Does anyone have any experience using Debian on PA-RISC machines? I currently have an HP P9000 running an older version of HP-UX. Would it be possible to replace it with Debian? Would I be able to use the newer X.org X11 implementation?
Perhaps this cleaning of the administration is being done in order to facilitate a more military-centric NASA. There has been much speculation (see References) that the US military will begin to weaponize space. A NASA that is less interested in scientific discovery will of course be beneficial to the Pentagon, as they have the capabilities and know-how to design, implement, launch, maintain and control this upcoming space-based weaponry.
It really doesn't matter what school they graduated from. As long as their background is in engineering, rather than political pandering, then things will improve at NASA. Real engineers practicing real engineering will prevent probes from being lost on a routine basis, and space shuttles from blowing up every so often.
Developments like this truly show the versatility of hand-held computers, whether they be PDAs or microgaming systems. Indeed, these systems are just as capable as the most powerful desktop systems of even just four or five years ago. It's amazing that so much progress has been made in so little time.
It's interesting because it opens up the possibility of bringing high-performance, fault-tolerant computing to the masses. I don't mean the type of "fault-tolerance" (as in it doesn't crash daily) that Linux brings. I mean rock-solid stability that only a true UNIX vendor can provide. I would gladly run HP-UX as my workstation OS if it were affordable. HP-UX and HP-VUE combine to form an amazingly strong workstation environment that's particularly good for software development.
Of course you don't pass those types of safety-inducing options to your Java compiler or virtual machine. The high-security nature of Java is implied. Security is inherent to Java. That is why it is difficult to write malicious code in Java, and as such is an actual challenge.
Anyone can write malicious code in C, but it takes a real pro with real knowledge to even begin to try that with Java.
And like I said, do it in Java instead. That'll make it a real challenge, since the designers of Java made an effort to make it difficult to write malicious code in the first place. The point isn't that the code will look valid, but rather that it will perform malicious duties, which is something that is a challenge in Java, but easily done in C. Making it look valid is just an additional challenge for both languages.
Indeed, HP has ported HP-UX to the Itanium. But there are doubts about the veracity of the Itanium as a stable, high-performance, fault tolerant, uptime-guaranteed platform. Part of going with HP-UX was knowing that you were running on PA-RISC, and you know you could trust your system. Now that has been taken away. It's as if HP-UX has been partially neutered.
Everyone knows that it is possible to write malicious code in C. That's just because C gives you the near utmost control over your system, and does not discrminiate based on human emotions like "good", "bad", and "malicious".
Perhaps a better idea would have been to try to write malicious code in a language such as Java, which tries to prevent a programmer from writing such code. That would be a real challenge.
Indeed. I am glad I was able to experience HP in the 1980s when they were at or near their prime. I feel sorry for the students these days who will never experience what it is like to use a system that just plain never crashes.
Being brought up on Windows and shitty PCs that have an entire lifespan a tenth as long as the average uptime of true systems like those from HP will damage one's mind. I fear that our upcoming system designers and engineers will be unable to make suitable decisions regarding what sort of systems to use. The moment we have nuclear power plant control systems running on Intel-based Windows 2003 Server machines the world will be doomed.
This sounds a lot like possible entrapment. The authorities start a contest such as this, an unsuspecting programmer submits a malicious program, and he or she is arrested and charged with a variety of computer crimes. Frankly, I won't participate in this contest considering the current legal state of America.
With the demise of HP-UX on PA-RISC, I fear we are going to see unsuitable systems used for mission-critical applications. HP-UX and PA-RISC are both widely known for their fault tolerance and extreme reliability. They're the kind of OS and computer architecture you trust to run the control systems of a nuclear power plant, or the financial transactions of a major stockmarket.
My hope is that IBM does not make the same mistake as HP, but instead continues with their AiX/PPC combination on workstations and servers. We need variety in the UNIX market to result in innovation and improvements. With IRIX and SGI gone, Compaq and Tru64 gone, and soon possibly HP and HP-UX (there are doubts that the Itanium can fully replace the PA-RISC), the major UNIX vendors left are Sun and IBM. Frankly, that may not be enough to provide a sufficient level of innovation.
There has been some speculation that the new computers from Apple which use an Intel processor will use an Itanium 2 CPU, which HP has used to replace the PA-RISC as their main workstation and server CPU. This indeed raises a very interesting question: if the new Macs do indeed use Itanium chips, would we one day see HP-UX running on a Mac? It is a real possibility.
But what if it's like R2-D2, with all sorts of probes that can emerge at will? There could be a dildo, a lube dispenser, a condom machine, and that electrozapper thing to make things really fun.
