Well, I can buy a book on my desktop, but read it on a laptop, on a plane. Or I can back it up to preserve my copy, or keep reading it after replacing my computer's CPU, or index its text with a private search system, or read it in a larger font which is more comfortable to my eyes, or cross-reference it into my private library, or...
Don't confuse having an illegitimate use with having no legitimate uses.
Re:That's like putting all of Ford in prision...
on
Sklyarov Indicted
·
· Score: 1
Worse - it's like jailing Ford for building a car which could be used in a vehicular manslaughter.
Course, in those days, not only were the risks of travel balanced by the rewards of escaping the local law's short arm or coming back with (possibly someone else's) valuable cargo, but your alternative was to stay home, eat boot leather in bad years, and probably die of typhus or cholera.
Our best and brightest aren't going to take up the torch of discovery if it's too much harder than the advanced life of relative ease and comfort they can have right here on Earth.
...to drum up support. (Except for the attempt to make the letters look unrelated - that's sleazy and pathetic. I wonder if other pacs do that.) The EFF does about the same thing: makes it easy for supporters to send prefab letters.
I was thinking about DMCA the other day, and finally "got it" about those apparently aimless protests.
People are mad because laws are being crafted for their home countries - not by their elected officials - but by bands of faceless, unelected international bureaucrats like WTO (or ICANN for that matter).
To restate: international law is suddenly powerful - and the officials drafting it are not representative or democratically elected. In its current form, this ends Locke's social contract between people and government.
California non-profits are making public policy for, say, Germany. Latin American dictators are helping to write US laws. Bad, bad situation.
Microsoft is giving up control of C# because C# doesn't matter - it's the free lunch that comes with the $15 soda. The object library underneath C# is where all the value is (and also where the bottleneck is), and that isn't standardized (nor will it be).
For crying out loud, it's even has bindings to a bunch of different languages! C# allows competing languages, but they all use the CLR. Doesn't that show you where the one tollbooth is actually going to be?
Yep, Apache is a webserver, and we all know what a webserver is. Apparently it will lose market-share to "web services" because it isn't one.
But what is a "web service?" It's just a word! Suppose it's "wakalixes." Apache will lose market-share because it isn't a "wakalix." But IIS is a "wakalix." So far so good, but what does that mean?
Software can have no value proposition unless it is real and performs a real task. The closest thing we see to a definition is "applications advertising their own capabilities, searching for other applications on the web and invoking their services without prior design or negotiation" - but what does this really mean? Do you give programs money to motor around the internet doing - just - stuff?
I challenge Mr. Prasad to post here a concrete example of a "web service" and what it does. That would establish a context for his (maybe valid) criticism of Apache. Without that, well - what are we actually talking about?
...or more generally, that people who pick up any computer book hoping for The One True Answer, instead of just some useful information, tools, and techniques, are barking up the wrong tree.
...is that the 80's and 90's (particularly the Democratic Party's big lurch to the right) have brought an unusually business-friendly establishment into power.
This was fine during the fat 90's, when there was more and more to go around and nothing to pit business and the public against each other.
But now, as the market contracts and organizations fight to survive financially, "business-friendly" is going to start meaning "hostile to the public." This is going to spur a big new wave of direct liberalism from the left.
I actually figured out a usable way to do this. It wasn't pretty, but...
I got this ASN.1 dumper, but found out that it can't tell where in the data to start (though you can give it an offset). This is even worse because ASN.1 structures tend to encapsulate entire other ASN.1 structures as opaque (to the dumper) "octet strings."
So I rigged up a script like this:
#!/usr/bin/perl
for $i (0..200) {system "dumpasn1 -$i $ARGV[0]";}
...to try every possible offset in a reasonable range. I dump the output to a file, then browse through it looking for structure. Feh.
And those OIDs are the ultimate in separating unique definition from actual meaning.
but pppoe isn't that bad. I'll grant that the extra connect effort is annoying, but:
the performance difference is minor (it's built into kernel 2.4),
it's not, as some here claim, incompatible with a static ip - I'm posting this over Earthlink's home-office dsl plan (pppoe with static ip),
it cuts costs for your provider (by letting them use their existing equipment and infrastructure) without seriously reducing performance, making it more likely that they'll be able to stay in business and continue to provide your service, and
the network is less cluttered (you don't get everyone's arp traffic, for example).
He was just trying to make an impression by saying shocking things, at your expense. I hope all the real employers see this guy for what he is.
To some extent, he's right about your leverage (though if you're working for moderate pay, it seems to be cancelled out by your generosity or sense of fairness) - but even if you became unreasonably demanding, the proper action would be to hire alternatives, not replacements (at least at first).
It's not going to be easy. Breaking into a job market is always hard, and particularly now.
I'd actually recommend pushing harder on the biology side; Novartis, etc. are on the rise, while silicon is still falling, and pits you against tougher competitors who were just laid off. The computing boom is over.
I remember the days when word processors reverse-engineered and read each other's formats. Good for the products and good for the customers. Where has the spirit of this industry gone?
Translated to the Web: browsers need to track each other's standards and behavior. This means everyone gets to "play" de facto, plus every product ends up the same for developers.
