As for the term 'realtime', without a reference to what it is realtime against, it could mean anything. It's just how the language works, without a relation to something else, we have to assume something and hope the author intended what we assume.
Just goes to show the inadequacy of languages, and why so many confusions are taking place in this world. No need to get upset about it though.
I'm glad you are not permitted anywhere near the decision-process.
First you assess the risks, then you perform experiments. With today's technology, it's becoming more and more vital to show a sound judgement. Which governments have repeatedly failed to do:
Would you like tests of nuclear bombs in your suburb? Neither did the people in the Pacific Ocean, but the US still did tests around Marshall Island (a href="http://umns.umc.org/02/sep/401.htm">http://u mns.umc.org/02/sep/401.htm). People got sick and died, they were forcefully relocated many times. Read the story, would you like to be subject to a nuclear test or similar?
How much do you justify in the name of science? How cold in your heart can you get?
Heart and science should go one in one, more so now than ever before!
Do you really think MS is dumb enough to chose a key length that has any chance of being broken anytime soon?
Yes. Does that answer your question?
All they need is the DMCA to stop it from being legitimate. With the DMCA, good security is "not necessary" to keep the masses down, just the law and a police force.
Many females play a male character in order to get to play more than having to chat with immature people who thinks Everquest is a place to get a girlfriend.
Re:Open Source and DRM are fundamentally incompati
on
Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
As soon as you go Open Source, *anyone* can take the code appart, take the decryption routine, and get the plaintext right out of that. There is nothing 'forcing' the data directly into the hardware. At that point, the plaintext can be distributed, and the DRM has failed.
The whole point of encrypting with known algorithms is that it is very hard to decrypt without the keys. I think you must have used a very weak algorithm. You don't release the keys anywhere, they must be hidden away as best you can. Of course, doing safe decryption on an untrusted platform is impossible (see below).
I don't see any mathematics in your post. So I have to ask for proof before believing you. Next time, avoid buzzwords just to be modded up..
Secondly, I believe you have some experience, but the future of DRM will not be in software.. With closed hardware, it's probably (who REALLY knows?) possible to combine Open Source and DRM. Point being that Microsoft announced they will release their sourcecode for Palladium, so that everybody can see that there is no 'evil' code in there. That it does what Microsoft says it will. The core code that runs in a hardware-protected sandbox should be perfectly safe (in theory) from tampering by other than Microsoft.
Thirdly, OSS supporting DRM is a bad move because that will validate closing up the hardware from the people. Maybe many thinks this is a good idea, but in the long run we WILL be better off defeating DRM before it becomes valid.
The people should make the decision NOT to buy DRM-enabled devices and programs. Just stop supporting DRM and all its likes RIGHT NOW. There is nothing to be gained for the people in the technology. It defeats the whole purpose of a multi-purpose device: That somebody else controls what you can and can't do on your own terminal.
For once in your life, take a stand. Have some spine! If it means you can't buy the latest N-Sync album over the net, just don't do it! Walk out into nature and meditate, you'll be much happier and better off..
Google is not a dictionary. If you want to look up a word in an "authority-approved" way, don't use a WWW-search engine, better yet, don't use the WWW at all!!
This is a classic case of people complaining about a tool, when they're using the tool the wrong way. Google doesn't have any more power than you give it.
Besides, as long as Google rank their pages in a semi-democratic way, I don't see how people can complain about that. The fact that the article ranks so high up, is because of people's interest.
Do you claim YOUR interest to be worth more than thousands of others? Then YOU might BE the problem.. Often people who just complain, are...
We possibly shouldn't be surprised that Norway is one of them: underneath the clean and friendly image, Scandinavian states have a history of social control, significant right-wing politics, and social repression of dissident groups. Just like us, in fact.
Norway is a far cry from the USA, but like EU, we're eagerly learning.
Sadly enough, USA have a big karmic responsibility to the world of being a role-model, and is failing horribly.
Just stick with LISP then. You do it in LISP and the others choose what they want to do it in. I assume you can do it blindfolded, gagged and all your fingers and toes behind your back, and faster too, in LISP.. Then do it!
But please spare us the stiff attitude and elitism..
I'll reply to you, since you have the highest score. But this goes to everyone who replied to my post:
It's clear you have an agenda. The article didn't mention Linux or Open Source at all, neither did the post I replied to. So where does all this come from? As far as this thread, this discussion is Off Topic.
