Shhh! No one tell them they made a mistake. It kinda gets me wondering if a lawyer made that IEEE document up or some intern making peanuts an hour typed it out (maybe both).
It really doesnt matter if its flood ping or not (or if the packet size is changed). I just wanted to make a point that it can make a significant difference at even minimal settings
A ping request and reply is about 98 bytes each. Assuming around.1 second round-trip latency latency thats 1960 bytes / second. 86400 seconds in a day would yeild 161.5 megabytes a day BOTH WAYS. That could actually make a difference. One ping process alone would be enough to double a 1GB upload limit (as say, the limit my isp uses). I'm scared!
-----Ripped Directly from FreeBSD CVS Server --/usr/src/sys/ufs/ffs/README.snapshot
Using Snapshots
To create a snapshot of your/var filesystem, run the command:
mount -u -o snapshot/var/snapshot/snap1/var
This command will take a snapshot of your/var filesystem and leave it in the file/var/snapshot/snap1. Note that snapshot files must be created in the filesystem that is being snapshotted. I use the convention of putting a `snapshot' directory at the root of each filesystem into which I can place snapshots. You may create up to 20 snapshots per filesystem. Active snapshots are recorded in the superblock, so they persist across unmount and remount operations and across system reboots. When your are done with a snapshot, it can be removed with the `rm' command. Snapshots may be removed in any order, however you may not get back all the space contained in the snapshot as another snapshot may claim some of the blocks that it is releasing. Note that the `schg' flag is set on snapshots to ensure that not even the root user can write to them. The unlink command makes an exception for snapshot files in that it allows them to be removed even though they have the `schg' flag set, so it is not necessary to clear the `schg' flag before removing a snapshot file.
Once you have taken a snapshot, there are three interesting things that you can do with it:
1) Run fsck on the snapshot file. Assuming that the filesystem
was clean when it was mounted, you should always get a clean
(and unchanging) result from running fsck on the snapshot.
If you are running with soft updates and rebooted after a
crash without cleaning up the filesystem, then fsck of the
snapshot may find missing blocks and inodes or inodes with
link counts that are too high. I have not yet added the
system calls to allow fsck to add these missing resources
back to the filesystem - that will be added once the basic
snapshot code is working properly. So, view those reports
as informational for now.
2) Run dump on the snapshot. You will get a dump that is
consistent with the filesystem as of the timestamp of the
snapshot. Note that I have not yet changed dump to set the
dumpdates file correctly, so do not use this feature in
production until that fix is made.
3) Mount the snapshot as a frozen image of the filesystem.
To mount the snapshot/var/snapshot/snap1:
mdconfig -a -t vnode -f/var/snapshot/snap1 -u 4
mount -r/dev/md4/mnt
You can now cruise around your frozen/var filesystem
at/mnt. Everything will be in the same state that it
was at the time the snapshot was taken. The one exception
is that any earlier snapshots will appear as zero length
files. When you are done with the mounted snapshot:
umount/mnt
mdconfig -d -u 4
Note that under some circumstances, the process accessing
the frozen filesystem may deadlock. I am aware of this
problem, but the solution is not simple. It requires
using buffer read locks rather than exclusive locks when
traversing the inode indirect blocks. Until this problem
is fixed, you should avoid putting mounted snapshots into
production.
Performance
It takes about 30 seconds to create a snapshot of an 8Gb filesystem. Of that time 25 seconds is spent in preparation; filesystem activity is only suspended for the final 5 seconds of that period. Snapshot removal of an 8Gb filesystem takes about two minutes. Filesystem activity is never suspended during snapshot removal.
The suspend time may be expanded by several minutes if a process is in the midst of removing many files as all the soft updates backlog must be cleared. Generally snapshots do not slow the system down appreciably except when removing many small files (i.e., any file less than 96Kb whose last block is a fragment) that are claimed by a snapshot. Here, the snapshot code must make a copy of every released fragment which slows the rate of file removal to about twenty files per second once the soft updates backlog limit is reached.
