/work ratio should be propagated across the whole chain, not just "the last mile".
In even simpler words: just as well as you should be allowed to sell your own work, you shouldn't try to sell what you got for free.
Don't nitpick, please, I'm not a lawyer and not a native speaker, so there might be some detail lost in translation, I hope I got my point across.
I know you are just trying to make a point, but I hope that deep down you realise that Debian is not a company and it's a fundamentally non-profit organization, right?
user@host: ~ $ cd Pictures You have just ran /bin/cd
EULA - blah blah blah.... ...
Agree Y/N: Y
Actually, cd is a shell builtin, so you'll get by without an EULA, it's covered by the bash EULA you accepted when you started bash :)
A man-in-the-middle attack was described in "Count of Monte Cristo" (purposeful fake information caused a stock crash and the bancruptcy of a particular villain).
I wonder if they have done any work with time-compression on this audio generation technique, so people could produce a X minute audio clip every Y minutes, could be handy to listen to a 5 minute track every day to get a quick outline of how a day went.
That's why graphs are for. In less than a second you can inspect a graph and locate right away the moment of trouble.The continuous sound is ok for identifying wrong patterns as they occur, most likely before the machine-detectable patterns already come through your e-mail or rss or mobile or pager or seat-embedded-tazers or whatever alerting technique you use. But to listen for the sound of the whole day of my network's feng shui takes too damn long.
Not to mention that the compressed 'normal' sound probably would sound different than the live status sound I'm used to.
A picture (graph) is worth a thousand words (sounds), right?