web portals ok, but what do you mean by a tcp daemon? Do you mean a TCP stack, in which case why would you use a scripting language (even though its highly optimizable) instead of C/C++? Or do you mean a TCP server? Even if it was the latter, if performance and code size is important to you, why didn't you use C/C++? Perl is great for prototyping performance-intensive apps, but if you deploy it for any serious performance-intensive tasks, you're making somewhat of a mistake. Also, I don't know how you can claim that Perl is a "very bloated" language. Do you mean that there are a bunch of modules out there, or that the core distribution is bloated? For the richness of functionality that Perl provides, I think it's doing a brilliant job in terms of size/features compared to, say, oh I don't know...Visual Studio??
I am an engineer at heart. I get a real kick out of watching something that I've built work. And the 'plex was the perfect environment, filled with smart, friendly people, state-of-the-art equipement, and half a dozen different kinds of coffee machines. (I actually had some interesting conversations about the finer points of espresso making, and at one point someone even brought in a book that was entirely devoted to the topic.)
Well LAAA-DEEE-DAAAAA. Excuse the rest of us who couldn't get past the 3rd round of interviews! We'll just continue in our windowless labs/cubicles here, sucking down on 35 cent coffee from a vending machine perpetually on the fritz.
So many comments talk about content, but content similarity was abandoned as the chief measure in searching years ago, when people started filling their pages with invisible, offtopic keywords to show up higher. Most contemporary ranking schemes are based on hyperlink analysis, i.e. the number and type of pages that LINK to your page, and vice versa.
If you want to figure out how to boost your ratings, why not get the advice from the horse's mouth?
For those with a taste for Yahoo, search for Kleinberg's original 1998 paper on HITS. I seriously doubt that these authors have anything more to contribute than the two papers I listed, unless of course they worked for Google/Yahoo and are violating some SERIOUS NDAs.
Call me jaded, but this is hardly surprising. It's quite amazing yes, but not surprising. Even small fragments of rat brain will have thousands and thousands of neurons and neuronal connections. It then becomes a matter of interfacing this "brain" with an appropriate sensory/control mechanism to respond to arbitrary stimuli (plane flying) after a certain amount of training. We have these beasties for decades and we call them "neural networks". If a relatively miniscule bunch of simulated neurons can drive a car (ALVINN from Google's cache, then a bunch of real neurons orders of magnitude larger can definitely fly a plane.
this all getting to be too much
on
Antispyware Shootout
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Whats going to be left of your CPU if you're running a bunch of anti-spy/virus/blaaaah scanners, auto-updaters and registry watchers? Have we all forgotten whitelist-based approaches? IMO, the best way to go is to DeepFreeze your system drive, unfreezing it for updates and installing new software (uninfected software of course). Then have a couple of data partitions that are not frozen. Run Firefox in ultra-restricted mode for everything but the sites you know are safe. Why is this so hard? The other approach would be to get AV makers to include spyware features in their software so that you don't have to clutter up your process space with extra protection.
perhaps you should read my initial reply. i said that while forcing people to move is not viable, making the domain available is free market commerce. my point was that a lot of porn sites might actually WANT.xxx. i explicitly said that forcing people to move was 1) not viable and 2) against the nature of the net. perhaps you should read my bullshit first...
bullshit -- they said the same things about.info and.biz, and yet they popped up magically on the Internet. my point is on discerning the difference between introducing.info and.biz, and introducing.xxx. there is no technical difference.
This is really not a valid argument. First of all, you can't possibly FORCE smut vendors to use.xxx -- first, it's impossible, and second, it goes against the nature of the Internet. Secondly, please remember that the First Amendment you refer to is an AMERICAN constitutional amendment. It isn't right to bind the Internet -- undeniably an international entity now -- by American laws. Even if you were, I very much doubt that free speech would allow a blanket ban on the.xxx domain.
My question is this: granted that the.xxx domain may not solve too many problems, is there any reason to BAN it?? I'm sure a lot of websites would WANT it, and you could price it at a much higher premium than.com or.net. There are no technical issues -- the only true objection I can see is puritanism. Remember, we aren't talking about FORCING people to move over to.xxx -- such enforced censorship is ineffective and largely a waste of time. It's more likely that.xxx will become more of a "status symbol" among porn vendors and actually sell.