How Snapshots Work
For more general information on snapshots, please see:
http://www.mckusick.com/softdep/
Google has no qualms with denying service to whole ISPs because of a few people from that specific provider abusing their search engine. I was reading somewhere that they denied everyone from Comcast for just that reason. The people at Google are pretty smart and I assume they will have a method for preventing abuse of their SOAP interface. I guess they will just deny anyone who abuses. Also, I assume they will have text adds or something (from seeing some of the other discussion in the/. stories). This move will no doubt allow Google to really entrench their position as the best search engine around.
Yes, but there are some of us that like to use STABLE code. It's not really php's fault though. *sigh* this is probably a useless argument, however, because of the fact that this is fundamentally a x.0.0 release (even though its really 2.0.35). I am not going to run it till it has spent some time in the field (or I may set it up on an extra non-production machine). Damn, php rules for small applications.
Every day we hear about how companies choose to implement MS solutions (adds more to the problem, however) rather than better BSD/Linux solutions. "But it's cheaper to employ an MCSE!"... That may be so, but this route should only be taken if you dont care about the company's data.
Fucking braindead corporations; spend the extra 15 thousand / year and protect your freaking data instead of throwing away your secrets. It's going to be cheaper down the road when you have to hire lawyers to start sueing people or lose business because people won't trust your braindead corporation with their credit cards.
Q: How many Bill Gates' does it take to change a light bulb?
A: 15 to develop a bloated software prototype, 8 to write a horribly designed and overly complex non-contextual help system. 34 to author the help text, 122 to write the various SDKs and interfaces so that the lightbulb will work in conventional sockets, 67 to create demeaning adds that belittle other's bulb-screwing attempts, and 4 to write a lengthy book on the process.
Well, it is quite obvious you did not understand my point.
Uh, I have a big problem with your argument.....Everything is grandfathered. That tends to stick us in the SQ. What happens when the grandfathered stuff is obsolete?!?
When the grandfathered stuff is obsolete, there obviously will be no choice but the drm stuff. The points I was disputing before were specific technologies. There is no point saying "mp3 players will become illegal" because the truth is they effectively wont. The only situation is if someone creates their own portable mp3 player that does not support the drm tech. Nobody in their right mind except maybe a handful of electronic engineers or computer enginers in the whole world would be able to roll their own. Mp3 players will simply not be made anymore. All the current ones would be grandfathered in. Therefore, the only illegal mp3 player would be so few in number that they would be insignificant. Essentially, of course they would still illegal in the respect of the producer, but fundamentally not the consumer because it would simply be impossible to get a new one
Grandfathering has never been and never will be a solution to a bill for the fact that most bills outlive whatever they grandfathered (at least in cases of grandfathered products).
I wasnt saying it was a solution, I was saying that we arent automatically going to have to go out and buy all new hardware (which was implied by the post I was commenting on).
Please next time argue the merits (yes, if this bill was passed 5 years ago, mp3 players WOULD be illegal, and thus your argument is void) instead of counter-acting with timeframe based crap.
Yet again, it is apparent you did understand my argument at all. If the bill was passed five years ago, newly created mp3 players would be illegal. I am not disputing that. I was just saying that the law would be enforced at the level of the producer, not the consumer. Face it, we are bitches to large companies. It would be exactly the same situation if 5 years ago, producers decided to not to create any more mp3 players (even though they didnt even have them five years ago). You would not be able to buy one, but you could get one second hand (according to my legalese). I am about 99.999% sure of people even here on slashdot would not be able to build their own. They wouldnt even be able to break the law, even if they tried.
1. It will be illegal to record anything off of your TV.
wrong! -- (2) PERSONAL USE COPIES. -- No person may apply a security measure that uses a standard security technology to prevent a lawful recipient from making a personal copy for lawful use in the home of programming at the time it is lawfully performed, on an over-the-air broadcast, premium or non-premium cable channel, or premium or non-premium satellite channel, by a television broadcast station (as defined in section 122 (j)(5)(A) of title 17, United States Code), a cables system (as defined in section 111(f) of such title), or a satellite carrier (as defined in section 119(d)(6) of such title).
