That, combined with a history TREE instead of a linear, self-overwriting history (go back 3 pages and click another link -- those 3 pages will drop out of the history). That's what I wish for.
Something like this?. Unfortunately, it's mac-only, a browser unto its own, not an addon to safari, and not a terribly good browser at that. Would be nice if someone ported it to some other browser.
Not sure if it counts as "full", but if you have an intranet type app you need to support, that might work. You can build Mozilla (not firebird IIRC) with Automation (IDispatch) scripting, which should let you script controls with javascript, otherwise you can host the control but not script it. It's still pretty painful to build Mozilla on Windows, but at least all the tools for doing so are now free.
Wow, tetris got into my brain in a big way. Especially the theme song for it on the gameboy.
The only game that has ever had a similar effect on me is Katamari Damacy. I can't look at my desk anymore without picturing rolling it all up into a big ball, then finishing off with the desk, the chair, the cubicle, the co-workers...
Microsoft Bob was for console only on Windows 3.1. You could bypass its "security " by simply not starting windows and using a DOS shell instead. Would any hacker actually want to use its interface? Seriously, bringing up Bob is more pathetic than that forgotten piece of software ever could have been.
(Besides, cue cards were part of Bob, and that was a damn good help system)
> To Jimmy Wales, everything looks like a job for a wiki.
Not so different than "everything looks like a job for the WWW." Tim Berners-Lee always lamented how the WWW had become very "publication" oriented, instead of feeling like a big connected editor. Wiki helps close that gap a little.
Of course the name, klunky markup, and lack of access control are more than a tad annoying, but Wiki's a tool with a pretty wide reach. I think it's good to experiment with universal access before putting up fences rather than the reverse and letting a trickle of select folks determine all the content.
I don't need a notarized letter, kook, I just need a public statement. Or any statement that might serve to bolster the claim rather than contradict it. Why should we pester the poor fellow because one dumbass kook told us to?
"Your physics theory is invalid because you are gay" is ad hominem.
"I don't trust your medical opinion because you've said previously that AIDs could be transmitted through tears" is not ad hominem.
Well, first of all, the first makes a clear and objective proposition, and the second one does not ("I don't trust X" != "X is invalid"). Secondly, it is technically still ad hominem, but only in the formal logical sense. As rhetoric, it's probably quite sound.
Throwing around accusations of "ad hominem" is quite popular these days. The best rebuttal is to respond "no, no, I'm not attacking you personally, I don't really even know you. I'm simply questioning your credibility." It's cheap, but it works.
I'm a flaming liberal, and these days I can't stand Indymedia. Why? Because many comments and stories are hidden by the fascist moderators.
Funny, I'm a flaming liberal and I can't stand Indymedia because it makes the left look so darn bad.
Apparenly I'm not liberal ENOUGH to have my comments read by others, especially when I dare to criticize some Black Blockster when they do stupid shit like setting a trashcan on fire...
Folks, go take a look at the article commentaries on Indymedia. It makes slashdot look like a fucking mensa society.
And even if nazism did happen, if FDR had gone to war in 1939 instead of waiting two years for the inevitable, WWII would have been less traumatic.
Perhaps. But we were at war in all but title by then anyway. Maybe we would have ratched up a fearsome enough war production that it would have convinced Japan to leave us alone, and they would have kept much of their conquests.
Maybe if Chamberlain had declared war back then, Hitler would have gone after a much weaker England sooner and convinced its populace through an even longer and worse air campaign to stay out of mainland Europe's own affairs.
> I have heard several 'experts' argue about whether it's nature or man causing the global warming. Doesn't anyone have a real answer yet?
Has it occured to you that it might be both? I remember hearing someone saying how we're only responsible for 50% of the greenhouse gas emissions. Well boy howdy, we only doubled them then, yeah, so let's all hop in the SUV...
If you think we can actually destroy the earth short of exploding every nuke we have at once (burn off the atmosphere real good), you're fucking deluded. Worst we can do is make it too dirty and barren for *us* to live on it. The planetary ecology will be modified somewhat, but will get along just dandy without us.
I'm an environmentalist because I love humanity and want a good place to live. People like yourself need some therapy. Or cyanide.
In the PII days, regular Pentiums had cache that only ran at half speed. Celerons had half as much cache, but it was the same kind in the Xeon, which ran at full speed. This made them a good deal more snappy and amenable to overclocking. Gamers actually preferred them.
Nowadays they're just a cheap CPU that aren't even worth the savings.
The machines are ok. Pretty solid for their price point, but anything you keep clean will make good coffee, so the idea is to get one that you can keep clean easily, and stands up to that cleaning for years. Braun's pretty decent.
