For decades, the only people who cared about open source were the geeks who stayed up for all hours swilling Jolt Cola and writing code.
I'm sure he means that in a good way. Suits can't stand open source. It makes no sense to them that innovation is driven by creativity and passion, not hierarchy and the bottom line.
Apparently they're trying to send the entire signal digitally, which would allow them to compress it and so distribute more programming within the same set of freqencies. That would make analog receivers obsolete.
Sounds like an awful idea. It's annoying when the station you're tuned into starts to fade as you drive along; I can't imagine being interrupted by all those sharp chirps and clicks that digital feeds make when they're interrupted.
My cell phone (a Motorola) will make any microphone nearby, a clock radio, a stereo, a boombox, whatever, go phht phht phht phht periodically, even if it's turned off, and cause my monitor to shake and shimmy if in close proximity, particularly when it's ringing. I assume this sort of interference wouldn't be good for navigation controls, either.
The cost of supporting a bunch of Linux newbies is not going to be trivial. If I were Dell, I'd probably stick to Windows too.
Not to mention they can't install a buttload of trial version software, e.g. Musicmatch, Quickbooks, Norton AV, ad nauseam. Selling the rights to that stuff is probably why Dells are so cheap.
That's their job, dude. They represent people. If you ever get caught doing something illegal, you'll be pleased as punch someone's trying to convince others you did nothing wrong.
The problem with multicast, including source-specific multicast, is that end users are essentially injecting routing information into the Internet's core. This is ripe for abuse, for the same reason that end users running routing protocol is ripe for abuse.
Imagine a scenario where someone on a DSL circuit solicits requests for every source-based multicast available on the Internet he can find. The ISP he's connected to propogates those IGMP requests through its own network, to all of its peers, who continue to propogate it through the core of the Internet to the source of all of the feeds. Then the data streams for all of those multicasts hammer every network in between the perpetrator and the sources, which ultimately gets stuck at the DSL circuit, if not before. It's a nightmare.
Are there workarounds for this? Sure there are. Is it worth risking network uptime to make it work? To a high-tiered ISP, no.
You said it yourself... they're research networks. Malicious and neophytic users are at a minimum. Too, these networks were deployed with multicast in mind; the global Internet would require something of a retrofit which, based on the unknown effects of multicast becoming available on a global scale, is highly unlikely.
The problem with deploying it on the commercial Internet is political. Backbone commercial Internet providers have had multicast on for a LONG time.
That's not true. Having multicast turned on to support OSPF is not the same thing as multicast routing, which is what's necessary to support multicast feeds.
The major problem with deploying multicast Internet-wide is management and security. ISPs would have to accept multicast routing information from their neighbors and trust they know what they're doing, because a script kiddie could launch a million fake multicast feeds and tip every router on their network over. Obviously there's going to be some reluctance to do that.
Also, if somehow it was possible to protect against DOS attacks, these feeds would require hardware upgrades. Sending out an Internet-wide multicast feed requires every core router on the Internet between the source and each individual listener to maintain state for the feed. If you just have a thousand or so, that might be OK, but at some point you're going to be pushing the limits.
The list goes on...and don't get me started about the sex-fests that go on in the olympic "village" [scotsman.com]; ever wonder why the media isn't allowed in? It's for "privacy" all right
Why do you care if they're having sex? Rumor has it that famous good-looking athletic people do that quite often.
I love Ubuntu and I love Linux, but this doesn't make any sense. Look at their sample use case from TFA:
Maria and her class mates of a primary school need to make up a report on how to protect the environment of dolphins, digitally recorded by them. They ask assistance from Jeff who selects a suitable subset of Ubuntu applications. He then generates an Embedded Ubuntu system image for the Internet Tablets they have and flashes it on the devices. The kids use Gstreamer, for example, and through WiFi connection they send their 5 minutes content to a 3G mobile phone of their teacher, which sends the content to other children in another city who have never seen a dolphin in their lives.
Ok, I hope Maria's in graduate school because I'm not sure I could pull that off.
I still don't understand the necessity for a full-featured OS on a cell phone or PDA. Sure it's cool and all, but being the features required for devices like those are a small subset of what you need on a PC, their OS is perfectly fine from my point of view.