Of course you can patch it up yourself, or pay someone to do it with Open Source. If you go for closed source commercial products, you have yourself to thank for being forced to upgrade when the vendor drops support for old products.
For the record, given the choice, I would go for Open Source products. I'm even using and advocating them at work. However, that doesn't mean the current OSS products are usable for all tasks. Even I wouldn't recommend it for everything we do. My experienced with OSS / Free Software is varied, but overall positive.
All Microsoft-bashing aside, does anyone else see something majorly wrong when it's impossible to fix a fairly serious exploit due to architecture limitations in the OS?? They're basically saying that they can't fix it because the OS makes it impossible to do so. Not because it's inherent in some protocol, or because it is a natural effect of some kind of desired behavior or something, but because the OS DOESN'T SUPPORT IT????? That's just wrong.
You're working yourself up here... Consider this like Red Hat refusing to patch up Red Hat 3.0 with the latest security fixes.
It's bad news here at work though, we still use NT. No need for an upgrade with all the hassle it brings, we get the development work done just fine. It makes excellent economic sense to skip a few Windows-versions for big businesses. It's just a huge hassle and economic drain to switch to newer versions when what you've got is working.
What should upset us is that Microsoft is refusing to support NT, when they've still committed to supporting the platform..
However, if a work-around is good enough, then it's good enough. This ain't rocket science, it's IT. IT is quite stupid and non-academic unfortunately.
Serious: Besides the "move your desktop around on campus", the main other principle behind SunRay's, MadHatter, etc. is that your paperless stuff is important enough to be put on central (probably mirrored or RAID) storage which gets backed up nightly. So you don't lose ANYTHING.
In case of a pole reversal, or magnetic storms, it can be lost very quickly. It has happened before, will happen again, we just don't know when. I'd backup on different types of media to be sure.
Since a year or three, I'm working 99% paperless. Don't have a cabinet with folders anymore. It also saves my lower back when I'm travelling.
Myself, I find it easier to read a book outside of the monitor, and have neat papers that I can quickly take with me on meetings etc. I wouldn't be comfortable with a paperless office even though I like the idea of not cutting down trees. I also like to take notes that are not meant to be a document. With a pen, it's quick and easy, and I can even draw pictures while I wait on the phone.
If it works for you, good, but it just wouldn't work for me.
I saw one of these in practice at a Sun field office. It's very cool to see people insert their card through and have their desktop appear on their screens without logging in. In todays corporate environment of people being rather mobile throughout the corporation, I'm surprised it hasn't caught on outside of Sun. Of course it preclused having a personalized workspace and a place to call "yours", but perhaps combining the idea of "home base" no matter where you are along with a personalized workspace would be something I'd like to have.
Problem is that you MUST have a paperless office if you move to such a mobile solution. And we are using more paper now than ever before, thus destroying the myth of a paperless office along with the viability for this in every office... I wouldn't want to carry all my books and perms along with me.
Maybe, you can get a paperless office if you spend 2 or 3 LCD screens per employee, but I doubt it will be cost-efficient.
For large consulting firms, it makes sense though. But then, a laptop and a LAN/private network makes even more sense..
Then there is the risk: In a paperless office you can lose EVERYTHING.
Re:mirror of screenshot
on
Opencroquet
·
· Score: 1
Gestures sound really neat, but in practice...
Personally, I think it's horrible. I enjoy playing with the mouse over the screen, expecting nothing to happen before I start clicking. So it's very different, and not something I really want or need. It's very stupid when you do a gesture you didn't mean to, or when the computer misunderstand or ignores your gestures (Litterally!;*). As if things weren't bad enough already...;-)
I've tried gestures in Black & White, Windows (using a 3rd party tool) and Mozilla, but I find it is easier and more accurate to just click or use the keyboard. Actually, the keyboard-mouse combo is very hard to beat both in gaming and in the office. It's not broken, so why fix it?
I'm not saying gestures are never useful. In special games, handling a sword or gun, etc, it can be just as neat as a simple add-on voice-recognition in a space combat sim. And if you love gestures in office applications, by all means use it!
It's good that people are working on many different features though. As long as they are optional in the system, all is good. Maybe something useful will come out of it in the end. Perhaps for certain types of disabled people, it might be better. Certainly, it is advancing CS technology further ahead.
I have experienced bad implementations though. For example, the biggest telco here in Norway (telenor) now demands you SPEAK the words to their answering machines, instead of pressing the keys on the phone. Of course, this pisses everyone looking for support off, or makes them hang up in confusion! (probably the intention)
I really like the left-clicks in Windows where you get a menu for manipulating that object you were clicking. It should be more generally and extensively used for every GUI object I think.
