Oh, my. Someone said something bad about someone else on the Internet?
If this is such a non-issue, why the hell is it deserving of my (and the rest of Slashdot's) attention?
Really, if this isn't just another run-of-the-mill defamation cases, and it actully deserves our attention, emmett certainly didn't give any indication whatsoever of that.
Following the links on the page, they do an email verify to download a pdf of their paper. WTF is this all about? Anyone have a mirror or a URL that is valid?
The fixed text of the original post.. (no, I didn't cut anything off at the end).. Taco screwed up something more than html here! I wonder if this post was really intended to make it to the page or not...
Jason Kau writes " is a working paper on the economics of open source software from the Nation Bureau of Economic Research entitled "The Simple Economics of Open Source". Focuses primarily on Apache, Perl, and Sendmail but mentions Linux, Debian, VA Linux, etc. It's a 40 page PDF document. Some background in Economics would probably be helpful. " something you should
However, I have experienced the very problem described in the article: I run 1600x1200 on my system at home, and certain foolish operating systems *cough*windows*cough* make teeny little icons. However, certain other systems *cough*xwindows*cough* allow me to tell the system the dots per inch, and most things work out well.
Hey.. maybe i missed something in XF86Setup.. Where do I specify DPI? I'm running 16x12 (@85Hz) on a 19".
Everyone that knows what a BBS door is knows this game. One of the best ever created, IMO. Console-based, so I don't think there would be technical difficulties with a port.
I'd love you put a telnetable TW2002 game up on my linux box! How much fun would that be?
Cookies are your friend. Cookies make web sites a whole lot simpler and more reliable.
True. I don't dispute this. But, there is no reason that cookies should be allowed on graphics (such as ads)! I mean, sure, there are plenty of legit reasons for having a cookie on a html file (look at slashdot). However, allowing cookies attached to pictures is useless, except for advertisement tracking!
Was it the W3C who decided to allow this? Who should we be blaming for this (besides doubleclick, they are obviously responsible)?
Note that Intel is now under attack in *all* their major market segments, so this limits their ability to undercut in one market while making up for it with extra-high prices in another market.
I believe you are correct, except for one market segment: SMP servers. There are x86 competitors in all of the other areas, but as of yet (IIRC), there are no Athlon SMP boards. The competitors I see in this area are Sun and Compaq/Digital/Alpha, both non-x86.
SUMMARY: This rule amends the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to allow the export and reexport of any encryption commodity or software to individuals, commercial firms, and other non-government end-users in all destinations. It also allows exports and reexports of retail encryption commodities and software to all end-users in all destinations. Post-export reporting requirements are streamlined, and changes are made to reflect amendments to the Wassenaar Arrangement. This rule implements the encryption policy announced by the White House on September 16 and will simplify U.S. encryption export rules. Restrictions on terrorist supporting states (Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan or Syria), their nationals and other sanctioned entities are not changed by this rule.
Note that there are still restrictions. Curious that you cannot export to a government user.
ssh is open source. RSAREF is the closed source (patented) library that is at issue. The vulnerability exists in RSAREF and affects all these other products.
Personally, I'm glad Debian distributes its ssh without RSAREF.
Would the vulnerability exist if RSAREF was open sourced? I doubt it. There are plenty of other RSA implementations that don't have this problem.
I worked for UPS recently and can tell you a little bit about OPL.
As the article states, OPL is "Overseas Partners, Ltd.".. when the stock was private, every time you purchased shares of UPS stock, you also had to purchase a certain amount of OPL stock. This was mandatory if you wanted to buy UPS stock.
OPL was known to my co-workers (middle management) as the company that provides package insurance. I remember hearing something about UPS starting it up and spinning it off years ago.
Wish I could provide more info. Thats all I remember about UPS and OPL. I wasn't involved in package systems.
How can this be a leak if Workspot had a webpage describing the solution?
Seems like public knowledge to me.
Re:Exactly what Intel's investors wanted to hear
on
Coppermine vs. Athlon
·
· Score: 1
Intel released a very disappointing profit report, which sent stock prices down as much as 10 points within a couple of days. Immediately following this, Intel makes several announcements about Willamette and Coppermine, and their stock goes back up. It seems that Intel may be pushing these chips a little too quickly in an attempt to make their investors feel better.