The ratio is out of whack. If the Big Scary Internet Business Dot Com has X Bandwidth, and the Home User has X / 2 Bandwidth (not X / 500) as it should be), there is a BIG problem.
This is a problem for client-server networks but an advantage for peer-to-peer networks like Gnutella.
very trivial problems. Like how they should be able to type the characters in an URL on their keyboard that lacks key for these.
Like it or not, multinational domain names will tend to fragment the Internet, by making it harder for people from different backgrounds to communicate.
As it stands, English is a kind of common language for the Internet.
Yes, this is to some extent unfair - it gives an advantage to naitive English speakers over everyone else. I can see why this would bother people with other naitive languages.
It also brings the same advantage in international communication that Latin did to the international community of scientists hundreds of years ago - it makes it possible for everyone to communicate after learning only one new language, not fifty.
To some extent what is easy is what gets done; and making it harder for people from different countries to reach each other's Internet hosts will make it happen less.
Don't get me wrong - this is not an argument that international domain names are bad or should not be used. I have not discussed at all their formidable advantages. But the fragmentation I speak of is an unavoidable consequence; to ignore it is to fool oneself.
If consumers want to avoid serious functionality and warranty troubles, they should avoid low-end purchases from no-name companies
A former housemate of mine has a Hewlett-Packard machine he bought for $2000. I have a comparable machine I built from components for $1500.
He has endless stability problems; I have barely a glitch.
I'd say "the big manufacturers will give you a better product" might be a misleading message to get.
I'd agree about this on the component level - no-name mice and modems, for example, tend to be really shoddy, while second-tier ones seem to last much longer.
But on the computer level, from what I've seen, a brand name is no protection against trouble.
Perhaps this illustrates the potential two-sided nature of this law - it could be used as a wedge by the big companies to force their mom-and-pop competitors out of business.
I think the idea is that Linux could be Windows done right - an easy GUI for the layperson, with an actual high-quality sense-making architecture underneath.
Dunno. To me, this seems very, very good. MS today has taken the first step toward winning me back as a customer.
...that is, if this isn't their typical deceptive-appearances act. Anyone want to comment on whether this document actually explains how to make Windows and vanilla Kerberos interoperate?
"selling out" is when someone negotiating on behalf of other parties makes concessions in return for personal concessions to him- or herself, not to them.
I'm liking Red Hat more and more. If it succeeds at its intentions, it will provide the ease of use and price point that sold so many copies of Windows, with an actual decent, high-quality, and open architecture underneath to keep the system working. I would love this.
Slashdot Mirror
What legal things can you do with this tool?
Well, I can buy a book on my desktop, but read it on a laptop, on a plane. Or I can back it up to preserve my copy, or keep reading it after replacing my computer's CPU, or index its text with a private search system, or read it in a larger font which is more comfortable to my eyes, or cross-reference it into my private library, or...
Don't confuse having an illegitimate use with having no legitimate uses.
Worse - it's like jailing Ford for building a car which could be used in a vehicular manslaughter.
Course, in those days, not only were the risks of travel balanced by the rewards of escaping the local law's short arm or coming back with (possibly someone else's) valuable cargo, but your alternative was to stay home, eat boot leather in bad years, and probably die of typhus or cholera.
Our best and brightest aren't going to take up the torch of discovery if it's too much harder than the advanced life of relative ease and comfort they can have right here on Earth.
...to drum up support. (Except for the attempt to make the letters look unrelated - that's sleazy and pathetic. I wonder if other pacs do that.) The EFF does about the same thing: makes it easy for supporters to send prefab letters.
I was thinking about DMCA the other day, and finally "got it" about those apparently aimless protests.
People are mad because laws are being crafted for their home countries - not by their elected officials - but by bands of faceless, unelected international bureaucrats like WTO (or ICANN for that matter).
To restate: international law is suddenly powerful - and the officials drafting it are not representative or democratically elected. In its current form, this ends Locke's social contract between people and government.
California non-profits are making public policy for, say, Germany. Latin American dictators are helping to write US laws. Bad, bad situation.
Really, it just underscores the point made by every other popular article about child development:
If you don't particularly care how your kids spend their time, who knows how they'll come out?
I agree.
If you know enough to run network services safely, you know enough to be able to turn them on yourself.
Microsoft is giving up control of C# because C# doesn't matter - it's the free lunch that comes with the $15 soda. The object library underneath C# is where all the value is (and also where the bottleneck is), and that isn't standardized (nor will it be).
For crying out loud, it's even has bindings to a bunch of different languages! C# allows competing languages, but they all use the CLR. Doesn't that show you where the one tollbooth is actually going to be?
Yep, Apache is a webserver, and we all know what a webserver is. Apparently it will lose market-share to "web services" because it isn't one.
But what is a "web service?" It's just a word! Suppose it's "wakalixes." Apache will lose market-share because it isn't a "wakalix." But IIS is a "wakalix." So far so good, but what does that mean?
Software can have no value proposition unless it is real and performs a real task. The closest thing we see to a definition is "applications advertising their own capabilities, searching for other applications on the web and invoking their services without prior design or negotiation" - but what does this really mean? Do you give programs money to motor around the internet doing - just - stuff?