However, what should be replaced, or improved is the double-click. When you move your mouse, the double-click gets very inaccurate. Many new users inadvertedly misunderstand the double-click, mainly because they move the mouse between the clicks and they get even more confused and start learning to click three or four times (which is just as bad).
This is just IMHO though.
Re:How can an OS be 3D?
on
Opencroquet
·
· Score: 1
The most elaborate update so far of the Befunge language, Funge-98 generalizes Befunge for one, two, or three dimensions, and provides a paradigm for Funges of any number of dimensions and topologies.
Wouldn't LISP be a generalization for this again?
If it requires my department buying n-D displays for me, then heavens yeah! I could go for Befunge98!
Re:mirror of screenshot
on
Opencroquet
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Nothing amazing to see here...
They even implement the same bad dialogs as in Windows. Notice in the Connect-form, the http:// link is neither wrapped, nor does it elongate the dialog box.
I find it amazing that nobody fixes such stupid GUI things and makes a truly generic GUI.
A moral system that glorifies a sociopathic, genocidal tyrant that's all too willing to use orbital bombardment on two bronze age cities, saving only the family that was willing to grovel to him sufficiently.... and that is also willing to drown an entire PLANET simply because the inhabitants of said planet weren't grovelling to him sufficiently... is beneath my contempt.
He's the creator. He can do anything He wants.;-) Especially if it teaches those ignorant humans a lesson... Call it vengeance of God, or karma, it doesn't matter.
I wouldn't read the bible to get accurate information about it though..
Microsoft competes against older releases of its software. How many machines are still running Windows 9X and Office 97?
It can hardly be called a competition. The older software doesn't evolve, the patches often breaks other things, it's much more unstable and insecure, besides the new formats are not backwards-compatible forcing old users to upgrade (especially corporate users).
How can you call this competition? Besides, the very idea of "competing with older software you sold", is pretty silly in my book.
In my experience, if you start choosing genuine - not superficial activities, you change your consciousness so that actually seeing pretty girls smoking, makes a BIG turn-off.
Blaming your genes for being the way you are, is silly on the personal level. Why should it be so at the mass-level? It really isn't, it's all about raising the awareness of what we're doing, and what we could be doing instead.
Of course, I agree that genes, history, etc, all play a certain influence. That is called karma. However, it doesn't have to make anybody into a victim if you don't let it. Just choose differently, and let other people know so. Don't do anything to please others, just because you want to be perceived as cool or anything. If you express your own truth, you'll really be cool and not a copy-cat.
Re:And now for a comment from someone who knows...
on
Speeding up Evolution
·
· Score: 1
Grow up!
Even I have a girlfriend now..
These are different times, you gotta hang on, or be lost in a turn.
If there is a bug or a security problem in a DLL you only have to replace that DLL instead of all statically linked programs.
This new fix seems to break that. You'd need 10-20 different versions of the DLL to overwrite the "unique IDs", if it is at all possible. Another "fix" that fixes the symptoms and introduce new "features", not the real problem (lack of code-proofing and immature languages).
Can be quite entertaining in the future. I sure hope my company stays clear away from Longhorn.
Aha, now I see your problem. It is a purely physical one. That is also no problem in a true relational DBMS. I recommend you read the contents over at Database Debunkings Contents (sublink to the link I referred to in my original post).
Basically, a true relational DBMS will have two layers: one logical and one physical that are completely separate. The logical consists of entities and relations between them, while the physical is entirely up to the makers of the DBMS to implement in every way- or even ways, that they deem fit. This means, there is nothing wrong with storing multiple entities into one physical table, which would solve your issue elegantly. Indeed the physical layer should be optimized for the platform/hardware/OS, while the logical layer should be normalized to the highest degree.
but indexed views are not a standard feature
It is up to the programmers of the DBMS to solve this issue. Unfortunately, they have not implemented true relational logic in the commercial DBMSes of today, so people have to rely on hacks such as this. It is sad that development and elegancy is sacrificed for ignorance and greed from the commercial vendors. Computing would be a totally different game, with reliability and efficiency, if people were more truer to the theory (which works).
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't realtime by WHILE the scene is filmed?
As for the term 'realtime', without a reference to what it is realtime against, it could mean anything. It's just how the language works, without a relation to something else, we have to assume something and hope the author intended what we assume.