While the announcement may have been shareholder-motivated, I don't think their schedule is. Their schedule may be advanced by AMD, but I doubt it will be at any detriment to Intel.
Intel has always controlled the market and let the technology tickle out. I'm sure that if Intel wanted to, they would their next generation of IA32 chips on desktops now. That would be great for us, but bad for Intel. They want to get all of the intermediate upgrades.
I mean, if you are the market leader regardless, why should you release the new chip until the current chip is sold through? Intel could step things up a notch, but they have had no motivation to do so (until now).
I think that AMD's success is a great thing for the consumer. It should motivate Intel to get their chips to market faster, something that I'm sure they are capable of.
For example, Intel has been producing 0.18 micron chips for many months. They were only available on portables until now. Why? It has to be a deliberate marketing decision to get all the money they can out of the desktop market.
A friend of mine had an idea to buy old missile silos out in the plains and use them to launch capsules w/ people in them to ~20k feet, then fly to a destination from there. Just turn the silos into giant inductive coils. No problem.
Actually, there is a problem there. Solenoids and other magnetic field carriers take time to build in strength and time to discharge.
If you ignored that charge/discharge time (lets imagine its 0), since solenoids pull objects towards their center, it would only make sense to have the solenoid on for the first half of the capsule's journey through the solenoid. If it was on for the second half (ie remained on), the capsule would actually be slowed down as it was pulled towards the center of the solenoid. It would bounce back and forth a little and then just remain motionless at the center.
Now if you turned the solenoid off (assuming discharge time of 0) after the capsule reaches the half-way mark, it would continue on its merry way at whatever velocity the capsule had reached by the mid-point of the solenoid.
Now, in reality, if the solenoid is large enough to exert more than one g on a 1 ton capsule (a reasonable estimate for your purpose), its going to take a very large magnetic field. The larger the field is, the longer it takes to build. The longer it takes to build, the longer it takes to die. So, if your capsule is in the bottom of this silo and the magnetic field is turned on, by the time it reaches the center of the solenoid, its moving at a good pace. Now the power is turned off and the magnetic field slowly diapates. Because it wasn't instantaneous, the capsule is slowed down by the remaining force drawing it towards the center of the solenoid. By the time the capsule reaches the end of the coil, its velocity is back to 0 and gravity takes over, bringing it back to the bottom of your silo.
So, there has to be a solution, you say. The solution is mag-lev. Use a whole long line of MUCH SMALLER magnetic field sources in sequence. This allows for a very short charge and discharge time, allowing the capsule to remain in motion.
This of course would present a problem for your silo idea, unless you were able to build a track into the air above the silo.
I actually looked into this way back in high school when a friend of mine and I came up with an idea for a solenoid-fired BB gun. We figured that the only way to get the BB up to speed is to use a long line of solenoids. I think it would have worked.. but we were never able to build it due to a lack of experience with electrical timing circuits.
-molo
p.s.: sorry for the lack of quantitative stuff here.. someone have a physics book around?
After growing up on a Qwerty keyboard, I tried switching to Dvorak. It lasted about 6 months. My results? I never got as fast on Dvorak as I was with my Qwerty keyboard. One possible reason for this is that I was unable to use Dvorak exclusively. Every time I used someone else's computer or went to a computer lab, it would be a huge pain. After Dvorak was ingrained in my head (and hands) pretty well, I was embarassed at my hunting and pecking on Qwerty keyboards. But still, my speed on Dvorak was only about 80% of my original speed on Qwerty. However, my typing comfort and accuracy on Dvorak were much improved! After using Dvorak for a while, I was making fewer (and less serious) mistakes. I think the main reason my comfort was improved was that when I learned Dvorak, I actually learned proper typing form, which is something I never had with Qwerty (and still don't). So why did I switch back? Dvorak is only a viable option if one can use it exclusively. In my job and schoolwork, I had to often use other people's or general access computers. Switching back and forth was a real pain. It would get my hands confused. In the end, I decided it was not worth it. However, if I could put myself in an environment where I could use a Dvorak layout exclusively, I think I would switch back. My hands and wrists havn't felt as good since. I think I could get my Dvorak speed to where my Qwerty speed is now if I was able to use it exclusively. Just my $0.02
Slashdot Mirror
If this is such a non-issue, why the hell is it deserving of my (and the rest of Slashdot's) attention?
