screw it, i'll link to it, explaining that i am linking to a sample of code that DOES NOT THWART A COPY PROTECTION SCHEME. because encryption != copy protection.
commentary on the article
on
Is UNIX An OS?
·
· Score: 1
i'm pretty sure the author doesn't understand what an Operating System, versus a User Enviroment, is.
his statement of 'So calling the kernel plus the shell an "operating system" made sense' was never valid. the kernel, drivers, and libraries are the OS. those are what allows other programs to run, and that is all an OS does. the arguement in this article is more of what you expect in the box of an OS that a person would buy. a minimal Operating/User Enviroment is "the kernel plus the shell", but its still the OS plus more. "A kernel provides three primary capabilities: Messaging, a set of routines to help applications (processes) or parts of applications (threads) talk to each other; Scheduler, to give the many applications (or parts of applications) some processing time to get work done; Memory management, so that applications have an area in memory in which to run, protected from other applications' bugs that might affect them. " these are all abilities of modern kernels, but no way do these things define something as a kernel.
messaging is only an option in a kernel if there are ever going to be more than 1 process (optionally with more than 1 thread) 'running' at a time, DOS didn't support this, so therefore, DOS did not contain a kernel, and thus was not a OS, by the authors logic.
a scheduler is required for something to be a kernel? so again that means DOS didn't have a kernel, since it could not schedule processes? scheduling only becomes possible/viable on a platform that has interrupts and dualmode operation, thus allowing pre-emption. cooperative multitasking is not true scheduling.
memory management (unfortunately) is not required either for something to be considered a kernel, and individual application can manage its own memory, and a kernel does not have to (but it is very NICE when it does) manage the memory given to applications. again, going back to DOS, it did not manage memory, but it still had a kernel. memory management purely in the kernel is possible, but only viable when the platform has a MMU available.
it almost seems that you wanted to say 'a pre-emptive, multitasking, protected memory capable kernel can do these things:', but for that statement to be possible, the hardware would need interrupts, dual mode operation, and a MMU.
anyone interested in what an actual OS (along with some modern features expected in them) is, should really pick up a copy of Operating System Concepts, by Abraham Silberschatz and Peter Baer Galvin (available at amazon, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471364142/ )
Re:You are the selfish person the article refers t
on
Selfish Society
·
· Score: 1
bullshit. I have been lucky because my situation/family/background/financial situation enabled me to have the opportunity to use computers. Some people aren't so lucky. what about the people whose situation/family/background/financial situation allowed them to use computers, and yet can't do a damn thing with them, and those that choose to do nothing with them? EVERY middle income family in America can provide a computer to their household, if not specifically for the kids there. what will these kids do with it? some will surf the web for porn, some for MP3's, some for warez, for information, for social interaction. but some will go beyond that, and actually learn something.
your arguement, in another light, says that many people could be as fast as michael johnson (100 meter dash, olympics) if given the right training/shoes/dedication, but since some people aren't given those things, we shouldn't look up to michael johnson, that he doesn't deserve to be an idol/hero. but he did run that fast, and those other people didn't. this is the age old arguement, do intentions or actions define a person?
identification purposes (your genetic.sig should be fairly unique, right?) encryption (wonderful public private key that you could carry with you) only problem with these is it would be easy to 'spoof' your ID. if someone got some of your blood/skin... (hair/fingernails wouldn't work, some sorta mitochondrial DNA thingie, don't ask me, my sister's the one doing the DNA forensics research, i just remember something about that from one of her presentations)
last time i checked, linux only cost $0, so no matter how many copies are sold, linux, itself, has never made anyone, any money. service and such on the other hand.....
someone might have mentioned it, but last time i bought cable, my 10baseT was RJ-45 and my phone cord was RJ-11, not the other way around.... so what's up with the ethernet port and modem port on the diagram? (or did they fix the picture yet?)
Linux (and UNIX) is inherently more secure than Windows and can do a much better job of protecting the user from his or her own stupidity.
i wouldn't say that, more like '.. better job of protecting the system from the users own stupidity' if an idiot users runs a trojan, it can delete all their files. but unless they have 'root' it can't affect the system files, so in the end, just the users files are affected.
I wouldn't say he was doing a favor, from those extensions, it looks like he is targetting office workers, students, and developers. probably an antisocial person who feels like striking back at those he thinks are 'repressing' him, in a most juvenile way. swords + war(literary device, not literal) don't make lasting friends.
excessive pirating? i think you might be mistaken. the game engines would be GPL'ed (very cool) & free, and you would pay for the content (the artwork, sound effects, levels)
depends on the distribution. by that logic, no one would have average intelligence, half would be below, half would be above. better to say, by definition, half of the human race has an average intelligence at best.