Typical CNET column. They think there's a problem because it makes sense to them and then they go find someone who agrees.
Most Internet traffic is consolidated within large network companies (Tier 1s, cable companies, phone companies) at this point. Large network comapnies exchange traffic with each other over high-capacity circuits (peering points) in multiple locations. Typically they don't charge each other for it because it allows both to keep their traffic levels at public exchanges, which are expensive to manage, to a minimum.
The video over IP companies who will have issues are those who don't have an existing footprint. Peering like I describe above isn't available to them. They must provide services by purchasing bandwidth from the aforementioned companies. Otherwise bottlenecks they can't control will become a problem. The only way to avoid that is to purchase multiple circuits from multiple carriers ($$$) in order to get the packets to their customers with as few exchanges as possible. The fact they have to pay for this and the larger companies don't gives the large companies a tremendous competitive advantage.
Like ISP to backbone latency guarantees, or never a dropped packet on their network (which requires quite a bit of expensive redundant hardware and a willingness to not sell all available bandwidth), or any of a host of other non-intrusive services.
The latency on dialup connections is a result of the modulation (the mo) and demodulation (the dem) of serial bits to noise to serial bits. Once your packets reach their network, they move at light speed to their destination so that's not really a consideration.
The UDP thing is probably due to a lack of adequate flow control within whatever application is dropping packets. TCP will adjust rate of transfer between fast connections and slow connections with the windowing mechanism, which is astonishingly effective; the UDP protocol has no such functionality so the people who write the app have to make it work themselves (and you're generally not going to get guys as talented as Postel to write your code). You're likely on a 56 kilobit connection trying to talk to servers in a colo that have a gigabit uplink. Getting that to work is complicated. Whatever application you're trying to run, the developers probably weren't able to get both dialup and broadband connections to work properly, so they compromised dialup users. That has nothing to do with your ISP.
Exactly. This is what they don't explain. Being that it's CNET, I expect they're assuming Windows.
Two major server companies that grew faster than the overall market: No. 2 HP, with 8.9 percent growth to $14.2 billion, and Dell, with 13.3 percent growth to $5.3 billion.
I would imagine most HP and Dell servers are sold with the "No OS" option as companies already have site licenses (for Windows) or prefer to install their own Linux. Dell and HP account for $20 billion of the $35 billion market so their argument is baseless, at best, slanted at worst.
I've noticed an increasing reluctance to say or do anything particularly meaningful in email. No one ever wants to say anything about anything lest it be held against them for eternity. Oftentimes I ask a question in an email and get a phone call answer. It's as if we're all being held to the standards of elected officials.
But what's the point?
It doesn't change your work habits to not mention them in email. It doesn't change the attitudes of employees towards their bosses. It doesn't change who respects whom or who does what. Really, do we think that people don't goof off, talk shit about their boss, gossip about one another, say things they don't mean to get what they want? And yet the world comes down with a hammer when they get caught admitting it. We reward those who keep their secrets hidden and punish those who are caught being candid. Sounds almost religious.
If correspondence was directed to attack an authority figure or subvert their authority that's one thing, but oftentimes these emails are nothing more than mistakenly overheard conversations.
Disclaimer: I was canned once for telling a salesman what's what, a salesman who happened to record his phone conversations. Doh.
They are *not* suing google for indexing THEIR web site. They are suing google for indexing OTHER PEOPLE'S websites. Websites that are infringing on their copyright.
Great point, but shouldn't they be suing those websites, as opposed to the search engine that indexes them? No infringing material, no indexing of such. That would eliminate the problem. In fact, Google is doing them a favor by discovering those websites.
But I suppose those websites don't have multibillion dollar cash reserves.
Yet, I'd be hard put to land even a proofreading job as an employee because I am "uneducated."
Why not get a degree then? It doesn't take a high school diploma to get into community college. You can get an associate's degree there and, provided you do well, enroll at a 4-year institution to get your bachelor's. It's not that difficult to do, but it is work. You do it and this will be a non-issue.