They're even better when you put real coffee in them though. Starbucks coffee is often way too stale, and they seem to have no problem selling you a pound of the burnt schwag at the bottom of the sack.
I believe downloaded chunks from one peer are verified by consulting another random peer with the hash of the chunk and asking if it agrees, perhaps with a preference toward asking a seeder. This could fall to corruption (if you asked a malicious peer), and corrupted torrents have been known to exist. Bram has admitted that a distributed hash mechanism like Tiger Tree would be a good addition, but it's not in this version. Most likely someone would report a corrupted or bogus torrent to the tracker site and just get it removed.
The *AA rents legal clerks by the truckload to send out C&D letters to torrent sites -- seems to be more efficient.
The Bittorrent specification is quite readable; in fact, it's meant for readability, and is kind of ambiguous on the technical side. I suggest taking a look at it. Google knows where to find it.
> How does the system heal itself when a seeder signs off taking with him some of the pieces.
Because others have the pieces too, and they will eventually discover each other. If some pieces are indeed missing completely, then no one will get the whole file, and everyone's SOL. This rarely happens in practice unless a single seeder gets knocked out quickly, in which case most others drop off the torrent, and no one bothers to join a torrent with no seeders and few peers, so it just goes away (all BT tracker sites automatically delete trackers with no seeders or peers).
One of the niftier things is that the "rarest" pieces (the ones the fewest peers have) are transferred first, so it's more likely a full copy will exist in the event that all the seeders leave and only peers are left (every peer seeds in some sense, but a "seeder" always has the whole file).
> How to the nodes decide which peers to ask for what and get updated on who has what as more peers sign on.
It picks a random number of peers to ask at first, and asks a new random peer every so often. Ultimately it's up to the client, but well-behaved ones do this. Remember, the tracker knows who everyone in the torrent is, so this info doesn't have to get relayed around like it does with most P2P networks.
> How is the download=upload actually enforced--what stops me from creating some evil bittorrent that only downloads then hands out shit.
A leech client will only manage to download from a seeder, and just like peers, they have rate limits. Peers won't hand out data to other peers unless that peer also uploads to them. Every so often peers will hand out freebies to prime the pump, but the transfer rate from depending on the seeders (rate limited) and freebies (a trickle) would be abysmal. The system can be gamed somewhat -- said clients usually arent that sophisticated, and end up blacklisted. Buggy clients are often blacklisted as well, which is why Shareaza isn't a good choice if you want to do BT (I recommend Azureus personally)
> My jaw hit the floor when his reply was "Well, this isn't exactly an atom bomb...."
Really? I think that's quite an appropriate response, as the implied continuation of that sentence is "... so get a sense of perspective or go back to journalism school you sensationalist knucklehead".
Bittorrent is actually not a revolutionary transfer method either. What it is is a well-tuned swarming downloader. Such download methods existed before BT, but It's the tuning, namely the tit-for-tat exchange method that makes it work so well. Read the whitepaper on BT where it talks about Pareto efficiency. It's quite illuminating, and doesn't require any advanced academic knowledge. It's an application of economics and game theory for real-world use, and though the principles seem blindingly obvious now, that's largely in hindsight.
It's not so much revolutionary as evolutionary, and I'm damn glad that Bram isn't listening to fanboys proclaiming him to be the second coming of Napster (as if anyone would want to ascend that, uh, throne)
> I ran the scan and it told me that WinPcap was spyware. Is MS trying to kill Ethereal?
No, it's searching for extra drivers in the TCP/IP stack, which is what WinPcap is. If you installed Ethereal yourself, you already know you want it, but if you saw WinPcap and you didn't install a sniffer, then that's fishy, isn't it? It does say potentially unwanted, so it sounds like it's doing its job.
A poor arguement. People were tortured and killed by the Inquisition because of their religious beliefs, while people were tortured and killed by Mao and Stalin because they were percieved as possible threats to their power.
Actually it was entire sects of Christians like the Cathars and the Waldenesians who were wiped out by Inquisitions because they were possible threats to the power of the Catholic Church.
The most famous inquisition would be the Spanish Inquisition of the late 1400's. Torquemada, hot irons, Fear, Surprise, and an almost fanatical devotion... er.. The Inquisition itself was and is an office of the Catholic church, and it still exists today under a different name and is still tasked with charging and punishing heresy. Of course now it only has jurisdiction over its own clergy and the worst punishment it metes out is defrocking, so it's a somewhat different situation in this age.