Just goes to show the inadequacy of languages, and why so many confusions are taking place in this world. No need to get upset about it though.
I'm glad you are not permitted anywhere near the decision-process.
u mns.umc.org/02/sep/401.htm). People got sick and died, they were forcefully relocated many times. Read the story, would you like to be subject to a nuclear test or similar?
First you assess the risks, then you perform experiments. With today's technology, it's becoming more and more vital to show a sound judgement. Which governments have repeatedly failed to do:
Would you like tests of nuclear bombs in your suburb? Neither did the people in the Pacific Ocean, but the US still did tests around Marshall Island (a href="http://umns.umc.org/02/sep/401.htm">http://
How much do you justify in the name of science?
How cold in your heart can you get?
Heart and science should go one in one, more so now than ever before!
Do you really think MS is dumb enough to chose a key length that has any chance of being broken anytime soon?
Yes. Does that answer your question?
All they need is the DMCA to stop it from being legitimate. With the DMCA, good security is "not necessary" to keep the masses down, just the law and a police force.
Maybe the aliens doesn't want to pollute the beds of others and the bed of themselves?
Many females play a male character in order to get to play more than having to chat with immature people who thinks Everquest is a place to get a girlfriend.
As soon as you go Open Source, *anyone* can take the code appart, take the decryption routine, and get the plaintext right out of that. There is nothing 'forcing' the data directly into the hardware. At that point, the plaintext can be distributed, and the DRM has failed.
The whole point of encrypting with known algorithms is that it is very hard to decrypt without the keys. I think you must have used a very weak algorithm. You don't release the keys anywhere, they must be hidden away as best you can. Of course, doing safe decryption on an untrusted platform is impossible (see below).
I don't see any mathematics in your post. So I have to ask for proof before believing you. Next time, avoid buzzwords just to be modded up..
Secondly, I believe you have some experience, but the future of DRM will not be in software.. With closed hardware, it's probably (who REALLY knows?) possible to combine Open Source and DRM. Point being that Microsoft announced they will release their sourcecode for Palladium, so that everybody can see that there is no 'evil' code in there. That it does what Microsoft says it will. The core code that runs in a hardware-protected sandbox should be perfectly safe (in theory) from tampering by other than Microsoft.
Thirdly, OSS supporting DRM is a bad move because that will validate closing up the hardware from the people. Maybe many thinks this is a good idea, but in the long run we WILL be better off defeating DRM before it becomes valid.
The people should make the decision NOT to buy DRM-enabled devices and programs. Just stop supporting DRM and all its likes RIGHT NOW. There is nothing to be gained for the people in the technology. It defeats the whole purpose of a multi-purpose device: That somebody else controls what you can and can't do on your own terminal.
For once in your life, take a stand. Have some spine! If it means you can't buy the latest N-Sync album over the net, just don't do it! Walk out into nature and meditate, you'll be much happier and better off..
Google is not a dictionary. If you want to look up a word in an "authority-approved" way, don't use a WWW-search engine, better yet, don't use the WWW at all!!
This is a classic case of people complaining about a tool, when they're using the tool the wrong way. Google doesn't have any more power than you give it.
Besides, as long as Google rank their pages in a semi-democratic way, I don't see how people can complain about that. The fact that the article ranks so high up, is because of people's interest.
Do you claim YOUR interest to be worth more than thousands of others? Then YOU might BE the problem.. Often people who just complain, are...
We possibly shouldn't be surprised that Norway is one of them: underneath the clean and friendly image, Scandinavian states have a history of social control, significant right-wing politics, and social repression of dissident groups. Just like us, in fact.
Norway is a far cry from the USA, but like EU, we're eagerly learning.
Sadly enough, USA have a big karmic responsibility to the world of being a role-model, and is failing horribly.
If you create a new life form, do you have the right to destroy it? Maybe. If you can re-create it at a whim, why not?
"Right" is a nonsensical word. There's noone out there granting or revocing rights, really, it's all a big con...... *ZAP!*
Just stick with LISP then. You do it in LISP and the others choose what they want to do it in. I assume you can do it blindfolded, gagged and all your fingers and toes behind your back, and faster too, in LISP.. Then do it!
But please spare us the stiff attitude and elitism..
Just to prove you wrong though: XML is not S-Expressions
I'll reply to you, since you have the highest score. But this goes to everyone who replied to my post:
It's clear you have an agenda. The article didn't mention Linux or Open Source at all, neither did the post I replied to. So where does all this come from? As far as this thread, this discussion is Off Topic.
