Re:What about MySQL?
on
Oracle Buys Sun
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
In the long run, FOSS converges to one winner, challenged by many (much smaller) creatures. Try to build a new browser or new *nix kernel and see how many people you project gets. Try to compete with Apache.
KHTML/Webkit, BSD or Solaris, Lighttpd or Nginx. Doesn't matter if it's got the most users, it just matters if it's a viable deployment platform that's got (relatively) modern features. The only thing that matters to the end user is whether he can use BSD or Lighttpd or Webkit and have it do what he needs and will be maintained in the future.
Well, the fact that they gave a talk about their LAMP stack tells you that they consider engineering more important than site design. Furthermore, a poor choice of infrastructure makes doing good site design hard. And that's my point: Facebook is evidently driven by system stuff and programmers, while it should be driven by site design.
Aditya Agarwal is Facebook's Director of Engineering. Infoq is a site about software engineering. This is a talk by a software engineer, hosted at a software engineering site. Of course it's about software engineering. That tells us nothing about Facebook's priorities vis a vis engineering and design.
Jeff Kaplan (Blizzard's Lead Game Designer) gave a talk about WoW quests at GDC. That doesn't mean that Blizzard thinks that PvE content design is more important than PvP class balance or graphics, it just means that the game designer is talking about his area of expertise in front of a crowd that's interested in his area of expertise. If I wanted to hear a Blizzard employee talk about graphics, I'd go to Nvision or something, and I'd listen to whoever Blizzard's graphics engine guy is, and if I wanted to hear about Blizzard's PvP class balance ideas, I'd look for talks by Greg Street (Ghostcrawler, their lead class balance guy)
Or Gen. Sherman in the Civil War, who pioneered the concept of "total war" by destroying the South's economy and burning as he went.
In my home county of Loudoun, one would be hard pressed not to draw some comparisons between the Loudoun Rangers (Union) and Mosby's Rangers (Confederate) and terrorism. I'm not saying they're equivalent, but there was a lot of indiscriminate burning of the houses and barns of the other side's supporters (or the Quakers, who got hit by both sides for being neutral).
Somewhat correct. Checking the post anonymously box winds up just not showing your name or affecting your karma, but if you don't log in, I think you can still post anonymously in a thread you moderated, and all they have is your IP address and timestamp.
A sufficiently paranoid person could go check out slashcode and try to figure it out if they wanted to. Or use a different browser from what they do their usual activity on and connect via proxy, and then they're safe.
GAAH!! Put the warning (or at least the asterisk) before the word! It's well documented that overexposure to corporate buzzwords causes headaches, confusion, and eventually IQ loss.
True, RFCs are not universally supported, but it's at least a basis to say "this is what you should be doing" with some authority. Otherwise you've got all those minor incompatibility issues AND no way to tell who is right or wrong.
No, it only makes your spectators a subset of the millions of CounterStrike players.
Yes, but it means that people are watching CounterStrike precisely at a time & place when they could instead be playing CounterStrike. So it's not like people watching while unable to play. Thus, there exist at least some conditions under which it is more interesting to watch good CS players than playing CS oneself.
You can't get the same processor on the Dell, since you'd have to use a completely different motherboard and RAM. That's why I pointed out the primary speed advantage of the MBP's processor over the Dell's processor is architectural and not in terms of clock-speed.
Look over your own figures, asshat. That 0.26GHz processor difference REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY matters!
In case people take this anon post seriously, let me quickly point out that it's not just a clock speed difference, but an architecture difference. This means a slightly different processor design with a faster bus and faster RAM. I've heard a 10-15% clock-for-clock boost over last gen is the number thrown around, but that's a general number across desktops and laptops of different shapes and sizes. That would make the performance difference about 21% (10% on the clock speed, 10% on the architecture), taken with about a pound of salt (only matters in heavy use cases, doesn't help if you're IO-bound (disk/network), architecture improvements result in very asymmetrical speedups).
For starters, the Dell is on sale, and the starting price is $2100.
Here are the differences between the two models: 1) In addition to the slower CPU clock speed, the Dell is from the previous Intel architecture, which is about 15% slower clock-for-clock. 2) The Dell uses DDR2 RAM @ 667 MHz vs DDR3 RAM @ 1066 MHz. Whether you consider DDR3 to be worth the money is an open question, but it's silly to consider them equivalent. 3) That Dell laptop doesn't have Wireless N. 4) Graphics card: here it becomes obvious that the markets for these two laptops are completely different. If you're a gamer, the SLI'd 9800Ms are clearly better, but good luck getting more than 30 minutes of battery power. 5) Then there's all the stuff the Dell doesn't have that the MBP does have. Like a webcam, Firewire 400/800, bluetooth, backlit keyboard, HDD motion sensor, etc.