So I just downloaded Azureus2.2.0.2.jar, the most active java project on sourceforge. I'm running jar -x Azureus2.2.0.2.jar, to extract it now, but it's been running for 20 minutes with no messages. I'm going to kill it, I don't know what it's doing, but a 4 meg file shouldn't take more than 20 minutes to extract.
Well since you're having that problem on Linux, I can now apply your logic to state that Linux is an abomination and teh suck and so forth.
"Illegal combatant" was defined by FDR in WWII, in order to have executed some German saboteurs on US soil. He threatened to defy the Supreme Court if he was overruled, so SCOTUS declined to hear their case and they were executed.
This is the entire scope of the precedent. It's awful convenient, isn't it, to have a war that lasts forever, where the whole world is a battleground, and everyone on the other side is an "illegal combatant". This is the forever war that the cold war hawks dreamed of, and now we have it. Enjoy.
Wouldn't Nash equilibrium imply that none of the companies would make such a move, since it'd be to their detriment? Or is this another theory?
First-mover advantage is likely to be enormous -- LCD volumes are still poor, and OLEDs could probably be cranked out like no one's business. They'll be tripping over each other to get this technology to market.
If they don't either provide a cheap replacement for the screen material or drop the price to the mid-to-low two-digit levels for ordinary screen sizes I predict that OLED monitors will get a rep for being unacceptably flakey within about two years.
They're putting them mostly in cell phones. Most cell phone screens are only on for a few minutes at a time, and people tend to replace cell phones every few years anyway. I agree, as computer monitors, they have a long way to go, and the problem might not even be solvable -- CRTs still get dingy and fuzzy even today. Of course, people are used to the idea of throwing away their CRTs after a few years, so if OLEDs are cheap enough...
The framers of the constitution never addressed corporate personhood at all. Corporations have had virtual personhood for hundreds of years; the word "corporation" implies it in a way that "company" does not. The notion that corporations have rights under the U.S. constitution is actually relatively recent, and the result of a Supreme Court decision (I don't recall precisely which one it is).
Note that corporations don't have all the rights of a person. For the most part, corporations have no 5th amendment rights against self-incrimination, for example.
Slashdot Mirror
[A graphical history record]
That, combined with a history TREE instead of a linear, self-overwriting history (go back 3 pages and click another link -- those 3 pages will drop out of the history). That's what I wish for.
Something like this?. Unfortunately, it's mac-only, a browser unto its own, not an addon to safari, and not a terribly good browser at that. Would be nice if someone ported it to some other browser.
> If they added in full Active-X support it'd be the perfect browser.
Here you go.
Not sure if it counts as "full", but if you have an intranet type app you need to support, that might work. You can build Mozilla (not firebird IIRC) with Automation (IDispatch) scripting, which should let you script controls with javascript, otherwise you can host the control but not script it. It's still pretty painful to build Mozilla on Windows, but at least all the tools for doing so are now free.
I've started imagining all these little Free Software micro-dissertations as being read in the voice of the Comic Book Guy in The Simpsons.
It really puts things in perspective.
Wow, tetris got into my brain in a big way. Especially the theme song for it on the gameboy.
...
The only game that has ever had a similar effect on me is Katamari Damacy. I can't look at my desk anymore without picturing rolling it all up into a big ball, then finishing off with the desk, the chair, the cubicle, the co-workers
Microsoft Bob was for console only on Windows 3.1. You could bypass its "security " by simply not starting windows and using a DOS shell instead. Would any hacker actually want to use its interface? Seriously, bringing up Bob is more pathetic than that forgotten piece of software ever could have been.
(Besides, cue cards were part of Bob, and that was a damn good help system)
Psst. I hear Linux 1.0 has a few bugs.
> To Jimmy Wales, everything looks like a job for a wiki.
Not so different than "everything looks like a job for the WWW." Tim Berners-Lee always lamented how the WWW had become very "publication" oriented, instead of feeling like a big connected editor. Wiki helps close that gap a little.
Of course the name, klunky markup, and lack of access control are more than a tad annoying, but Wiki's a tool with a pretty wide reach. I think it's good to experiment with universal access before putting up fences rather than the reverse and letting a trickle of select folks determine all the content.
I don't need a notarized letter, kook, I just need a public statement. Or any statement that might serve to bolster the claim rather than contradict it. Why should we pester the poor fellow because one dumbass kook told us to?
"Your physics theory is invalid because you are gay" is ad hominem.
"I don't trust your medical opinion because you've said previously that AIDs could be transmitted through tears" is not ad hominem.
Well, first of all, the first makes a clear and objective proposition, and the second one does not ("I don't trust X" != "X is invalid"). Secondly, it is technically still ad hominem, but only in the formal logical sense. As rhetoric, it's probably quite sound.