If you don't want to put forth the time, trouble and expense to get a degree... well, then you shouldn't complain about people who did. It's a status thing more than a practical thing, that's true, but attaining a degree is an accomplishment and you can't claim discrimination just because you didn't do the work.
There are a few cities where recruiters have started trolling, but generally on Craigslist you find tech job ads published by tech people. Personally, I don't apply for a job unless the ad is well-written and includes specific and sane technical detail. That's also the way I post positions. You can't fake clue.
Has anyone noticed some larger companies have started farming out their recruiting departments? Not using agencies, but using outside recruiters who are corresponding with email addresses from within the company's domain so as to make it appear they're internal employees? *cough* Google *cough* Yahoo *cough* Juniper *cough*
It is statements like these that make some people think that intelligent design is a plausible scientific theory.
It's statements like that which make some people think Darwin's evolutionary theory and intelligent design are the only two plausible explanations for the population of living creatures on the planet.
If someone wants to believe that some sentient being guided the course of existence, you're not going to convince them otherwise; that line of thought is based on an entirely different set of principles (faith) which science cannot prove or disprove. However, that should not dissuade us from being skeptical of Darwin. His theories are not predictive when it comes to natural selection; they take a result and assume the action that led to it which is a questionable approach.
Darwin being wrong does not prove that God made the world. It's just as likely the truth has not yet been discovered.
We went through audio format wars about 10 years or so ago, when there were phonograph records, cassettes and CDs (and there was more than one kind of CD... remember when ADD meant AudioDigitalDigital, not AttentionDeficitDisorder?).
Phonograph records sounded the best, but they're fragile and non-portable. Casettes are portable, but they sound horrible. CDs are more portable than records and sound better than casettes, though not quite as good as records under optimal conditions. CDs won, though it's notable that you couldn't create your own CD when that victory was achieved.
What this would predict is that ultimately convenience wins out, even trumping sound quality, unless the sound quality is much, much worse, viz. detectable by a non-audiophile over cheap equipment. That would predict that formats like FLAC and OGG and WMA and AAC will never trump MP3 unless the industry has sufficient leverage to make that happen. Which is entirely possible.
Whoever wrote this should be taken seriously. Witness:
Finally, today's faster connections and more capacious hard drives have audiophiles turning to lossless codecs such as FLAC and those offered by Apple Computer and Microsoft.
Anyone who has mastery of the word "capacious" knows a little somethin about somethin.
Sun used to be the bread-and butter platform for Oracle. Linux has basically replaced it
This is why Oracle chose to be "pro" open source in the first place. They knew if they could get their product running on Linux, they would have an easier time selling software licenses. Those $50k-$100k Sun enterprise purchase reqs were killing them. Once the economy started to bubble, their $50k-$100k licensing fees were getting lost in the shuffle. Ta Da! Linux servers are far less expensive, making the bundle far more attractive from a cost perspective. Not to mention why should they hand all that business to Sun when it's their product that's driving the hardware purchase in the first place?
And it worked. Oracle thrives. Sun suffers.
Oracle, like every other company with their toes in the open source bath water, is doing it to make money. There's an end game with these purchases. Being that Oracle and mysql are competitors, it's probably to squash. Witness the Peoplesoft "acquisition".
Slashdot Mirror
For decades, the only people who cared about open source were the geeks who stayed up for all hours swilling Jolt Cola and writing code.
I'm sure he means that in a good way. Suits can't stand open source. It makes no sense to them that innovation is driven by creativity and passion, not hierarchy and the bottom line.
Sounds like an awful idea. It's annoying when the station you're tuned into starts to fade as you drive along; I can't imagine being interrupted by all those sharp chirps and clicks that digital feeds make when they're interrupted.
Anybody know why the phone does this?
Not to mention they can't install a buttload of trial version software, e.g. Musicmatch, Quickbooks, Norton AV, ad nauseam. Selling the rights to that stuff is probably why Dells are so cheap.
That's their job, dude. They represent people. If you ever get caught doing something illegal, you'll be pleased as punch someone's trying to convince others you did nothing wrong.
It's impossible for these two conditions to exist simultaneously.