My point isn't really that the MBP is definitely worth the money over the Dell XPS, but rather that whether each is worth the price depends on your needs. The differences I mentioned may not be a big deal to you (in which case, the XPS is the better value), or they may be gigantic (in which case, you'd gladly spend more for the MBP)
They're also generally top-binned cards. Even if you make the pencil lines and change the BIOS and play with the drivers, your card might break because it doesn't pass the more rigorous testing required. Same thing as with CPUs.
It seems too specialized to go in the main kernel tree. Additionally, I can only imagine that it hurts performance more than some users would like. Additionally, it requires a fundamental change to the system of distributing linux apps. Maybe a distro will include it in their kernel and modify their repository to include pre-built maps, but I can't see it becoming fully mainstream.
Yes, it would still work. The method discussed here only checks whether a program is doing what it should, not whether what the program is doing is dangerous. If you compiled an application whose purpose was malicious, this wouldn't stop it (so you still need to download from known-good repositories and check MD5 hashes). It just stops code modification and code-injection attacks in compiled software.
It's actually completely useless against a shell script, because if you're running a valid shell script on an unmodified shell, then it's perfectly within the program's capabilities (since by definition, a shell can do just about anything) and thus allowed.
Oops, looks like this is the wrong thread. I guess it was the one immediately above it that had the download link. The way the comments got drawn up with my view settings screwed me up. My apologies.
More annoying than any of the setup work is the fact that in order to reboot into Windows, you have to close all your open applications and restart your computer. That's 5-10 minutes added on to launching the program and 5-10 minutes added on to shutting it down. In a 2-hour gaming session, that's like 1/8th your time, and it also makes impossible the "I really want to play now" aspect. If I want to start WOW right now, I hit Cmd+Space and type WOW and hit enter. Adding ten minutes to that cuts down on the number of times I'm gonna pop onto a game when I have an hour to kill.
No. What I meant was that rather shortly, once the whole "Palin's emails hacked" thing hits the mainstream media, people will be looking for them in droves, and spammers/botters will take advantage of that curiosity.
There's a difference between government emails - which are official business and should be publicly available, and the emails of private citizens.
Secondly, this isn't a random NSA fishing expedition - there are actually ongoing legit questions about her use of private email addresses (there are two on yahoo, only one was hacked) for public business (which violates disclosure laws). It's not impossible to foresee a legitimate court order for said emails during one or more of the current investigations into her. While that doesn't exonerate Anonymous, it's a far cry from a random attack without suspicion (which is what I personally resent about the current laws).
Get real - it'll probably be 30 minutes before some hacker's writing up malware that takes advantage of this, with half a dozen fake sites promising the download and a billion spams in your inbox. A known-good link to the files is a good step (MD5 hash from a trusted source would be nice too).
That would hold if Firefox and the other non-IE browsers required divergent coding. And it's true that they have slight differences and bugs, but a site targeted at standards will run fine in Safari, Firefox, Opera, and Chrome.
The marketshare you need to look at is Internet Explorer vs. "standards compliant" browsers, not Firefox vs. IE.
There's a difference between "someone with a law degree" and "a lawyer".
The fact is that the law is sufficiently complicated that a law degree is of substantial benefit to people who don't actively practice law. I won't take a position on whether this is a result of the inherent complexity in high-stakes rules, or whether it is deliberate obfuscation by lawyers.
Additionally, there's a difference between types of lawyers. The lawyers that people generally look down on (and are probably most common) are defense lawyers (because most of their clients are less than wonderful people), personal-injury lawyers (because ambulance chasers and frivolous suits give the decent ones a bad name), and corporate lawyers (because they sit around all day). Both Obama and Biden are/were constitutional lawyers (in ranking lawyer sub-specialties, this is perhaps the least odious). They were also primarily non-tenure-track law professors.
MPEG uses keyframes, right? So you'll still have a full frame in there every few frames. When I play back a MP4 I encoded, I wind up with something like a full frame every second or two (with the intermediate frames being the transformations you mentioned). So you can split at those frames. That's not infinitely parallel, but if we split it up by minute-sized segments, we'd have 90-150 segments (based on movie length), which is plenty for any prosumer computer for the foreseeable future, and even plenty for smaller clusters (that's 30 quad-cores or so).
Busybox is a more space efficient version of a lot of the common Unix tools ('grep', 'ls', 'cd', etc.). As one executable, it shares a lot of the same code between components, reducing the size. In embedded platforms, saving 10 MB of code just on your basic toolset with basically no other work required is a massive boon. They need every MB they can get, since they use the bare minimum of flash.
Slashdot Mirror
In the long run, FOSS converges to one winner, challenged by many (much smaller) creatures. Try to build a new browser or new *nix kernel and see how many people you project gets. Try to compete with Apache.