Throwing around accusations of "ad hominem" is quite popular these days. The best rebuttal is to respond "no, no, I'm not attacking you personally, I don't really even know you. I'm simply questioning your credibility." It's cheap, but it works.
I'm a flaming liberal, and these days I can't stand Indymedia. Why? Because many comments and stories are hidden by the fascist moderators.
Funny, I'm a flaming liberal and I can't stand Indymedia because it makes the left look so darn bad.
Apparenly I'm not liberal ENOUGH to have my comments read by others, especially when I dare to criticize some Black Blockster when they do stupid shit like setting a trashcan on fire...
Folks, go take a look at the article commentaries on Indymedia. It makes slashdot look like a fucking mensa society.
And even if nazism did happen, if FDR had gone to war in 1939 instead of waiting two years for the inevitable, WWII would have been less traumatic.
Perhaps. But we were at war in all but title by then anyway. Maybe we would have ratched up a fearsome enough war production that it would have convinced Japan to leave us alone, and they would have kept much of their conquests.
Maybe if Chamberlain had declared war back then, Hitler would have gone after a much weaker England sooner and convinced its populace through an even longer and worse air campaign to stay out of mainland Europe's own affairs.
Rewriting history is a tricky thing.
> I have heard several 'experts' argue about whether it's nature or man causing the global warming. Doesn't anyone have a real answer yet?
Has it occured to you that it might be both? I remember hearing someone saying how we're only responsible for 50% of the greenhouse gas emissions. Well boy howdy, we only doubled them then, yeah, so let's all hop in the SUV...
If you think we can actually destroy the earth short of exploding every nuke we have at once (burn off the atmosphere real good), you're fucking deluded. Worst we can do is make it too dirty and barren for *us* to live on it. The planetary ecology will be modified somewhat, but will get along just dandy without us.
I'm an environmentalist because I love humanity and want a good place to live. People like yourself need some therapy. Or cyanide.
In the PII days, regular Pentiums had cache that only ran at half speed. Celerons had half as much cache, but it was the same kind in the Xeon, which ran at full speed. This made them a good deal more snappy and amenable to overclocking. Gamers actually preferred them.
Nowadays they're just a cheap CPU that aren't even worth the savings.
The machines are ok. Pretty solid for their price point, but anything you keep clean will make good coffee, so the idea is to get one that you can keep clean easily, and stands up to that cleaning for years. Braun's pretty decent.
They're even better when you put real coffee in them though. Starbucks coffee is often way too stale, and they seem to have no problem selling you a pound of the burnt schwag at the bottom of the sack.
I believe downloaded chunks from one peer are verified by consulting another random peer with the hash of the chunk and asking if it agrees, perhaps with a preference toward asking a seeder. This could fall to corruption (if you asked a malicious peer), and corrupted torrents have been known to exist. Bram has admitted that a distributed hash mechanism like Tiger Tree would be a good addition, but it's not in this version. Most likely someone would report a corrupted or bogus torrent to the tracker site and just get it removed.
The *AA rents legal clerks by the truckload to send out C&D letters to torrent sites -- seems to be more efficient.
I can never quite figure it out from the docs: what is smart-seeding, and how does it work?
The Bittorrent specification is quite readable; in fact, it's meant for readability, and is kind of ambiguous on the technical side. I suggest taking a look at it. Google knows where to find it.
> How does the system heal itself when a seeder signs off taking with him some of the pieces.
Because others have the pieces too, and they will eventually discover each other. If some pieces are indeed missing completely, then no one will get the whole file, and everyone's SOL. This rarely happens in practice unless a single seeder gets knocked out quickly, in which case most others drop off the torrent, and no one bothers to join a torrent with no seeders and few peers, so it just goes away (all BT tracker sites automatically delete trackers with no seeders or peers).
One of the niftier things is that the "rarest" pieces (the ones the fewest peers have) are transferred first, so it's more likely a full copy will exist in the event that all the seeders leave and only peers are left (every peer seeds in some sense, but a "seeder" always has the whole file).
> How to the nodes decide which peers to ask for what and get updated on who has what as more peers sign on.
It picks a random number of peers to ask at first, and asks a new random peer every so often. Ultimately it's up to the client, but well-behaved ones do this. Remember, the tracker knows who everyone in the torrent is, so this info doesn't have to get relayed around like it does with most P2P networks.
> How is the download=upload actually enforced--what stops me from creating some evil bittorrent that only downloads then hands out shit.