If you don't have any to sell, then you're selling all that you have. That classifies as exceptional, not mediocre.
Imagine a scenario where someone on a DSL circuit solicits requests for every source-based multicast available on the Internet he can find. The ISP he's connected to propogates those IGMP requests through its own network, to all of its peers, who continue to propogate it through the core of the Internet to the source of all of the feeds. Then the data streams for all of those multicasts hammer every network in between the perpetrator and the sources, which ultimately gets stuck at the DSL circuit, if not before. It's a nightmare.
Are there workarounds for this? Sure there are. Is it worth risking network uptime to make it work? To a high-tiered ISP, no.
You said it yourself ... they're research networks. Malicious and neophytic users are at a minimum. Too, these networks were deployed with multicast in mind; the global Internet would require something of a retrofit which, based on the unknown effects of multicast becoming available on a global scale, is highly unlikely.
That's not true. Having multicast turned on to support OSPF is not the same thing as multicast routing, which is what's necessary to support multicast feeds.
The major problem with deploying multicast Internet-wide is management and security. ISPs would have to accept multicast routing information from their neighbors and trust they know what they're doing, because a script kiddie could launch a million fake multicast feeds and tip every router on their network over. Obviously there's going to be some reluctance to do that.
Also, if somehow it was possible to protect against DOS attacks, these feeds would require hardware upgrades. Sending out an Internet-wide multicast feed requires every core router on the Internet between the source and each individual listener to maintain state for the feed. If you just have a thousand or so, that might be OK, but at some point you're going to be pushing the limits.
Why do you care if they're having sex? Rumor has it that famous good-looking athletic people do that quite often.
Will be the last of the famous international detainees?
Downloadable music isn't a viable music model.
Maria and her class mates of a primary school need to make up a report on how to protect the environment of dolphins, digitally recorded by them. They ask assistance from Jeff who selects a suitable subset of Ubuntu applications. He then generates an Embedded Ubuntu system image for the Internet Tablets they have and flashes it on the devices. The kids use Gstreamer, for example, and through WiFi connection they send their 5 minutes content to a 3G mobile phone of their teacher, which sends the content to other children in another city who have never seen a dolphin in their lives.
Ok, I hope Maria's in graduate school because I'm not sure I could pull that off.
I still don't understand the necessity for a full-featured OS on a cell phone or PDA. Sure it's cool and all, but being the features required for devices like those are a small subset of what you need on a PC, their OS is perfectly fine from my point of view.
Cool! More threads to wait on I/O! I love system wait.
Most Internet traffic is consolidated within large network companies (Tier 1s, cable companies, phone companies) at this point. Large network comapnies exchange traffic with each other over high-capacity circuits (peering points) in multiple locations. Typically they don't charge each other for it because it allows both to keep their traffic levels at public exchanges, which are expensive to manage, to a minimum.
The video over IP companies who will have issues are those who don't have an existing footprint. Peering like I describe above isn't available to them. They must provide services by purchasing bandwidth from the aforementioned companies. Otherwise bottlenecks they can't control will become a problem. The only way to avoid that is to purchase multiple circuits from multiple carriers ($$$) in order to get the packets to their customers with as few exchanges as possible. The fact they have to pay for this and the larger companies don't gives the large companies a tremendous competitive advantage.
The latency on dialup connections is a result of the modulation (the mo) and demodulation (the dem) of serial bits to noise to serial bits. Once your packets reach their network, they move at light speed to their destination so that's not really a consideration.
The UDP thing is probably due to a lack of adequate flow control within whatever application is dropping packets. TCP will adjust rate of transfer between fast connections and slow connections with the windowing mechanism, which is astonishingly effective; the UDP protocol has no such functionality so the people who write the app have to make it work themselves (and you're generally not going to get guys as talented as Postel to write your code). You're likely on a 56 kilobit connection trying to talk to servers in a colo that have a gigabit uplink. Getting that to work is complicated. Whatever application you're trying to run, the developers probably weren't able to get both dialup and broadband connections to work properly, so they compromised dialup users. That has nothing to do with your ISP.