Really, if this isn't just another run-of-the-mill defamation cases, and it actully deserves our attention, emmett certainly didn't give any indication whatsoever of that.
Emmett, please be more choosy.
-me
Following the links on the page, they do an email verify to download a pdf of their paper. WTF is this all about? Anyone have a mirror or a URL that is valid?
Jason Kau writes " is a working paper on the economics of open source software from the Nation Bureau of Economic Research entitled "The Simple Economics of Open Source". Focuses primarily on Apache, Perl, and Sendmail but mentions Linux, Debian, VA Linux, etc. It's a 40 page PDF document. Some background in Economics would probably be helpful. " something you should
I want a demo of the honeymoon. :)
However, I have experienced the very problem described in the article: I run 1600x1200 on my system at home, and certain foolish operating systems *cough*windows*cough* make teeny little icons. However, certain other systems *cough*xwindows*cough* allow me to tell the system the dots per inch, and most things work out well.
Hey.. maybe i missed something in XF86Setup.. Where do I specify DPI? I'm running 16x12 (@85Hz) on a 19".
Thanks
Everyone that knows what a BBS door is knows this game. One of the best ever created, IMO. Console-based, so I don't think there would be technical difficulties with a port.
I'd love you put a telnetable TW2002 game up on my linux box! How much fun would that be?
Ah, the good old days.
Cookies are your friend. Cookies make web sites a whole lot simpler and more reliable.
True. I don't dispute this. But, there is no reason that cookies should be allowed on graphics (such as ads)! I mean, sure, there are plenty of legit reasons for having a cookie on a html file (look at slashdot). However, allowing cookies attached to pictures is useless, except for advertisement tracking!
Was it the W3C who decided to allow this? Who should we be blaming for this (besides doubleclick, they are obviously responsible)?
Note that Intel is now under attack in *all* their major market segments, so this limits their ability to undercut in one market while making up for it with extra-high prices in another market.
I believe you are correct, except for one market segment: SMP servers. There are x86 competitors in all of the other areas, but as of yet (IIRC), there are no Athlon SMP boards. The competitors I see in this area are Sun and Compaq/Digital/Alpha, both non-x86.
I tried that and I get 404s on the frozen directories.
Mirrors probably aren't updated yet. Give it a day or two.
SUMMARY: This rule amends the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to allow the export and reexport of any encryption commodity or software to individuals, commercial firms, and other non-government end-users in all destinations. It also allows exports and reexports of retail encryption commodities and software to all end-users in all destinations. Post-export reporting requirements are streamlined, and changes are made to reflect amendments to the Wassenaar Arrangement. This rule implements the encryption policy announced by the White House on September 16 and will simplify U.S. encryption export rules. Restrictions on terrorist supporting states (Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan or Syria), their nationals and other sanctioned entities are not changed by this rule.
Note that there are still restrictions. Curious that you cannot export to a government user.
Enjoy.
ssh is open source. RSAREF is the closed source (patented) library that is at issue. The vulnerability exists in RSAREF and affects all these other products.
Personally, I'm glad Debian distributes its ssh without RSAREF.
Would the vulnerability exist if RSAREF was open sourced? I doubt it. There are plenty of other RSA implementations that don't have this problem.
Bruce, I think you missed the main part of the review. They have links at the top of the page that displays the ratings (1-10 graphic).
h tml?st.cn.3721-7-1477826.dir.3721-7-147782 8
The page for the full Corel review is:
http://home.cnet.com/software/0-3721-7-1477828.
The first new paragraph starts with:
Corel is based on the Debian distribution of Linux, but you'd be hard-pressed to tell.
That doesn't make the review any more useful to us that already use linux, but they DO say that Corel comes from Debian.
Enjoy.
-molo
As the article states, OPL is "Overseas Partners, Ltd." .. when the stock was private, every time you purchased shares of UPS stock, you also had to purchase a certain amount of OPL stock. This was mandatory if you wanted to buy UPS stock.
OPL was known to my co-workers (middle management) as the company that provides package insurance. I remember hearing something about UPS starting it up and spinning it off years ago.