A leech client will only manage to download from a seeder, and just like peers, they have rate limits. Peers won't hand out data to other peers unless that peer also uploads to them. Every so often peers will hand out freebies to prime the pump, but the transfer rate from depending on the seeders (rate limited) and freebies (a trickle) would be abysmal. The system can be gamed somewhat -- said clients usually arent that sophisticated, and end up blacklisted. Buggy clients are often blacklisted as well, which is why Shareaza isn't a good choice if you want to do BT (I recommend Azureus personally)
> My jaw hit the floor when his reply was "Well, this isn't exactly an atom bomb...."
Really? I think that's quite an appropriate response, as the implied continuation of that sentence is "... so get a sense of perspective or go back to journalism school you sensationalist knucklehead".
Bittorrent is actually not a revolutionary transfer method either. What it is is a well-tuned swarming downloader. Such download methods existed before BT, but It's the tuning, namely the tit-for-tat exchange method that makes it work so well. Read the whitepaper on BT where it talks about Pareto efficiency. It's quite illuminating, and doesn't require any advanced academic knowledge. It's an application of economics and game theory for real-world use, and though the principles seem blindingly obvious now, that's largely in hindsight.
It's not so much revolutionary as evolutionary, and I'm damn glad that Bram isn't listening to fanboys proclaiming him to be the second coming of Napster (as if anyone would want to ascend that, uh, throne)
> I ran the scan and it told me that WinPcap was spyware. Is MS trying to kill Ethereal?
No, it's searching for extra drivers in the TCP/IP stack, which is what WinPcap is. If you installed Ethereal yourself, you already know you want it, but if you saw WinPcap and you didn't install a sniffer, then that's fishy, isn't it? It does say potentially unwanted, so it sounds like it's doing its job.
A poor arguement. People were tortured and killed by the Inquisition because of their religious beliefs, while people were tortured and killed by Mao and Stalin because they were percieved as possible threats to their power.
... er.. The Inquisition itself was and is an office of the Catholic church, and it still exists today under a different name and is still tasked with charging and punishing heresy. Of course now it only has jurisdiction over its own clergy and the worst punishment it metes out is defrocking, so it's a somewhat different situation in this age.
Actually it was entire sects of Christians like the Cathars and the Waldenesians who were wiped out by Inquisitions because they were possible threats to the power of the Catholic Church.
The most famous inquisition would be the Spanish Inquisition of the late 1400's. Torquemada, hot irons, Fear, Surprise, and an almost fanatical devotion
So I just downloaded Azureus2.2.0.2.jar, the most active java project on sourceforge. I'm running jar -x Azureus2.2.0.2.jar, to extract it now, but it's been running for 20 minutes with no messages. I'm going to kill it, I don't know what it's doing, but a 4 meg file shouldn't take more than 20 minutes to extract.
Well since you're having that problem on Linux, I can now apply your logic to state that Linux is an abomination and teh suck and so forth.
Azureus installs and runs like buttah on Windows.
"Illegal combatant" was defined by FDR in WWII, in order to have executed some German saboteurs on US soil. He threatened to defy the Supreme Court if he was overruled, so SCOTUS declined to hear their case and they were executed.
This is the entire scope of the precedent. It's awful convenient, isn't it, to have a war that lasts forever, where the whole world is a battleground, and everyone on the other side is an "illegal combatant". This is the forever war that the cold war hawks dreamed of, and now we have it. Enjoy.
Wouldn't Nash equilibrium imply that none of the companies would make such a move, since it'd be to their detriment? Or is this another theory?
First-mover advantage is likely to be enormous -- LCD volumes are still poor, and OLEDs could probably be cranked out like no one's business. They'll be tripping over each other to get this technology to market.
If they don't either provide a cheap replacement for the screen material or drop the price to the mid-to-low two-digit levels for ordinary screen sizes I predict that OLED monitors will get a rep for being unacceptably flakey within about two years.
They're putting them mostly in cell phones. Most cell phone screens are only on for a few minutes at a time, and people tend to replace cell phones every few years anyway. I agree, as computer monitors, they have a long way to go, and the problem might not even be solvable -- CRTs still get dingy and fuzzy even today. Of course, people are used to the idea of throwing away their CRTs after a few years, so if OLEDs are cheap enough...
The framers of the constitution never addressed corporate personhood at all. Corporations have had virtual personhood for hundreds of years; the word "corporation" implies it in a way that "company" does not. The notion that corporations have rights under the U.S. constitution is actually relatively recent, and the result of a Supreme Court decision (I don't recall precisely which one it is).
Note that corporations don't have all the rights of a person. For the most part, corporations have no 5th amendment rights against self-incrimination, for example.