2. It will be illegal to listen to CDs you've bought on your computer.
Wrong again! The current system will be grandfathered in. But when the standards are finalized, they wont have any reason for you NOT to listen to your music "CD" because there would be "no way of copying it". (see the fourth point)
3. It will be illegal to own an MP3 player.
BZZZZZZZ! wrong again! The current mp3 players will be grandfathered in (see point number 4). They will just stop making mp3 players and create new standards that compies with the CBDTPA (or whatever)
4. The computer you are currently using will be illegal since it's not fitted with Copy Protection.
Grandfathered!
(a) IN GENERAL. -- A manufacturer, importer, or seller of digital media devices may not --
(1) sell, or offer for sale, in interstate commerce, or
(2) cause to be transported in, or in a manner affecting, interstate commerce,
a digital medial device unless the device includes and utilizes standard security technologies that adhere to the security system standards adopted under section 3.
(b) EXCEPTION. -- Subsection (a) does not apply to the sale, offer for sale, or transportation of a digital media device that was legally manufactured or imported, and sold to the consumer, prior to the effective date of regulations adopted under section 3 and not subsequently modified in violation of section 6(a).
5. It will be illegal to innovate, to create, or to even write without the blessing of the Entertainment industry.
Well, except for the innovation part, that is also wrong. There will be nothing preventing you from writing anything. Creation will not be outlawed, just harder to build upon other's work. Your computer will not be turned into a dvd watching / castrated web browser terminal at all. You will still have graphics programs, film editing programs, 3d modeling programs, compilers, whatever.
Fighting ignorance with ignorance is quite useless.
did you neglect to read the last part of my comment? Would you consider that a hard-ass, rigid, especially humourless response? I think you need to get your glasses fixed. It looks like you are the one that should "buy a sense of humour".
sorry, when I say "traveling soley by compass" I really mean a situation where you cannot see properly and use an instrument for direction finding. It would not be practical to do this because every time one would need to change direction slightly they would have to orient themselves with polaris as a reference.
What happens when it is daytime, cloudy or you are in a light saturated location? Even if you can see it, it is impractical if you are traveling soley by compass. I do a lot of sailing and I can tell you, Polaris is not very useful unless for celestial navigation.
No shit! Nobody is disputing that. The problem comes when you apply a map/chart to a real life situation. How are you supposed to find the direction of true north without a compass? To figure out which way true north is, one must take the compass bearing and apply the variation correction. Without a variation correction on a chart, then nobody would be able to use it properly because the chart could be oriented any way and nobody would know which way is what.
I think you mean variation. Declination is a term used for latitude of celestial bodies in the sky. You were probably thinking of "deviation" -- which happens to be the local change in the readings of the compass due to metallic elements in a boat etc.
I dont know about anything else, but the nautical charts put out by the Canadian and American hydrographical services have corrections for this. I would think that any topographical map that had a magnetic north pole would have corrections for the change too.
Anyone who sets foot in a london drugs expecting not to get ripped off is a fucking moron. Their computer "section" is little more than a automatic-raping-device(tm) used to separate fools from their money.
On the rare occasion that I do enter one of their stores (once a year maybe), I am revolted by the sleeze and greasiness of their employees and entire establishment. Go to one of the few respectable Canadian outless for your recordable-media.
Oh yah, if you dont like it, get proof of it (hidden camera), and send it anonymously to your local television station, BBB, and cop-shop.
"but the same principles have been internationally ratified by 177 countries. Thus, DMCA cannot be wrong!".
You obviously haven't read the treaty then. The previous comment stated that the WIPO treaty does not carry the same provisions as the DMCA. I agree with this from doing a little reading; there is nothing about distribution of "rights management circumvention devices" being prevented in this. At most, it says it is illegal to circumvent rights management systems.
These are completely different things. If you wanted to fight the WIPO somehow in your country, there is not much to go on with free speech violation (assuming there are free speech laws in your country)
Slashdot Mirror
Shhh! No one tell them they made a mistake. It kinda gets me wondering if a lawyer made that IEEE document up or some intern making peanuts an hour typed it out (maybe both).
It really doesnt matter if its flood ping or not (or if the packet size is changed). I just wanted to make a point that it can make a significant difference at even minimal settings
A ping request and reply is about 98 bytes each. Assuming around .1 second round-trip latency latency thats 1960 bytes / second. 86400 seconds in a day would yeild 161.5 megabytes a day BOTH WAYS. That could actually make a difference. One ping process alone would be enough to double a 1GB upload limit (as say, the limit my isp uses). I'm scared!