KHTML/Webkit, BSD or Solaris, Lighttpd or Nginx. Doesn't matter if it's got the most users, it just matters if it's a viable deployment platform that's got (relatively) modern features. The only thing that matters to the end user is whether he can use BSD or Lighttpd or Webkit and have it do what he needs and will be maintained in the future.
Well, the fact that they gave a talk about their LAMP stack tells you that they consider engineering more important than site design. Furthermore, a poor choice of infrastructure makes doing good site design hard. And that's my point: Facebook is evidently driven by system stuff and programmers, while it should be driven by site design.
Aditya Agarwal is Facebook's Director of Engineering. Infoq is a site about software engineering. This is a talk by a software engineer, hosted at a software engineering site. Of course it's about software engineering. That tells us nothing about Facebook's priorities vis a vis engineering and design.
Jeff Kaplan (Blizzard's Lead Game Designer) gave a talk about WoW quests at GDC. That doesn't mean that Blizzard thinks that PvE content design is more important than PvP class balance or graphics, it just means that the game designer is talking about his area of expertise in front of a crowd that's interested in his area of expertise. If I wanted to hear a Blizzard employee talk about graphics, I'd go to Nvision or something, and I'd listen to whoever Blizzard's graphics engine guy is, and if I wanted to hear about Blizzard's PvP class balance ideas, I'd look for talks by Greg Street (Ghostcrawler, their lead class balance guy)
That's a fair correction. Thank you.
Or Gen. Sherman in the Civil War, who pioneered the concept of "total war" by destroying the South's economy and burning as he went.
In my home county of Loudoun, one would be hard pressed not to draw some comparisons between the Loudoun Rangers (Union) and Mosby's Rangers (Confederate) and terrorism. I'm not saying they're equivalent, but there was a lot of indiscriminate burning of the houses and barns of the other side's supporters (or the Quakers, who got hit by both sides for being neutral).
Somewhat correct. Checking the post anonymously box winds up just not showing your name or affecting your karma, but if you don't log in, I think you can still post anonymously in a thread you moderated, and all they have is your IP address and timestamp.
A sufficiently paranoid person could go check out slashcode and try to figure it out if they wanted to. Or use a different browser from what they do their usual activity on and connect via proxy, and then they're safe.
* Warning: Corporate buzzword!
GAAH!! Put the warning (or at least the asterisk) before the word! It's well documented that overexposure to corporate buzzwords causes headaches, confusion, and eventually IQ loss.
True, RFCs are not universally supported, but it's at least a basis to say "this is what you should be doing" with some authority. Otherwise you've got all those minor incompatibility issues AND no way to tell who is right or wrong.
No, it only makes your spectators a subset of the millions of CounterStrike players.
Yes, but it means that people are watching CounterStrike precisely at a time & place when they could instead be playing CounterStrike. So it's not like people watching while unable to play. Thus, there exist at least some conditions under which it is more interesting to watch good CS players than playing CS oneself.
You can't get the same processor on the Dell, since you'd have to use a completely different motherboard and RAM. That's why I pointed out the primary speed advantage of the MBP's processor over the Dell's processor is architectural and not in terms of clock-speed.
Look over your own figures, asshat. That 0.26GHz processor difference REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY matters!
In case people take this anon post seriously, let me quickly point out that it's not just a clock speed difference, but an architecture difference. This means a slightly different processor design with a faster bus and faster RAM. I've heard a 10-15% clock-for-clock boost over last gen is the number thrown around, but that's a general number across desktops and laptops of different shapes and sizes. That would make the performance difference about 21% (10% on the clock speed, 10% on the architecture), taken with about a pound of salt (only matters in heavy use cases, doesn't help if you're IO-bound (disk/network), architecture improvements result in very asymmetrical speedups).
For starters, the Dell is on sale, and the starting price is $2100.
Here are the differences between the two models:
1) In addition to the slower CPU clock speed, the Dell is from the previous Intel architecture, which is about 15% slower clock-for-clock.
2) The Dell uses DDR2 RAM @ 667 MHz vs DDR3 RAM @ 1066 MHz. Whether you consider DDR3 to be worth the money is an open question, but it's silly to consider them equivalent.
3) That Dell laptop doesn't have Wireless N.
4) Graphics card: here it becomes obvious that the markets for these two laptops are completely different. If you're a gamer, the SLI'd 9800Ms are clearly better, but good luck getting more than 30 minutes of battery power.
5) Then there's all the stuff the Dell doesn't have that the MBP does have. Like a webcam, Firewire 400/800, bluetooth, backlit keyboard, HDD motion sensor, etc.