Wish I could provide more info. Thats all I remember about UPS and OPL. I wasn't involved in package systems.
Seems like public knowledge to me.
While the announcement may have been shareholder-motivated, I don't think their schedule is. Their schedule may be advanced by AMD, but I doubt it will be at any detriment to Intel.
Intel has always controlled the market and let the technology tickle out. I'm sure that if Intel wanted to, they would their next generation of IA32 chips on desktops now. That would be great for us, but bad for Intel. They want to get all of the intermediate upgrades.
I mean, if you are the market leader regardless, why should you release the new chip until the current chip is sold through? Intel could step things up a notch, but they have had no motivation to do so (until now).
I think that AMD's success is a great thing for the consumer. It should motivate Intel to get their chips to market faster, something that I'm sure they are capable of.
For example, Intel has been producing 0.18 micron chips for many months. They were only available on portables until now. Why? It has to be a deliberate marketing decision to get all the money they can out of the desktop market.
I hate marketing.
Actually, there is a problem there. Solenoids and other magnetic field carriers take time to build in strength and time to discharge.
If you ignored that charge/discharge time (lets imagine its 0), since solenoids pull objects towards their center, it would only make sense to have the solenoid on for the first half of the capsule's journey through the solenoid. If it was on for the second half (ie remained on), the capsule would actually be slowed down as it was pulled towards the center of the solenoid. It would bounce back and forth a little and then just remain motionless at the center.
Now if you turned the solenoid off (assuming discharge time of 0) after the capsule reaches the half-way mark, it would continue on its merry way at whatever velocity the capsule had reached by the mid-point of the solenoid.
Now, in reality, if the solenoid is large enough to exert more than one g on a 1 ton capsule (a reasonable estimate for your purpose), its going to take a very large magnetic field. The larger the field is, the longer it takes to build. The longer it takes to build, the longer it takes to die. So, if your capsule is in the bottom of this silo and the magnetic field is turned on, by the time it reaches the center of the solenoid, its moving at a good pace. Now the power is turned off and the magnetic field slowly diapates. Because it wasn't instantaneous, the capsule is slowed down by the remaining force drawing it towards the center of the solenoid. By the time the capsule reaches the end of the coil, its velocity is back to 0 and gravity takes over, bringing it back to the bottom of your silo.
So, there has to be a solution, you say. The solution is mag-lev. Use a whole long line of MUCH SMALLER magnetic field sources in sequence. This allows for a very short charge and discharge time, allowing the capsule to remain in motion.
This of course would present a problem for your silo idea, unless you were able to build a track into the air above the silo.
I actually looked into this way back in high school when a friend of mine and I came up with an idea for a solenoid-fired BB gun. We figured that the only way to get the BB up to speed is to use a long line of solenoids. I think it would have worked.. but we were never able to build it due to a lack of experience with electrical timing circuits.
-molo
p.s.: sorry for the lack of quantitative stuff here.. someone have a physics book around?
After growing up on a Qwerty keyboard, I tried switching to Dvorak. It lasted about 6 months. My results? I never got as fast on Dvorak as I was with my Qwerty keyboard. One possible reason for this is that I was unable to use Dvorak exclusively. Every time I used someone else's computer or went to a computer lab, it would be a huge pain. After Dvorak was ingrained in my head (and hands) pretty well, I was embarassed at my hunting and pecking on Qwerty keyboards. But still, my speed on Dvorak was only about 80% of my original speed on Qwerty. However, my typing comfort and accuracy on Dvorak were much improved! After using Dvorak for a while, I was making fewer (and less serious) mistakes. I think the main reason my comfort was improved was that when I learned Dvorak, I actually learned proper typing form, which is something I never had with Qwerty (and still don't). So why did I switch back? Dvorak is only a viable option if one can use it exclusively. In my job and schoolwork, I had to often use other people's or general access computers. Switching back and forth was a real pain. It would get my hands confused. In the end, I decided it was not worth it. However, if I could put myself in an environment where I could use a Dvorak layout exclusively, I think I would switch back. My hands and wrists havn't felt as good since. I think I could get my Dvorak speed to where my Qwerty speed is now if I was able to use it exclusively. Just my $0.02