When Anakin started to burn up after losing most of his limbs, it is quite possible that his penis was severely burned. Considering that he was engulfed in flames, it is probably safe to say that his penis and scrotum were literally quite gone. Now, my question is, did the Emperor install a prosthetic, mechanical penis onto Darth Vader?
Well, it is more than possible to use other, non-Microsoft operatings sytems on PCs. You know, OSes like Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, x86 Darwin, x86 Mac OS X, Solaris x86, BeOS, and so on. So no, there is evidence to suggest that a monopoly in the strictest sense does not exist.
Anyways, it's just a fact of nature that everyone is biased, and people won't always agree. That is because subjectivity plays a role in all types of thinking by each and every person, including you and me.
OpenGL and OpenAL are two such multimedia facilities offered by Mac OS X. Indeed, along with other Mac OX S technologies such as Quartz, QuickTime, QuickDraw it does begin to form the backbone of the ultimate gaming PC.
The transition to the Intel platform may very well give it the userbase it needs. In fact, it may be a case of the two building off one another: the increased userbase will increase its appeal to game developers, who will provide more games, which will further entice current Windows gamers to switch over to Mac OS X and Apple computers, which will lead to further game develpment, and so on.
The population a single blog reaches may be ten or fifteen times the population a colonial paper reached. Indeed, the scale has grown significantly between the 1700s and now.
These days the cross-linking between blogs makes up for the fact that one particular blog doesn't reach 100% of a community. Over the span of several blogs, in the form of a blogwork (ie. a network of blogs referencing each other's content), the ideas are eventually propagated to a vast majority of the population.
But how do you define who a "liar" is when you're dealing with completely subjective material? Indeed, it is quite difficult. Should FOX News be considered "liars" because they put a neoconservative spin on their reporting? Should Indymedia be considered "liars" because they put a liberal spin on their reporting?
There are no absolutes when it comes to "the truth" on various subjective topics, and therefore it is incorrect to deprive people of their freedom of expression because one thinks they are "liars".
Sure it matters. What about the people following you? I commend you for making this problem known about on Slashdot. But don't forget to contact your government representatives and local newspapers. Make people in your community aware of this tyranny. Perhaps then it will get dealt with.
Slashdot Mirror
Does anyone have any experience using Debian on PA-RISC machines? I currently have an HP P9000 running an older version of HP-UX. Would it be possible to replace it with Debian? Would I be able to use the newer X.org X11 implementation?
Perhaps this cleaning of the administration is being done in order to facilitate a more military-centric NASA. There has been much speculation (see References) that the US military will begin to weaponize space. A NASA that is less interested in scientific discovery will of course be beneficial to the Pentagon, as they have the capabilities and know-how to design, implement, launch, maintain and control this upcoming space-based weaponry.
e =technologyNews&storyID=8522373 0 0000e2511c8.html
References: http://www.reuters.com/audi/newsArticle.jhtml?typ
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/a4a4e198-c8cf-11d9-87c9-
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7896613/
It really doesn't matter what school they graduated from. As long as their background is in engineering, rather than political pandering, then things will improve at NASA. Real engineers practicing real engineering will prevent probes from being lost on a routine basis, and space shuttles from blowing up every so often.
Developments like this truly show the versatility of hand-held computers, whether they be PDAs or microgaming systems. Indeed, these systems are just as capable as the most powerful desktop systems of even just four or five years ago. It's amazing that so much progress has been made in so little time.
Will the be bringing in real engineers? Real engineers, rather than bureaucrats, are the only way that NASA can be revitalized.
It's interesting because it opens up the possibility of bringing high-performance, fault-tolerant computing to the masses. I don't mean the type of "fault-tolerance" (as in it doesn't crash daily) that Linux brings. I mean rock-solid stability that only a true UNIX vendor can provide. I would gladly run HP-UX as my workstation OS if it were affordable. HP-UX and HP-VUE combine to form an amazingly strong workstation environment that's particularly good for software development.
Of course you don't pass those types of safety-inducing options to your Java compiler or virtual machine. The high-security nature of Java is implied. Security is inherent to Java. That is why it is difficult to write malicious code in Java, and as such is an actual challenge.
Anyone can write malicious code in C, but it takes a real pro with real knowledge to even begin to try that with Java.
And like I said, do it in Java instead. That'll make it a real challenge, since the designers of Java made an effort to make it difficult to write malicious code in the first place. The point isn't that the code will look valid, but rather that it will perform malicious duties, which is something that is a challenge in Java, but easily done in C. Making it look valid is just an additional challenge for both languages.
Indeed, HP has ported HP-UX to the Itanium. But there are doubts about the veracity of the Itanium as a stable, high-performance, fault tolerant, uptime-guaranteed platform. Part of going with HP-UX was knowing that you were running on PA-RISC, and you know you could trust your system. Now that has been taken away. It's as if HP-UX has been partially neutered.