I know this issue has been discussed a lot, and I'm all for keeping things the way they are (it simply works). HOWEVER, what does concern me is growing evidence of U.S. puritanism in the decision process, like the blocking of the.xxx domain on what seems like shallow premises. While the benefits of.xxx are a separate issue altogether, I doubt if European audiences would resist something like that unless they had a very strong reason to do so. I say let ICANN keep control as long as it doesn't become puritan-ized.
That's not quite correct. The state space of this problem is greatly reduced because you're constraining each row or column to be a word from the dictionary. As a result, you don't have a choice of 26 for each grid cell, or 26^10 for each row or column. If you use a 100,000 word dictionary, you're looking at approximately 100000^10 choices for the whole puzzle, which is large, but not completely unmanageable.
While I partially agree with some comments on the utility of laptops vs. 2 gallons of milk, you have to think past the obvious shortcoming. Sure, third-world children could use a TB vaccine or even extra gallons of milk I suppose, but that doesn't mean that all the money that's invested in the third world should be put solely into medical grants and food aid. Dumping food into poor countries isn't a sustainable plan in the long run. What to me this $100 laptop would really do is open up the world to underprivileged children in a way that they never had access to. Sure, it won't feed them but then again I assume that the $100 laptop is not aimed at the demographic that would sell it for a loaf of bread. What people in the west do not understand is that poverty comes in varying shades. Not all underprivileged children would sell the display screen for bread -- some have access to very basic of neccessities but face a bleak future nonetheless because of the lack of opportunities. I see this laptop as encouraging them to explore and dream beyond their circumstances. If this laptop hooks one kid per thousand, like our first computers did to so many of us, and encourages that kid to stay in school, learn , be better educated and dream beyond his circumstances, then this project will have done more good than dumping $100 worth of bread and milk into his family could ever do. Teach a man to fish...
This in itself is not surprising -- it's a natural step that Google had to take in order to compete with the other biggies in the business. What I'm more interested in knowing is if Google has put that army of Ph.D.'s into developing the AV technology. I don't see any other reason to wait so long for adding virus protection -- they could just as easily have licensed some commercial AV months ago, seeing as AV is one of the features that novice Internet users look for most. Now that MS is into AV, will Google follow suit? I'm hoping...
...because a lot of good came out of the original Xbox being hacked. I'm sure there are a lot of high-perf researchers on a shoestring who are eyeing the price on the basic Xbox 360. Even without a hard disk, a small memory card should be enough to house a basic computation/communications infrastructure, and with the retail price on the basic 360, you should be able to string a bunch of them together to get decent computing power at a price even lower than a low-end Beowulf. I understand that the obvious application of hacking the 360 is so that you can play pirated games, but I for one am eagerly waiting to see what comes out of this project, and the PS3-hack that is soon to be.
IMHO, there are much better ways of curing phobias than resorting to potential treatments based on genetics. It's much easier to imagine military and other subversive applications to motivate this kind of research. Imagine it billed as a "cure" to shell shock and other combat-related situations. While its definitely interesting that we now understand fear a little better, removing fear, or even tinkering with its inner workings, seems nothing short of asking for disaster. We have fear for a reason, and methink moderating it arbitrarily to within parameters that we specify will be more challenging than it is worth.
First it's the microwaves and fridges and coffee makers in the labs/cubicles/dungeons that we work in. Then come along hyper-caffeinated beverages to keep you going longer and longer. Choose anti-glare screens. Choose ergonomic mice. Choose Microsoft f***ing natural keyboards with advanced wrist support and a line of shortcut keys at the top. Choose free soda and free sugar, pumped handily into your veins. What next? Briefcase-sized port-a-potties so that we never, EVER have to leave the glare of the monitor?? STOP THE MADNESS!!!
Whichever av company it was that put out this release, it clearly isn't meant for anyone who's ever used *nix. This message is aimed at potential corporate *nix adopters for whom the lack of viruses might have been a strong selling point. I'm willing to put serious money that there's some lobby cash behind this. This is just like Bush's war - no one with a brain believes its right, but the majority without the brains do, and that's all thats needed. It's disgusting.
> There was always this dreamy, hopeful feeling to it. It's where ideas are traded and inspirations are found. I miss academia and the pure pursue of knowledge/ideas.
you either went to the west coast or wellesley college. oh wait, this is slashdot. cancel wellesley.
> I'd laugh if I weren't crying. The idea that P2P leads to wrongdoing is so utterly laughable that you
> just need to wonder what brand of crack Mr. Henderson is smoking.
they make crack in brands now??