My point isn't really that the MBP is definitely worth the money over the Dell XPS, but rather that whether each is worth the price depends on your needs. The differences I mentioned may not be a big deal to you (in which case, the XPS is the better value), or they may be gigantic (in which case, you'd gladly spend more for the MBP)
They're also generally top-binned cards. Even if you make the pencil lines and change the BIOS and play with the drivers, your card might break because it doesn't pass the more rigorous testing required. Same thing as with CPUs.
LAN Parties. It's not so much a laptop as a portable computer.
It seems too specialized to go in the main kernel tree. Additionally, I can only imagine that it hurts performance more than some users would like. Additionally, it requires a fundamental change to the system of distributing linux apps. Maybe a distro will include it in their kernel and modify their repository to include pre-built maps, but I can't see it becoming fully mainstream.
Yes, it would still work. The method discussed here only checks whether a program is doing what it should, not whether what the program is doing is dangerous. If you compiled an application whose purpose was malicious, this wouldn't stop it (so you still need to download from known-good repositories and check MD5 hashes). It just stops code modification and code-injection attacks in compiled software.
It's actually completely useless against a shell script, because if you're running a valid shell script on an unmodified shell, then it's perfectly within the program's capabilities (since by definition, a shell can do just about anything) and thus allowed.
Oops, looks like this is the wrong thread. I guess it was the one immediately above it that had the download link. The way the comments got drawn up with my view settings screwed me up. My apologies.
More annoying than any of the setup work is the fact that in order to reboot into Windows, you have to close all your open applications and restart your computer. That's 5-10 minutes added on to launching the program and 5-10 minutes added on to shutting it down. In a 2-hour gaming session, that's like 1/8th your time, and it also makes impossible the "I really want to play now" aspect. If I want to start WOW right now, I hit Cmd+Space and type WOW and hit enter. Adding ten minutes to that cuts down on the number of times I'm gonna pop onto a game when I have an hour to kill.
No. What I meant was that rather shortly, once the whole "Palin's emails hacked" thing hits the mainstream media, people will be looking for them in droves, and spammers/botters will take advantage of that curiosity.
There's a difference between government emails - which are official business and should be publicly available, and the emails of private citizens.
Secondly, this isn't a random NSA fishing expedition - there are actually ongoing legit questions about her use of private email addresses (there are two on yahoo, only one was hacked) for public business (which violates disclosure laws). It's not impossible to foresee a legitimate court order for said emails during one or more of the current investigations into her. While that doesn't exonerate Anonymous, it's a far cry from a random attack without suspicion (which is what I personally resent about the current laws).
Get real - it'll probably be 30 minutes before some hacker's writing up malware that takes advantage of this, with half a dozen fake sites promising the download and a billion spams in your inbox. A known-good link to the files is a good step (MD5 hash from a trusted source would be nice too).
That would hold if Firefox and the other non-IE browsers required divergent coding. And it's true that they have slight differences and bugs, but a site targeted at standards will run fine in Safari, Firefox, Opera, and Chrome.
The marketshare you need to look at is Internet Explorer vs. "standards compliant" browsers, not Firefox vs. IE.
There's a difference between "someone with a law degree" and "a lawyer".
The fact is that the law is sufficiently complicated that a law degree is of substantial benefit to people who don't actively practice law. I won't take a position on whether this is a result of the inherent complexity in high-stakes rules, or whether it is deliberate obfuscation by lawyers.
Additionally, there's a difference between types of lawyers. The lawyers that people generally look down on (and are probably most common) are defense lawyers (because most of their clients are less than wonderful people), personal-injury lawyers (because ambulance chasers and frivolous suits give the decent ones a bad name), and corporate lawyers (because they sit around all day). Both Obama and Biden are/were constitutional lawyers (in ranking lawyer sub-specialties, this is perhaps the least odious). They were also primarily non-tenure-track law professors.
MPEG uses keyframes, right? So you'll still have a full frame in there every few frames. When I play back a MP4 I encoded, I wind up with something like a full frame every second or two (with the intermediate frames being the transformations you mentioned). So you can split at those frames. That's not infinitely parallel, but if we split it up by minute-sized segments, we'd have 90-150 segments (based on movie length), which is plenty for any prosumer computer for the foreseeable future, and even plenty for smaller clusters (that's 30 quad-cores or so).
Busybox is a more space efficient version of a lot of the common Unix tools ('grep', 'ls', 'cd', etc.). As one executable, it shares a lot of the same code between components, reducing the size. In embedded platforms, saving 10 MB of code just on your basic toolset with basically no other work required is a massive boon. They need every MB they can get, since they use the bare minimum of flash.
ZFS does full checksumming, but for licensing reasons, it's not available for Linux (outside of via FUSE). It runs on BSD and Solaris.