Pi is a finite number, it less than 3.2 and more than 3.1, there it has limits, therefore it is finite. its like that triangle fractal (looks like a star of david after the 2nd iteration) it has infinite perimeter, but has a finite area.
ok, i kinda get it now. its like taking a long stick, (say, with a length of 'c') that doesn't flex at all. now, spin it in a circle. a point one inch from the center is going kinda slow cause it only goes 3.14 inches in one revolution, but a point near the end goes incredibly fast, because it has to traverse pi*'c' in one revolution. the distance between the 2 points is constant, but the speed is different. now, think of this in a linear manner.
there could be a fingerprint encoded into the mp3 based on the computer it was recorded from, and if the software used to rip/transfer songs to the player detects that the fingerprint doesn't match 'this' computers' fingerprint, then it would refuse to transfer the file. also, 'new' CD's could also have a fingerprint in them for the 'phase 2' checking.
no, they can't call it java compliant because it didn't pass the compability tests. possibly java compatible, or make up another cool sounding, but utterly meaningless bit of marketing-speak (don't know if you have these commercials in your area, but the sprint PCS commercial, where they talk about 'built from the ground up', listen to the phrasing, you could easily say 'built from the horizon to the side' or some other nonsense and it would mean just as little)
yep, i did misunderstand part of what you where saying, but i did address the application standards part in the second half of my post. Does anyone know what POSIX is (excuse my ignorance, i think it might apply in this case)
i'm not sure if we want a single *IX binary or not, that goes back to the control issue, maybe a central, public forum for 'moderation' of the binary, but still allow customization (if i'm not going to run a FooServer, why would i want my kernel binary to be optimized for it?) but a single set of public standards for *IX binaries. i might be misunderstanding it, but isn't POSIX a set in the right direction?
there are a couple locations that will be 'demo-ing' the new digital format, but it won't be wide spread (at least for star wars movies) until episode II, which will be completely digital, from 'filming' to the audience. and as for the second bit, why call it a movie when its a 'talkie'? it's just more convient/ingrained in us.
funny you should mention how vehemently some linux users hate M$, a couple years back, the same thing could have been said about the Mac vs. Wintel arguement, and look now, the top selling office suite on Mac's is a microsoft product. This would be nothing new for M$ to do. M$ doesn't have much to worry about, most consumers assume that M$ makes the better (or best) application sets, so if they make a web browser for linux (charging a nominal fee for it of course), that's what the cattle population will use, even if there is a free alternative.
yes! the last lines are especially important, people won't be able to just sit there and accept whatever is told to them they will have to think for themselves!!! (oops, wait if they did that, i would be out of my cushy tech support job, j/k;p)
Slashdot Mirror
the first call on my TiVo, it was on the phone for 10 minutes, but spent 2 hours setting up the data (indexing and stuff)
screw it, i'll link to it, explaining that i am linking to a sample of code that DOES NOT THWART A COPY PROTECTION SCHEME. because encryption != copy protection.
i'm pretty sure the author doesn't understand what an Operating System, versus a User Enviroment, is.
/ )
his statement of 'So calling the kernel plus the shell an "operating system" made sense' was never valid. the kernel, drivers, and libraries are the OS. those are what allows other programs to run, and that is all an OS does. the arguement in this article is more of what you expect in the box of an OS that a person would buy. a minimal Operating/User Enviroment is "the kernel plus the shell", but its still the OS plus more. "A kernel provides three primary capabilities: Messaging, a set of routines to help applications (processes) or parts of applications (threads) talk to each other; Scheduler, to give the many applications (or parts of applications) some processing time to get work done; Memory management, so that applications have an area in memory in which to run, protected from other applications' bugs that might affect them. " these are all abilities of modern kernels, but no way do these things define something as a kernel.
messaging is only an option in a kernel if there are ever going to be more than 1 process (optionally with more than 1 thread) 'running' at a time, DOS didn't support this, so therefore, DOS did not contain a kernel, and thus was not a OS, by the authors logic.
a scheduler is required for something to be a kernel? so again that means DOS didn't have a kernel, since it could not schedule processes? scheduling only becomes possible/viable on a platform that has interrupts and dualmode operation, thus allowing pre-emption. cooperative multitasking is not true scheduling.
memory management (unfortunately) is not required either for something to be considered a kernel, and individual application can manage its own memory, and a kernel does not have to (but it is very NICE when it does) manage the memory given to applications. again, going back to DOS, it did not manage memory, but it still had a kernel. memory management purely in the kernel is possible, but only viable when the platform has a MMU available.
it almost seems that you wanted to say 'a pre-emptive, multitasking, protected memory capable kernel can do these things:', but for that statement to be possible, the hardware would need interrupts, dual mode operation, and a MMU.
anyone interested in what an actual OS (along with some modern features expected in them) is, should really pick up a copy of Operating System Concepts, by Abraham Silberschatz and Peter Baer Galvin (available at amazon, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471364142
bullshit.