Of course you can patch it up yourself, or pay someone to do it with Open Source. If you go for closed source commercial products, you have yourself to thank for being forced to upgrade when the vendor drops support for old products.
For the record, given the choice, I would go for Open Source products. I'm even using and advocating them at work. However, that doesn't mean the current OSS products are usable for all tasks. Even I wouldn't recommend it for everything we do. My experienced with OSS / Free Software is varied, but overall positive.
All Microsoft-bashing aside, does anyone else see something majorly wrong when it's impossible to fix a fairly serious exploit due to architecture limitations in the OS??
They're basically saying that they can't fix it because the OS makes it impossible to do so. Not because it's inherent in some protocol, or because it is a natural effect of some kind of desired behavior or something, but because the OS DOESN'T SUPPORT IT?????
That's just wrong.
You're working yourself up here... Consider this like Red Hat refusing to patch up Red Hat 3.0 with the latest security fixes.
It's bad news here at work though, we still use NT. No need for an upgrade with all the hassle it brings, we get the development work done just fine. It makes excellent economic sense to skip a few Windows-versions for big businesses. It's just a huge hassle and economic drain to switch to newer versions when what you've got is working.
What should upset us is that Microsoft is refusing to support NT, when they've still committed to supporting the platform..
However, if a work-around is good enough, then it's good enough. This ain't rocket science, it's IT. IT is quite stupid and non-academic unfortunately.
Serious: Besides the "move your desktop around on campus", the main other principle behind SunRay's, MadHatter, etc. is that your paperless stuff is important enough to be put on central (probably mirrored or RAID) storage which gets backed up nightly. So you don't lose ANYTHING.
In case of a pole reversal, or magnetic storms, it can be lost very quickly. It has happened before, will happen again, we just don't know when. I'd backup on different types of media to be sure.
Since a year or three, I'm working 99% paperless. Don't have a cabinet with folders anymore. It also saves my lower back when I'm travelling.
Myself, I find it easier to read a book outside of the monitor, and have neat papers that I can quickly take with me on meetings etc. I wouldn't be comfortable with a paperless office even though I like the idea of not cutting down trees. I also like to take notes that are not meant to be a document. With a pen, it's quick and easy, and I can even draw pictures while I wait on the phone.
If it works for you, good, but it just wouldn't work for me.
I saw one of these in practice at a Sun field office. It's very cool to see people insert their card through and have their desktop appear on their screens without logging in. In todays corporate environment of people being rather mobile throughout the corporation, I'm surprised it hasn't caught on outside of Sun. Of course it preclused having a personalized workspace and a place to call "yours", but perhaps combining the idea of "home base" no matter where you are along with a personalized workspace would be something I'd like to have.
Problem is that you MUST have a paperless office if you move to such a mobile solution. And we are using more paper now than ever before, thus destroying the myth of a paperless office along with the viability for this in every office... I wouldn't want to carry all my books and perms along with me.
Maybe, you can get a paperless office if you spend 2 or 3 LCD screens per employee, but I doubt it will be cost-efficient.
For large consulting firms, it makes sense though. But then, a laptop and a LAN/private network makes even more sense..
Then there is the risk: In a paperless office you can lose EVERYTHING.
Gestures sound really neat, but in practice...
;*). As if things weren't bad enough already... ;-)
Personally, I think it's horrible. I enjoy playing with the mouse over the screen, expecting nothing to happen before I start clicking. So it's very different, and not something I really want or need. It's very stupid when you do a gesture you didn't mean to, or when the computer misunderstand or ignores your gestures (Litterally!
I've tried gestures in Black & White, Windows (using a 3rd party tool) and Mozilla, but I find it is easier and more accurate to just click or use the keyboard. Actually, the keyboard-mouse combo is very hard to beat both in gaming and in the office. It's not broken, so why fix it?
I'm not saying gestures are never useful. In special games, handling a sword or gun, etc, it can be just as neat as a simple add-on voice-recognition in a space combat sim. And if you love gestures in office applications, by all means use it!
It's good that people are working on many different features though. As long as they are optional in the system, all is good. Maybe something useful will come out of it in the end. Perhaps for certain types of disabled people, it might be better. Certainly, it is advancing CS technology further ahead.