(if my math is wrong please respond!)
-----Ripped Directly from FreeBSD CVS Server --/usr/src/sys/ufs/ffs/README.snapshot
/var filesystem, run the command:
/var/snapshot/snap1 /var
/var filesystem and /var/snapshot/snap1. Note that snapshot
/var/snapshot/snap1:
/var/snapshot/snap1 -u 4 /dev/md4 /mnt
/var filesystem /mnt. Everything will be in the same state that it
/mnt
Using Snapshots
To create a snapshot of your
mount -u -o snapshot
This command will take a snapshot of your
leave it in the file
files must be created in the filesystem that is being snapshotted.
I use the convention of putting a `snapshot' directory at the
root of each filesystem into which I can place snapshots.
You may create up to 20 snapshots per filesystem. Active snapshots
are recorded in the superblock, so they persist across unmount
and remount operations and across system reboots. When your
are done with a snapshot, it can be removed with the `rm'
command. Snapshots may be removed in any order, however you
may not get back all the space contained in the snapshot as
another snapshot may claim some of the blocks that it is releasing.
Note that the `schg' flag is set on snapshots to ensure that
not even the root user can write to them. The unlink command
makes an exception for snapshot files in that it allows them
to be removed even though they have the `schg' flag set, so it
is not necessary to clear the `schg' flag before removing a
snapshot file.
Once you have taken a snapshot, there are three interesting
things that you can do with it:
1) Run fsck on the snapshot file. Assuming that the filesystem
was clean when it was mounted, you should always get a clean
(and unchanging) result from running fsck on the snapshot.
If you are running with soft updates and rebooted after a
crash without cleaning up the filesystem, then fsck of the
snapshot may find missing blocks and inodes or inodes with
link counts that are too high. I have not yet added the
system calls to allow fsck to add these missing resources
back to the filesystem - that will be added once the basic
snapshot code is working properly. So, view those reports
as informational for now.
2) Run dump on the snapshot. You will get a dump that is
consistent with the filesystem as of the timestamp of the
snapshot. Note that I have not yet changed dump to set the
dumpdates file correctly, so do not use this feature in
production until that fix is made.
3) Mount the snapshot as a frozen image of the filesystem.
To mount the snapshot
mdconfig -a -t vnode -f
mount -r
You can now cruise around your frozen
at
was at the time the snapshot was taken. The one exception
is that any earlier snapshots will appear as zero length
files. When you are done with the mounted snapshot:
umount
mdconfig -d -u 4
Note that under some circumstances, the process accessing
the frozen filesystem may deadlock. I am aware of this
problem, but the solution is not simple. It requires
using buffer read locks rather than exclusive locks when
traversing the inode indirect blocks. Until this problem
is fixed, you should avoid putting mounted snapshots into
production.
Performance
It takes about 30 seconds to create a snapshot of an 8Gb filesystem.
Of that time 25 seconds is spent in preparation; filesystem activity
is only suspended for the final 5 seconds of that period. Snapshot
removal of an 8Gb filesystem takes about two minutes. Filesystem
activity is never suspended during snapshot removal.
The suspend time may be expanded by several minutes if a process
is in the midst of removing many files as all the soft updates
backlog must be cleared. Generally snapshots do not slow the system
down appreciably except when removing many small files (i.e., any
file less than 96Kb whose last block is a fragment) that are claimed
by a snapshot. Here, the snapshot code must make a copy of every
released fragment which slows the rate of file removal to about
twenty files per second once the soft updates backlog limit is
reached.
How Snapshots Work
For more general information on snapshots, please see:
http://www.mckusick.com/softdep/
is it me, or does this story seem like it was piped from /dev/katz?
I think i will be first to ask: now where is the damned article? maybe i am missing something
Google has no qualms with denying service to whole ISPs because of a few people from that specific provider abusing their search engine. I was reading somewhere that they denied everyone from Comcast for just that reason. The people at Google are pretty smart and I assume they will have a method for preventing abuse of their SOAP interface. I guess they will just deny anyone who abuses. Also, I assume they will have text adds or something (from seeing some of the other discussion in the /. stories). This move will no doubt allow Google to really entrench their position as the best search engine around.