WHY DIDN'T ANYONE TELL ME?!?!?!
Slashdot Mirror
web portals ok, but what do you mean by a tcp daemon? Do you mean a TCP stack, in which case why would you use a scripting language (even though its highly optimizable) instead of C/C++? Or do you mean a TCP server? Even if it was the latter, if performance and code size is important to you, why didn't you use C/C++? Perl is great for prototyping performance-intensive apps, but if you deploy it for any serious performance-intensive tasks, you're making somewhat of a mistake. Also, I don't know how you can claim that Perl is a "very bloated" language. Do you mean that there are a bunch of modules out there, or that the core distribution is bloated? For the richness of functionality that Perl provides, I think it's doing a brilliant job in terms of size/features compared to, say, oh I don't know...Visual Studio??
Well LAAA-DEEE-DAAAAA. Excuse the rest of us who couldn't get past the 3rd round of interviews! We'll just continue in our windowless labs/cubicles here, sucking down on 35 cent coffee from a vending machine perpetually on the fritz.
but then ...
Rip the head of the cute Barbie doll, and plug it into your PC.
can you say TWISTED???
If you want to figure out how to boost your ratings, why not get the advice from the horse's mouth?
Brin and Page's original paper about PageRank (Google) : the original Google paper
Another PageRank paper Inside PageRank
For those with a taste for Yahoo, search for Kleinberg's original 1998 paper on HITS. I seriously doubt that these authors have anything more to contribute than the two papers I listed, unless of course they worked for Google/Yahoo and are violating some SERIOUS NDAs.
Call me jaded, but this is hardly surprising. It's quite amazing yes, but not surprising. Even small fragments of rat brain will have thousands and thousands of neurons and neuronal connections. It then becomes a matter of interfacing this "brain" with an appropriate sensory/control mechanism to respond to arbitrary stimuli (plane flying) after a certain amount of training. We have these beasties for decades and we call them "neural networks". If a relatively miniscule bunch of simulated neurons can drive a car (ALVINN from Google's cache, then a bunch of real neurons orders of magnitude larger can definitely fly a plane.
Whats going to be left of your CPU if you're running a bunch of anti-spy/virus/blaaaah scanners, auto-updaters and registry watchers? Have we all forgotten whitelist-based approaches? IMO, the best way to go is to DeepFreeze your system drive, unfreezing it for updates and installing new software (uninfected software of course). Then have a couple of data partitions that are not frozen. Run Firefox in ultra-restricted mode for everything but the sites you know are safe. Why is this so hard? The other approach would be to get AV makers to include spyware features in their software so that you don't have to clutter up your process space with extra protection.
perhaps you should read my initial reply. i said that while forcing people to move is not viable, making the domain available is free market commerce. my point was that a lot of porn sites might actually WANT .xxx. i explicitly said that forcing people to move was 1) not viable and 2) against the nature of the net. perhaps you should read my bullshit first...
bullshit -- they said the same things about .info and .biz, and yet they popped up magically on the Internet. my point is on discerning the difference between introducing .info and .biz, and introducing .xxx. there is no technical difference.
This is really not a valid argument. First of all, you can't possibly FORCE smut vendors to use .xxx -- first, it's impossible, and second, it goes against the nature of the Internet. Secondly, please remember that the First Amendment you refer to is an AMERICAN constitutional amendment. It isn't right to bind the Internet -- undeniably an international entity now -- by American laws. Even if you were, I very much doubt that free speech would allow a blanket ban on the .xxx domain.
My question is this: granted that the .xxx domain may not solve too many problems, is there any reason to BAN it?? I'm sure a lot of websites would WANT it, and you could price it at a much higher premium than .com or .net. There are no technical issues -- the only true objection I can see is puritanism. Remember, we aren't talking about FORCING people to move over to .xxx -- such enforced censorship is ineffective and largely a waste of time. It's more likely that .xxx will become more of a "status symbol" among porn vendors and actually sell.
I know this issue has been discussed a lot, and I'm all for keeping things the way they are (it simply works). HOWEVER, what does concern me is growing evidence of U.S. puritanism in the decision process, like the blocking of the .xxx domain on what seems like shallow premises. While the benefits of .xxx are a separate issue altogether, I doubt if European audiences would resist something like that unless they had a very strong reason to do so. I say let ICANN keep control as long as it doesn't become puritan-ized.