I have experienced bad implementations though. For example, the biggest telco here in Norway (telenor) now demands you SPEAK the words to their answering machines, instead of pressing the keys on the phone. Of course, this pisses everyone looking for support off, or makes them hang up in confusion! (probably the intention)
I really like the left-clicks in Windows where you get a menu for manipulating that object you were clicking. It should be more generally and extensively used for every GUI object I think.
However, what should be replaced, or improved is the double-click. When you move your mouse, the double-click gets very inaccurate. Many new users inadvertedly misunderstand the double-click, mainly because they move the mouse between the clicks and they get even more confused and start learning to click three or four times (which is just as bad).
This is just IMHO though.
The most elaborate update so far of the Befunge language, Funge-98 generalizes Befunge for one, two, or three dimensions, and provides a paradigm for Funges of any number of dimensions and topologies.
Wouldn't LISP be a generalization for this again?
If it requires my department buying n-D displays for me, then heavens yeah! I could go for Befunge98!
Nothing amazing to see here...
They even implement the same bad dialogs as in Windows. Notice in the Connect-form, the http:// link is neither wrapped, nor does it elongate the dialog box.
I find it amazing that nobody fixes such stupid GUI things and makes a truly generic GUI.
A moral system that glorifies a sociopathic, genocidal tyrant that's all too willing to use orbital bombardment on two bronze age cities, saving only the family that was willing to grovel to him sufficiently.... and that is also willing to drown an entire PLANET simply because the inhabitants of said planet weren't grovelling to him sufficiently... is beneath my contempt.
;-) Especially if it teaches those ignorant humans a lesson... Call it vengeance of God, or karma, it doesn't matter.
He's the creator. He can do anything He wants.
I wouldn't read the bible to get accurate information about it though..
Microsoft competes against older releases of its software. How many machines are still running Windows 9X and Office 97?
It can hardly be called a competition. The older software doesn't evolve, the patches often breaks other things, it's much more unstable and insecure, besides the new formats are not backwards-compatible forcing old users to upgrade (especially corporate users).
How can you call this competition? Besides, the very idea of "competing with older software you sold", is pretty silly in my book.
In my experience, if you start choosing genuine - not superficial activities, you change your consciousness so that actually seeing pretty girls smoking, makes a BIG turn-off.
Blaming your genes for being the way you are, is silly on the personal level. Why should it be so at the mass-level? It really isn't, it's all about raising the awareness of what we're doing, and what we could be doing instead.
Of course, I agree that genes, history, etc, all play a certain influence. That is called karma. However, it doesn't have to make anybody into a victim if you don't let it. Just choose differently, and let other people know so. Don't do anything to please others, just because you want to be perceived as cool or anything. If you express your own truth, you'll really be cool and not a copy-cat.
Grow up!
Even I have a girlfriend now..
These are different times, you gotta hang on, or be lost in a turn.
The joke isn't funny anymore.
I'd say this:
A love that is dependent on beauty, is superficial and leads only to misery.
So why be obsessed about superficial attributes such as beauty, strength and intelligence, when love is what we seek?
When you have much love, beauty comes naturally. You even cannot have beauty, without love.
If there is a bug or a security problem in a DLL you only have to replace that DLL instead of all statically linked programs.
This new fix seems to break that. You'd need 10-20 different versions of the DLL to overwrite the "unique IDs", if it is at all possible. Another "fix" that fixes the symptoms and introduce new "features", not the real problem (lack of code-proofing and immature languages).
Can be quite entertaining in the future. I sure hope my company stays clear away from Longhorn.
GO ahead, knock yerself out .-)
Aha, now I see your problem. It is a purely physical one. That is also no problem in a true relational DBMS. I recommend you read the contents over at Database Debunkings Contents (sublink to the link I referred to in my original post).
Basically, a true relational DBMS will have two layers: one logical and one physical that are completely separate. The logical consists of entities and relations between them, while the physical is entirely up to the makers of the DBMS to implement in every way- or even ways, that they deem fit. This means, there is nothing wrong with storing multiple entities into one physical table, which would solve your issue elegantly. Indeed the physical layer should be optimized for the platform/hardware/OS, while the logical layer should be normalized to the highest degree.
but indexed views are not a standard feature
It is up to the programmers of the DBMS to solve this issue. Unfortunately, they have not implemented true relational logic in the commercial DBMSes of today, so people have to rely on hacks such as this. It is sad that development and elegancy is sacrificed for ignorance and greed from the commercial vendors. Computing would be a totally different game, with reliability and efficiency, if people were more truer to the theory (which works).