Two major server companies that grew faster than the overall market: No. 2 HP, with 8.9 percent growth to $14.2 billion, and Dell, with 13.3 percent growth to $5.3 billion.
I would imagine most HP and Dell servers are sold with the "No OS" option as companies already have site licenses (for Windows) or prefer to install their own Linux. Dell and HP account for $20 billion of the $35 billion market so their argument is baseless, at best, slanted at worst.
But what's the point?
It doesn't change your work habits to not mention them in email. It doesn't change the attitudes of employees towards their bosses. It doesn't change who respects whom or who does what. Really, do we think that people don't goof off, talk shit about their boss, gossip about one another, say things they don't mean to get what they want? And yet the world comes down with a hammer when they get caught admitting it. We reward those who keep their secrets hidden and punish those who are caught being candid. Sounds almost religious.
If correspondence was directed to attack an authority figure or subvert their authority that's one thing, but oftentimes these emails are nothing more than mistakenly overheard conversations.
Disclaimer: I was canned once for telling a salesman what's what, a salesman who happened to record his phone conversations. Doh.
Great point, but shouldn't they be suing those websites, as opposed to the search engine that indexes them? No infringing material, no indexing of such. That would eliminate the problem. In fact, Google is doing them a favor by discovering those websites.
But I suppose those websites don't have multibillion dollar cash reserves.
Why not get a degree then? It doesn't take a high school diploma to get into community college. You can get an associate's degree there and, provided you do well, enroll at a 4-year institution to get your bachelor's. It's not that difficult to do, but it is work. You do it and this will be a non-issue.
If you don't want to put forth the time, trouble and expense to get a degree ... well, then you shouldn't complain about people who did. It's a status thing more than a practical thing, that's true, but attaining a degree is an accomplishment and you can't claim discrimination just because you didn't do the work.
Has anyone noticed some larger companies have started farming out their recruiting departments? Not using agencies, but using outside recruiters who are corresponding with email addresses from within the company's domain so as to make it appear they're internal employees? *cough* Google *cough* Yahoo *cough* Juniper *cough*
It's statements like that which make some people think Darwin's evolutionary theory and intelligent design are the only two plausible explanations for the population of living creatures on the planet.
If someone wants to believe that some sentient being guided the course of existence, you're not going to convince them otherwise; that line of thought is based on an entirely different set of principles (faith) which science cannot prove or disprove. However, that should not dissuade us from being skeptical of Darwin. His theories are not predictive when it comes to natural selection; they take a result and assume the action that led to it which is a questionable approach.
Darwin being wrong does not prove that God made the world. It's just as likely the truth has not yet been discovered.
Phonograph records sounded the best, but they're fragile and non-portable. Casettes are portable, but they sound horrible. CDs are more portable than records and sound better than casettes, though not quite as good as records under optimal conditions. CDs won, though it's notable that you couldn't create your own CD when that victory was achieved.
What this would predict is that ultimately convenience wins out, even trumping sound quality, unless the sound quality is much, much worse, viz. detectable by a non-audiophile over cheap equipment. That would predict that formats like FLAC and OGG and WMA and AAC will never trump MP3 unless the industry has sufficient leverage to make that happen. Which is entirely possible.
Finally, today's faster connections and more capacious hard drives have audiophiles turning to lossless codecs such as FLAC and those offered by Apple Computer and Microsoft.
Anyone who has mastery of the word "capacious" knows a little somethin about somethin.
This is why Oracle chose to be "pro" open source in the first place. They knew if they could get their product running on Linux, they would have an easier time selling software licenses. Those $50k-$100k Sun enterprise purchase reqs were killing them. Once the economy started to bubble, their $50k-$100k licensing fees were getting lost in the shuffle. Ta Da! Linux servers are far less expensive, making the bundle far more attractive from a cost perspective. Not to mention why should they hand all that business to Sun when it's their product that's driving the hardware purchase in the first place?
And it worked. Oracle thrives. Sun suffers.
Oracle, like every other company with their toes in the open source bath water, is doing it to make money. There's an end game with these purchases. Being that Oracle and mysql are competitors, it's probably to squash. Witness the Peoplesoft "acquisition".