Yes, but there are some of us that like to use STABLE code. It's not really php's fault though. *sigh* this is probably a useless argument, however, because of the fact that this is fundamentally a x.0.0 release (even though its really 2.0.35). I am not going to run it till it has spent some time in the field (or I may set it up on an extra non-production machine). Damn, php rules for small applications.
Stupid people!
Every day we hear about how companies choose to implement MS solutions (adds more to the problem, however) rather than better BSD/Linux solutions. "But it's cheaper to employ an MCSE!"... That may be so, but this route should only be taken if you dont care about the company's data.
Fucking braindead corporations; spend the extra 15 thousand / year and protect your freaking data instead of throwing away your secrets. It's going to be cheaper down the road when you have to hire lawyers to start sueing people or lose business because people won't trust your braindead corporation with their credit cards.
Netcraft Survay
Why the hell would they switch from FreeBSD to Windows 2000?
--cut an paste from a random joke site---
Q: How many Bill Gates' does it take to change a light bulb?
A: 15 to develop a bloated software prototype, 8 to write a horribly designed and overly complex non-contextual help system. 34 to author the help text, 122 to write the various SDKs and interfaces so that the lightbulb will work in conventional sockets, 67 to create demeaning adds that belittle other's bulb-screwing attempts, and 4 to write a lengthy book on the process.
Well, it is quite obvious you did not understand my point.
Uh, I have a big problem with your argument.....Everything is grandfathered. That tends to stick us in the SQ. What happens when the grandfathered stuff is obsolete?!?
When the grandfathered stuff is obsolete, there obviously will be no choice but the drm stuff. The points I was disputing before were specific technologies. There is no point saying "mp3 players will become illegal" because the truth is they effectively wont. The only situation is if someone creates their own portable mp3 player that does not support the drm tech. Nobody in their right mind except maybe a handful of electronic engineers or computer enginers in the whole world would be able to roll their own. Mp3 players will simply not be made anymore. All the current ones would be grandfathered in. Therefore, the only illegal mp3 player would be so few in number that they would be insignificant. Essentially, of course they would still illegal in the respect of the producer, but fundamentally not the consumer because it would simply be impossible to get a new one
Grandfathering has never been and never will be a solution to a bill for the fact that most bills outlive whatever they grandfathered (at least in cases of grandfathered products).
I wasnt saying it was a solution, I was saying that we arent automatically going to have to go out and buy all new hardware (which was implied by the post I was commenting on).
Please next time argue the merits (yes, if this bill was passed 5 years ago, mp3 players WOULD be illegal, and thus your argument is void) instead of counter-acting with timeframe based crap.
Yet again, it is apparent you did understand my argument at all. If the bill was passed five years ago, newly created mp3 players would be illegal. I am not disputing that. I was just saying that the law would be enforced at the level of the producer, not the consumer. Face it, we are bitches to large companies. It would be exactly the same situation if 5 years ago, producers decided to not to create any more mp3 players (even though they didnt even have them five years ago). You would not be able to buy one, but you could get one second hand (according to my legalese). I am about 99.999% sure of people even here on slashdot would not be able to build their own. They wouldnt even be able to break the law, even if they tried.
1. It will be illegal to record anything off of your TV.
wrong! -- (2) PERSONAL USE COPIES. -- No person may apply a security measure that uses a standard security technology to prevent a lawful recipient from making a personal copy for lawful use in the home of programming at the time it is lawfully performed, on an over-the-air broadcast, premium or non-premium cable channel, or premium or non-premium satellite channel, by a television broadcast station (as defined in section 122 (j)(5)(A) of title 17, United States Code), a cables system (as defined in section 111(f) of such title), or a satellite carrier (as defined in section 119(d)(6) of such title).
2. It will be illegal to listen to CDs you've bought on your computer.
Wrong again! The current system will be grandfathered in. But when the standards are finalized, they wont have any reason for you NOT to listen to your music "CD" because there would be "no way of copying it". (see the fourth point)
3. It will be illegal to own an MP3 player.
BZZZZZZZ! wrong again! The current mp3 players will be grandfathered in (see point number 4). They will just stop making mp3 players and create new standards that compies with the CBDTPA (or whatever)
4. The computer you are currently using will be illegal since it's not fitted with Copy Protection.
Grandfathered!
