"Adelstein: Anybody can be an NT integrator and anybody can do Novell. Everybody is." So creating and maintaining NT is anybody's game? I'm sure most sys admins and the like will know a few people who aren't quite up to it... "Typically, the Unix world has been relegated to the elite..." Or perhaps the rich with high end networks systems... "We found there definitely was a market for it..." Doesn't this kind of go against the Open Source ethic? Shouldn't he be indicating to his clients that the can get this totally free (if they want to learn how to setup and maintain their own system, which I would think is desirable)?
I think the most important part is not the cost or hassle, but that the manafacturers are starting to recognise that something other than M$ exists, and that it is a viable and popular alternative. Maybe perhaps motivated by their realisation that they can make money out of this, rather than any community spirit, but still, it's a step the right way...
Only 2 bead minimum support???
on
Linux After Y2K
·
· Score: 1
What about support for one bead Boolean algebra abaci? Hopefully in 3.2
Having already complained about the problems this kind of race can engender (see the Athlon Killer link above), it is nice to see the market place working to please it's customers, and offer them the 'best', rather than using the M$ dictatorship commerce model. Ofcourse, the question is, are they giving us the best?
Yes, stupid question I know, ofcourse we want it, but what I mean is should we be so eagerly anticipating something that will simply have more resources to be eaten up by sloppy code? (Let's face it, M$ still hold the biggest share in OS, despite best efforts) Shouldn't we be also pushing for tighter and better coding, which would fix probably half the resource problems we have now?
Even if the Russian Governmant is responsible for the attack, what is the surprise? Governments are constantly spying on each other, and no doubt the U.S. has made attacks on Russian systems, just because WE didn't hear about it doesn't mean it didn't happen. A case in point is the U.S. distribution of Japanese and German cryptographic techniques which they had cracked to their allies so that they could have almost instant access to sensitive data, despite their supposed affiliation with these nations. Why would that change now?
growing human organs as replacements has been a target of Medical Science for a long time, first with things like transplants, up to seeding organ onto living organisms, like that mouse with ear on its back. The ethos seems to have moved from prevention is the best medicine, to replacement is the best treatment (not that that is necessarily a bad thing, it just may lead to complacency and the feeling that any indulgence is O.K. simply because you can replace it later). What's more interesting is that it was NASA that developed this technology, not a Medical Research centre or university, where this has been a goal for a while...
Other problems come into the issue of prosectuing hackers (read crackers) when you consider the very nature of the system used by them, the internet. That is, the hacker does not need to be in the same place (or even country) as the system they are trying to hack/crack/infiltrate, so if they are to be prosecuted for any damage done, whos laws are followed? The country in which the damage was done, they country the hacker is in, or should new provisions in international laws be made? And what about countries that are hostile, or simply decide not to submit to the system used? Should the prosecuting country invade them (being ofcourse the extreme case). Then we run into the problems of wrongful prosecution, which although provided for in conventional law, is a much easier mistake to make in an online environment when the hacker is good and decides to take adequate precautions against getting caught. Electronic fingerprints are much easier to fake than real ones...
Indeed, but has that ever slowed M$ before? The larger market usually seems quite unaware that there are better, viable, alternatives to the standard Intel/M$ combination, and while people are beginning to awaken to these possibilities, will it suddenly happen with Sledgehammer? I think they're really going out on a limb with their 64bit architecture different to Intel, and I just don't think the larger market is ready for that shift...fingers crossed for the other though.
The problem ofcourse with the task is that the descision on a structure has to be made without testing, i.e. the testing process has to be abstracted, which is where I see the potential for advance coming in, the first steps towards machines with actual or simulated abstract thought processes, this being an admittedly primitve and slightly less abstract example of these processes. But it's a start!
Slashdot Mirror
"Adelstein: Anybody can be an NT integrator and anybody can do Novell. Everybody is." So creating and maintaining NT is anybody's game? I'm sure most sys admins and the like will know a few people who aren't quite up to it... "Typically, the Unix world has been relegated to the elite..." Or perhaps the rich with high end networks systems... "We found there definitely was a market for it..." Doesn't this kind of go against the Open Source ethic? Shouldn't he be indicating to his clients that the can get this totally free (if they want to learn how to setup and maintain their own system, which I would think is desirable)?
How are we going to play minesweeper on the instore machines!?
I think the most important part is not the cost or hassle, but that the manafacturers are starting to recognise that something other than M$ exists, and that it is a viable and popular alternative. Maybe perhaps motivated by their realisation that they can make money out of this, rather than any community spirit, but still, it's a step the right way...
What about support for one bead Boolean algebra abaci? Hopefully in 3.2
Having already complained about the problems this kind of race can engender (see the Athlon Killer link above), it is nice to see the market place working to please it's customers, and offer them the 'best', rather than using the M$ dictatorship commerce model. Ofcourse, the question is, are they giving us the best?
Yes, stupid question I know, ofcourse we want it, but what I mean is should we be so eagerly anticipating something that will simply have more resources to be eaten up by sloppy code? (Let's face it, M$ still hold the biggest share in OS, despite best efforts) Shouldn't we be also pushing for tighter and better coding, which would fix probably half the resource problems we have now?
Even if the Russian Governmant is responsible for the attack, what is the surprise? Governments are constantly spying on each other, and no doubt the U.S. has made attacks on Russian systems, just because WE didn't hear about it doesn't mean it didn't happen. A case in point is the U.S. distribution of Japanese and German cryptographic techniques which they had cracked to their allies so that they could have almost instant access to sensitive data, despite their supposed affiliation with these nations. Why would that change now?
growing human organs as replacements has been a target of Medical Science for a long time, first with things like transplants, up to seeding organ onto living organisms, like that mouse with ear on its back. The ethos seems to have moved from prevention is the best medicine, to replacement is the best treatment (not that that is necessarily a bad thing, it just may lead to complacency and the feeling that any indulgence is O.K. simply because you can replace it later). What's more interesting is that it was NASA that developed this technology, not a Medical Research centre or university, where this has been a goal for a while...
Other problems come into the issue of prosectuing hackers (read crackers) when you consider the very nature of the system used by them, the internet. That is, the hacker does not need to be in the same place (or even country) as the system they are trying to hack/crack/infiltrate, so if they are to be prosecuted for any damage done, whos laws are followed? The country in which the damage was done, they country the hacker is in, or should new provisions in international laws be made? And what about countries that are hostile, or simply decide not to submit to the system used? Should the prosecuting country invade them (being ofcourse the extreme case). Then we run into the problems of wrongful prosecution, which although provided for in conventional law, is a much easier mistake to make in an online environment when the hacker is good and decides to take adequate precautions against getting caught. Electronic fingerprints are much easier to fake than real ones...
Indeed, but has that ever slowed M$ before? The larger market usually seems quite unaware that there are better, viable, alternatives to the standard Intel/M$ combination, and while people are beginning to awaken to these possibilities, will it suddenly happen with Sledgehammer? I think they're really going out on a limb with their 64bit architecture different to Intel, and I just don't think the larger market is ready for that shift...fingers crossed for the other though.
The problem ofcourse with the task is that the descision on a structure has to be made without testing, i.e. the testing process has to be abstracted, which is where I see the potential for advance coming in, the first steps towards machines with actual or simulated abstract thought processes, this being an admittedly primitve and slightly less abstract example of these processes. But it's a start!