That's not quite correct. The state space of this problem is greatly reduced because you're constraining each row or column to be a word from the dictionary. As a result, you don't have a choice of 26 for each grid cell, or 26^10 for each row or column. If you use a 100,000 word dictionary, you're looking at approximately 100000^10 choices for the whole puzzle, which is large, but not completely unmanageable.
While I partially agree with some comments on the utility of laptops vs. 2 gallons of milk, you have to think past the obvious shortcoming. Sure, third-world children could use a TB vaccine or even extra gallons of milk I suppose, but that doesn't mean that all the money that's invested in the third world should be put solely into medical grants and food aid. Dumping food into poor countries isn't a sustainable plan in the long run. What to me this $100 laptop would really do is open up the world to underprivileged children in a way that they never had access to. Sure, it won't feed them but then again I assume that the $100 laptop is not aimed at the demographic that would sell it for a loaf of bread. What people in the west do not understand is that poverty comes in varying shades. Not all underprivileged children would sell the display screen for bread -- some have access to very basic of neccessities but face a bleak future nonetheless because of the lack of opportunities. I see this laptop as encouraging them to explore and dream beyond their circumstances. If this laptop hooks one kid per thousand, like our first computers did to so many of us, and encourages that kid to stay in school, learn , be better educated and dream beyond his circumstances, then this project will have done more good than dumping $100 worth of bread and milk into his family could ever do. Teach a man to fish...
This in itself is not surprising -- it's a natural step that Google had to take in order to compete with the other biggies in the business. What I'm more interested in knowing is if Google has put that army of Ph.D.'s into developing the AV technology. I don't see any other reason to wait so long for adding virus protection -- they could just as easily have licensed some commercial AV months ago, seeing as AV is one of the features that novice Internet users look for most. Now that MS is into AV, will Google follow suit? I'm hoping...
...because a lot of good came out of the original Xbox being hacked. I'm sure there are a lot of high-perf researchers on a shoestring who are eyeing the price on the basic Xbox 360. Even without a hard disk, a small memory card should be enough to house a basic computation/communications infrastructure, and with the retail price on the basic 360, you should be able to string a bunch of them together to get decent computing power at a price even lower than a low-end Beowulf. I understand that the obvious application of hacking the 360 is so that you can play pirated games, but I for one am eagerly waiting to see what comes out of this project, and the PS3-hack that is soon to be.
IMHO, there are much better ways of curing phobias than resorting to potential treatments based on genetics. It's much easier to imagine military and other subversive applications to motivate this kind of research. Imagine it billed as a "cure" to shell shock and other combat-related situations. While its definitely interesting that we now understand fear a little better, removing fear, or even tinkering with its inner workings, seems nothing short of asking for disaster. We have fear for a reason, and methink moderating it arbitrarily to within parameters that we specify will be more challenging than it is worth.
First it's the microwaves and fridges and coffee makers in the labs/cubicles/dungeons that we work in. Then come along hyper-caffeinated beverages to keep you going longer and longer. Choose anti-glare screens. Choose ergonomic mice. Choose Microsoft f***ing natural keyboards with advanced wrist support and a line of shortcut keys at the top. Choose free soda and free sugar, pumped handily into your veins. What next? Briefcase-sized port-a-potties so that we never, EVER have to leave the glare of the monitor?? STOP THE MADNESS!!!
Whichever av company it was that put out this release, it clearly isn't meant for anyone who's ever used *nix. This message is aimed at potential corporate *nix adopters for whom the lack of viruses might have been a strong selling point. I'm willing to put serious money that there's some lobby cash behind this. This is just like Bush's war - no one with a brain believes its right, but the majority without the brains do, and that's all thats needed. It's disgusting.
> There was always this dreamy, hopeful feeling to it. It's where ideas are traded and inspirations are found. I miss academia and the pure pursue of knowledge/ideas. you either went to the west coast or wellesley college. oh wait, this is slashdot. cancel wellesley.
Who can't smell marketing a mile away? Slashdot is really sinking...! Anyone else feel this way?
> I'd laugh if I weren't crying. The idea that P2P leads to wrongdoing is so utterly laughable that you > just need to wonder what brand of crack Mr. Henderson is smoking. they make crack in brands now?? WHY DIDN'T ANYONE TELL ME?!?!?!
Perhaps you should put the bong down now....
...when that big one comes flying by to send us up, the ESA will be there to save. Armageddon (the movie) anyone?