Everyone knows that it is possible to write malicious code in C. That's just because C gives you the near utmost control over your system, and does not discrminiate based on human emotions like "good", "bad", and "malicious". Perhaps a better idea would have been to try to write malicious code in a language such as Java, which tries to prevent a programmer from writing such code. That would be a real challenge.
Indeed. I am glad I was able to experience HP in the 1980s when they were at or near their prime. I feel sorry for the students these days who will never experience what it is like to use a system that just plain never crashes.
Being brought up on Windows and shitty PCs that have an entire lifespan a tenth as long as the average uptime of true systems like those from HP will damage one's mind. I fear that our upcoming system designers and engineers will be unable to make suitable decisions regarding what sort of systems to use. The moment we have nuclear power plant control systems running on Intel-based Windows 2003 Server machines the world will be doomed.
This sounds a lot like possible entrapment. The authorities start a contest such as this, an unsuspecting programmer submits a malicious program, and he or she is arrested and charged with a variety of computer crimes. Frankly, I won't participate in this contest considering the current legal state of America.
With the demise of HP-UX on PA-RISC, I fear we are going to see unsuitable systems used for mission-critical applications. HP-UX and PA-RISC are both widely known for their fault tolerance and extreme reliability. They're the kind of OS and computer architecture you trust to run the control systems of a nuclear power plant, or the financial transactions of a major stockmarket.
My hope is that IBM does not make the same mistake as HP, but instead continues with their AiX/PPC combination on workstations and servers. We need variety in the UNIX market to result in innovation and improvements. With IRIX and SGI gone, Compaq and Tru64 gone, and soon possibly HP and HP-UX (there are doubts that the Itanium can fully replace the PA-RISC), the major UNIX vendors left are Sun and IBM. Frankly, that may not be enough to provide a sufficient level of innovation.
There has been some speculation that the new computers from Apple which use an Intel processor will use an Itanium 2 CPU, which HP has used to replace the PA-RISC as their main workstation and server CPU. This indeed raises a very interesting question: if the new Macs do indeed use Itanium chips, would we one day see HP-UX running on a Mac? It is a real possibility.
But what if it's like R2-D2, with all sorts of probes that can emerge at will? There could be a dildo, a lube dispenser, a condom machine, and that electrozapper thing to make things really fun.
No. I mean he will bend her over, and incestually fuck her in the ass with his prosthetic, mechanical penis.
Interesting. And if he buttfucked Princess Leah with it, it be even more interesting!
When Anakin started to burn up after losing most of his limbs, it is quite possible that his penis was severely burned. Considering that he was engulfed in flames, it is probably safe to say that his penis and scrotum were literally quite gone. Now, my question is, did the Emperor install a prosthetic, mechanical penis onto Darth Vader?
Well, it is more than possible to use other, non-Microsoft operatings sytems on PCs. You know, OSes like Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, x86 Darwin, x86 Mac OS X, Solaris x86, BeOS, and so on. So no, there is evidence to suggest that a monopoly in the strictest sense does not exist. Anyways, it's just a fact of nature that everyone is biased, and people won't always agree. That is because subjectivity plays a role in all types of thinking by each and every person, including you and me.
OpenGL and OpenAL are two such multimedia facilities offered by Mac OS X. Indeed, along with other Mac OX S technologies such as Quartz, QuickTime, QuickDraw it does begin to form the backbone of the ultimate gaming PC.
The transition to the Intel platform may very well give it the userbase it needs. In fact, it may be a case of the two building off one another: the increased userbase will increase its appeal to game developers, who will provide more games, which will further entice current Windows gamers to switch over to Mac OS X and Apple computers, which will lead to further game develpment, and so on.
The population a single blog reaches may be ten or fifteen times the population a colonial paper reached. Indeed, the scale has grown significantly between the 1700s and now. These days the cross-linking between blogs makes up for the fact that one particular blog doesn't reach 100% of a community. Over the span of several blogs, in the form of a blogwork (ie. a network of blogs referencing each other's content), the ideas are eventually propagated to a vast majority of the population.
But how do you define who a "liar" is when you're dealing with completely subjective material? Indeed, it is quite difficult. Should FOX News be considered "liars" because they put a neoconservative spin on their reporting? Should Indymedia be considered "liars" because they put a liberal spin on their reporting? There are no absolutes when it comes to "the truth" on various subjective topics, and therefore it is incorrect to deprive people of their freedom of expression because one thinks they are "liars".
All media is like that. Blogs, newspapers, news broadcasts, etc.
Sure it matters. What about the people following you? I commend you for making this problem known about on Slashdot. But don't forget to contact your government representatives and local newspapers. Make people in your community aware of this tyranny. Perhaps then it will get dealt with.