(a) IN GENERAL. -- A manufacturer, importer, or seller of digital media devices may not -- (1) sell, or offer for sale, in interstate commerce, or
(2) cause to be transported in, or in a manner affecting, interstate commerce,
a digital medial device unless the device includes and utilizes standard security technologies that adhere to the security system standards adopted under section 3.
(b) EXCEPTION. -- Subsection (a) does not apply to the sale, offer for sale, or transportation of a digital media device that was legally manufactured or imported, and sold to the consumer, prior to the effective date of regulations adopted under section 3 and not subsequently modified in violation of section 6(a).
5. It will be illegal to innovate, to create, or to even write without the blessing of the Entertainment industry.
Well, except for the innovation part, that is also wrong. There will be nothing preventing you from writing anything. Creation will not be outlawed, just harder to build upon other's work. Your computer will not be turned into a dvd watching / castrated web browser terminal at all. You will still have graphics programs, film editing programs, 3d modeling programs, compilers, whatever.
Fighting ignorance with ignorance is quite useless.
did you neglect to read the last part of my comment? Would you consider that a hard-ass, rigid, especially humourless response? I think you need to get your glasses fixed. It looks like you are the one that should "buy a sense of humour".
That suggestion would not be very good for one main reason: You are trying to sway your elected official's opinion - not hold them for ransom.
-------text ransom note-------
deAR sEnAtOr:
dO N0T pAsS sSsCa 0r eLSe
sInCErELy,
31337 Hax0r
sorry, when I say "traveling soley by compass" I really mean a situation where you cannot see properly and use an instrument for direction finding. It would not be practical to do this because every time one would need to change direction slightly they would have to orient themselves with polaris as a reference.
Um, Polaris is still a pretty good indicator
What happens when it is daytime, cloudy or you are in a light saturated location? Even if you can see it, it is impractical if you are traveling soley by compass. I do a lot of sailing and I can tell you, Polaris is not very useful unless for celestial navigation.
No shit! Nobody is disputing that. The problem comes when you apply a map/chart to a real life situation. How are you supposed to find the direction of true north without a compass? To figure out which way true north is, one must take the compass bearing and apply the variation correction. Without a variation correction on a chart, then nobody would be able to use it properly because the chart could be oriented any way and nobody would know which way is what.
I think you mean variation. Declination is a term used for latitude of celestial bodies in the sky. You were probably thinking of "deviation" -- which happens to be the local change in the readings of the compass due to metallic elements in a boat etc.
Yes, it is called Notice to Mariners and it's a subscription service here in Canada. I have no idea about the states.
I dont know about anything else, but the nautical charts put out by the Canadian and American hydrographical services have corrections for this. I would think that any topographical map that had a magnetic north pole would have corrections for the change too.
Anyone who sets foot in a london drugs expecting not to get ripped off is a fucking moron. Their computer "section" is little more than a automatic-raping-device(tm) used to separate fools from their money.
On the rare occasion that I do enter one of their stores (once a year maybe), I am revolted by the sleeze and greasiness of their employees and entire establishment. Go to one of the few respectable Canadian outless for your recordable-media.
Oh yah, if you dont like it, get proof of it (hidden camera), and send it anonymously to your local television station, BBB, and cop-shop.
They broke MS Proxy server compatibility
:P
read: fixed
"but the same principles have been internationally ratified by 177 countries. Thus, DMCA cannot be wrong!".
You obviously haven't read the treaty then. The previous comment stated that the WIPO treaty does not carry the same provisions as the DMCA. I agree with this from doing a little reading; there is nothing about distribution of "rights management circumvention devices" being prevented in this. At most, it says it is illegal to circumvent rights management systems.
These are completely different things. If you wanted to fight the WIPO somehow in your country, there is not much to go on with free speech violation (assuming there are free speech laws in your country)
For the first couple of months of the trip, I would imagine this would be a reoccuring version:
"I spy with my little eye, something that is gaseous!"
Uranus?