I have been lucky because my situation/family/background/financial situation enabled me to have the opportunity to use computers. Some people aren't so lucky.
what about the people whose situation/family/background/financial situation allowed them to use computers, and yet can't do a damn thing with them, and those that choose to do nothing with them? EVERY middle income family in America can provide a computer to their household, if not specifically for the kids there. what will these kids do with it? some will surf the web for porn, some for MP3's, some for warez, for information, for social interaction. but some will go beyond that, and actually learn something.
your arguement, in another light, says that many people could be as fast as michael johnson (100 meter dash, olympics) if given the right training/shoes/dedication, but since some people aren't given those things, we shouldn't look up to michael johnson, that he doesn't deserve to be an idol/hero. but he did run that fast, and those other people didn't. this is the age old arguement, do intentions or actions define a person?
when are we gonna get a avantgo channel/super lean version of slashdot that shows up good (i.e. no tables, intelligently placed content) for slashdot?
identification purposes (your genetic .sig should be fairly unique, right?) encryption (wonderful public private key that you could carry with you) only problem with these is it would be easy to 'spoof' your ID. if someone got some of your blood/skin... (hair/fingernails wouldn't work, some sorta mitochondrial DNA thingie, don't ask me, my sister's the one doing the DNA forensics research, i just remember something about that from one of her presentations)
16 bit color? or 16 colors? big difference (orders of magnitude). all the 'color' ones i've had to support did 16 (well, 15) colors.
last time i checked, linux only cost $0, so no matter how many copies are sold, linux, itself, has never made anyone, any money. service and such on the other hand.....
someone might have mentioned it, but last time i bought cable, my 10baseT was RJ-45 and my phone cord was RJ-11, not the other way around.... so what's up with the ethernet port and modem port on the diagram? (or did they fix the picture yet?)
lets all throw some cash in, and get this, so we can port linux to it . . . .
Linux (and UNIX) is inherently more secure than Windows and can do a much better job of protecting the user from his or her own stupidity.
i wouldn't say that, more like '.. better job of protecting the system from the users own stupidity' if an idiot users runs a trojan, it can delete all their files. but unless they have 'root' it can't affect the system files, so in the end, just the users files are affected.
I wouldn't say he was doing a favor, from those extensions, it looks like he is targetting office workers, students, and developers. probably an antisocial person who feels like striking back at those he thinks are 'repressing' him, in a most juvenile way. swords + war(literary device, not literal) don't make lasting friends.
excessive pirating? i think you might be mistaken. the game engines would be GPL'ed (very cool) & free, and you would pay for the content (the artwork, sound effects, levels)
depends on the distribution. by that logic, no one would have average intelligence, half would be below, half would be above. better to say, by definition, half of the human race has an average intelligence at best.
i believe NT 3.51 was also affected, but it was patched/fixed for 4.0
Pi is a finite number, it less than 3.2 and more than 3.1, there it has limits, therefore it is finite. its like that triangle fractal (looks like a star of david after the 2nd iteration) it has infinite perimeter, but has a finite area.
ok, i kinda get it now. its like taking a long stick, (say, with a length of 'c') that doesn't flex at all. now, spin it in a circle. a point one inch from the center is going kinda slow cause it only goes 3.14 inches in one revolution, but a point near the end goes incredibly fast, because it has to traverse pi*'c' in one revolution. the distance between the 2 points is constant, but the speed is different. now, think of this in a linear manner.
there could be a fingerprint encoded into the mp3 based on the computer it was recorded from, and if the software used to rip/transfer songs to the player detects that the fingerprint doesn't match 'this' computers' fingerprint, then it would refuse to transfer the file. also, 'new' CD's could also have a fingerprint in them for the 'phase 2' checking.
no, they can't call it java compliant because it didn't pass the compability tests. possibly java compatible, or make up another cool sounding, but utterly meaningless bit of marketing-speak (don't know if you have these commercials in your area, but the sprint PCS commercial, where they talk about 'built from the ground up', listen to the phrasing, you could easily say 'built from the horizon to the side' or some other nonsense and it would mean just as little)
Is stuff that's further away actually going faster, or is it doppler/red shifting? or, to us mere mortals would it appear to go even faster?
yep, i did misunderstand part of what you where saying, but i did address the application standards part in the second half of my post. Does anyone know what POSIX is (excuse my ignorance, i think it might apply in this case)
i'm not sure if we want a single *IX binary or not, that goes back to the control issue, maybe a central, public forum for 'moderation' of the binary, but still allow customization (if i'm not going to run a FooServer, why would i want my kernel binary to be optimized for it?) but a single set of public standards for *IX binaries. i might be misunderstanding it, but isn't POSIX a set in the right direction?
there are a couple locations that will be 'demo-ing' the new digital format, but it won't be wide spread (at least for star wars movies) until episode II, which will be completely digital, from 'filming' to the audience. and as for the second bit, why call it a movie when its a 'talkie'? it's just more convient/ingrained in us.
funny you should mention how vehemently some linux users hate M$, a couple years back, the same thing could have been said about the Mac vs. Wintel arguement, and look now, the top selling office suite on Mac's is a microsoft product. This would be nothing new for M$ to do. M$ doesn't have much to worry about, most consumers assume that M$ makes the better (or best) application sets, so if they make a web browser for linux (charging a nominal fee for it of course), that's what the cattle population will use, even if there is a free alternative.
yes! the last lines are especially important, people won't be able to just sit there and accept whatever is told to them they will have to think for themselves!!! (oops, wait if they did that, i would be out of my cushy tech support job, j/k ;p)