I challenge Mr. Prasad to post here a concrete example of a "web service" and what it does. That would establish a context for his (maybe valid) criticism of Apache. Without that, well - what are we actually talking about?
rather than being hailed as a savior.
...or more generally, that people who pick up any computer book hoping for The One True Answer, instead of just some useful information, tools, and techniques, are barking up the wrong tree.
...is that the 80's and 90's (particularly the Democratic Party's big lurch to the right) have brought an unusually business-friendly establishment into power.
This was fine during the fat 90's, when there was more and more to go around and nothing to pit business and the public against each other.
But now, as the market contracts and organizations fight to survive financially, "business-friendly" is going to start meaning "hostile to the public." This is going to spur a big new wave of direct liberalism from the left.
I actually figured out a usable way to do this. It wasn't pretty, but...
I got this ASN.1 dumper, but found out that it can't tell where in the data to start (though you can give it an offset). This is even worse because ASN.1 structures tend to encapsulate entire other ASN.1 structures as opaque (to the dumper) "octet strings."
So I rigged up a script like this:
#!/usr/bin/perl
for $i (0..200) {system "dumpasn1 -$i $ARGV[0]";}
...to try every possible offset in a reasonable range. I dump the output to a file, then browse through it looking for structure. Feh.
And those OIDs are the ultimate in separating unique definition from actual meaning.
Less syntactically clunky than the html/javascript combination. They'll regret resurrecting the "let" keyword, though.
but pppoe isn't that bad. I'll grant that the extra connect effort is annoying, but:
He was just trying to make an impression by saying shocking things, at your expense. I hope all the real employers see this guy for what he is.
To some extent, he's right about your leverage (though if you're working for moderate pay, it seems to be cancelled out by your generosity or sense of fairness) - but even if you became unreasonably demanding, the proper action would be to hire alternatives, not replacements (at least at first).
It's not going to be easy. Breaking into a job market is always hard, and particularly now.
I'd actually recommend pushing harder on the biology side; Novartis, etc. are on the rise, while silicon is still falling, and pits you against tougher competitors who were just laid off. The computing boom is over.
I remember the days when word processors reverse-engineered and read each other's formats. Good for the products and good for the customers. Where has the spirit of this industry gone?
Translated to the Web: browsers need to track each other's standards and behavior. This means everyone gets to "play" de facto, plus every product ends up the same for developers.
Instead we hear nothing but whining.
The ratio is out of whack. If the Big Scary Internet Business Dot Com has X Bandwidth, and the Home User has X / 2 Bandwidth (not X / 500) as it should be), there is a BIG problem.
This is a problem for client-server networks but an advantage for peer-to-peer networks like Gnutella.
very trivial problems. Like how they should be able to type the characters in an URL on their keyboard that lacks key for these.
Like it or not, multinational domain names will tend to fragment the Internet, by making it harder for people from different backgrounds to communicate.
As it stands, English is a kind of common language for the Internet.
Yes, this is to some extent unfair - it gives an advantage to naitive English speakers over everyone else. I can see why this would bother people with other naitive languages.
It also brings the same advantage in international communication that Latin did to the international community of scientists hundreds of years ago - it makes it possible for everyone to communicate after learning only one new language, not fifty.
To some extent what is easy is what gets done; and making it harder for people from different countries to reach each other's Internet hosts will make it happen less.
Don't get me wrong - this is not an argument that international domain names are bad or should not be used. I have not discussed at all their formidable advantages. But the fragmentation I speak of is an unavoidable consequence; to ignore it is to fool oneself.
Most Americans couldn't be bothered with such foreign sewage.
Ugh. At this point I can't tell the U.S. trolls from the European trolls.
(from the article)
If consumers want to avoid serious functionality and warranty troubles, they should avoid low-end purchases from no-name companiesA former housemate of mine has a Hewlett-Packard machine he bought for $2000. I have a comparable machine I built from components for $1500.
He has endless stability problems; I have barely a glitch.
I'd say "the big manufacturers will give you a better product" might be a misleading message to get.
I'd agree about this on the component level - no-name mice and modems, for example, tend to be really shoddy, while second-tier ones seem to last much longer.
But on the computer level, from what I've seen, a brand name is no protection against trouble.
Perhaps this illustrates the potential two-sided nature of this law - it could be used as a wedge by the big companies to force their mom-and-pop competitors out of business.
I think the idea is that Linux could be Windows done right - an easy GUI for the layperson, with an actual high-quality sense-making architecture underneath.
Dunno. To me, this seems very, very good. MS today has taken the first step toward winning me back as a customer.
...that is, if this isn't their typical deceptive-appearances act. Anyone want to comment on whether this document actually explains how to make Windows and vanilla Kerberos interoperate?
"selling out" is when someone negotiating on behalf of other parties makes concessions in return for personal concessions to him- or herself, not to them.
I'm liking Red Hat more and more. If it succeeds at its intentions, it will provide the ease of use and price point that sold so many copies of Windows, with an actual decent, high-quality, and open architecture underneath to keep the system working. I would love this.