How should I have done this differently so that using Linux would have been a more positive experience for my company?
Um, how about posting the actual "ring errors" that your lan admins were seeing. Also, did you try contacting Madge, since they supply the card and drivers? I'm still not really sure why this is an Ask Slashdot. While I'm sure it's within the realm of possibility that an errant (or improper configuration of a) driver hosed the network (an ex-admin of ours hosed our network with the linux box after he was let go), there isn't much detail here, there are many mailing lists devoted to this kind of thing, and your hardware vendor does support your card under linux. From their website:
Madge Networks has extended its Token Ring adapter software support to
include the Linux Operating System. Linux is becoming an increasingly popular
application environment within and this new driver support provides Token
Ring users with Linux support on the latest adapters:
yada yada. The fact that you posted this as an Ask Slashdot (and the complete lack of details), make me question the veracity of this report. Regardless, if this did happen, it is too bad. People at your work will undoubtedly have a bad impression of linux from this. Such is life.
The admin password is sent in clear text on each request anyways. All Challenge/Response usernames and passwords use Basic authentication which is the username:password base64'd
You should consider replacing your linksys. I have the BEFSR41 and have never had to reset it except when I upgraded the software on it by choice (it had more better forwarding options). I'm constantly ssh'ed in (through ssh forwarding I do other things) while I am at work. If you box is that unstable, get it replaced. It shouldn't be like that.
Designing 5-9s software for commercial use is like making a knife out of diamonds. Sure, it's more durable, but it costs a hell of a lot more than people are willing to pay.
I'll tell you exactly why. Because the requirement for ebook protection is born from outside of the technical department. Then it is passed around the techies who either refuse to do it because they know it will be cracked (and don't want to be accountable) or who will do it reluctantly because they don't want to lose their jobs. If they do have the balls and swing to say no, then it gets put out in front of a bunch of contracting companies. Some will know they can't and pass on the contract, others will line up at the teet and milk the cow.
No, you are thinking of the 64K barrier, not the 640K one. The 640K one was a DOS restriction. 64K was because of the 8088's 16-bit addressing. 640K was for no real good reason other than "it should be enough". While Bill G may have never said those exect words, his company okayed the philosophy behind them.
But what good is R&D and new drugs and technologies if only x% of the world can take advantage of developments supposedly in the name of 'humanity'
What seems to be lost in this thread is the real reason why patents exist. The purpose of the patents are to trade the secret for limited exclusive use. If there were no patents and this company did develop this drug, then they would keep the drug secret, develop obfusticated pills, and continue to only allow that x% access into perpetuity. At least with patents, it convices the companies to give everyone access after the expiry.
Another thing that has been lost in this thread is the difference between the typical/. patents we object to and this patent. I don't object to software patents like, say, RSA (which has now expired and everyone may use the technique), which would not naturally be derived by an average person with cryptography skills. Before RSA, if I were to say to a person "build me an algorithm for asymmetric key encryption" it is doubtful that someone would come up with RSA.
But I do object to "One-click shopping" because it basically patents a requirement. If you ask an average person skilled in dynamic web design to build a "one-click" system, they are going to use a database, and likely similar technologies that are covered by the one-click patent. It isn't innovative. It's trivial. Even
Similarily, if someone were to say to an average skilled biochemist, "make a drug that increases survival of AIDS patients," it isn't likely that said person would come up with this drug (or anything at all). I would object to a patent on all "pills or capsule taken orally that increase survival of AIDS patients" because that would be patenting a requirement.
I see a net loss. When companies "up north" can no longer recoup their R&D they will being able to develop the drugs needed to combat diseases. Then a new disease and mutation will come out, and there will be no feasible way to fight it.
This may work if only one country does it. But then why is Brazil allowed to do it while others aren't? All and all this is a bad situation.
Dude, I think you need to pick up a history book. Yes, the war of 1812 was started by the Americans invading what we now call Canada (yes, I'm Canadian). Both the French and the British fought the US in that war because they had land stakes in that area. The war went to December 24, 1814. In 1814, the British took Washington. Undoubtedly there were French militia with them since they were fight with the British in the war.
Even if we suppose that there is a global conspiracy to cover up a different burning of the White House not in 1814 but during the war of 1812 prior to that which happened during the British occupation of Washington in 1814, it still doesn't explain why there is a letter from 1811 refering to it at the White House (did this burning of the pink house happen both during the war of 1812 and before 1811?). If you don't trust snopes, then the encyclopoedia britannica, which is a British publication, states that the term "White House" was commonly used in 1810.
Quite frankly, your version of history does not make sence (starting with the sentance "It happened during the war of 1812, not in 1814") because it isn't reality. You were duped by an urban legend. It happens.
Did you read the link? It doesn't question if the white house was burned down. In fact, it states that it was burned down when Washington was taken in 1814. But it clearly states that it was white before this happened. It even has a quote from a letter in 1811 refering to it as "the White House".
One of the problems I see with the importance of metadata is that many of the protocols we use can't transmit it. FTP has no way of sending metadata. HTTP can include some of it in the headers, but there are limits on the format for these headers.
I think one of the reasons why extensions became so tightly tied to the mime-type is because of FTP. In the early days of the web, you could set up helper applications for mime-types, but if you were FTPing, you had to set it up as an extension. Now they are just linked.
If you have to know, the White House is white in order to protect the locally-quarried sandstone used for the exterior against deterioriation. The poster you are replying to is probably confused by
a popular urban legend, though.
You know, I've read the Java Virtual Machine Specifications, and I wrote a small compiler that would output Java classes, and I don't recall any op codes with garbage collection built into them. Perhaps you can share which ones these are?
I was:
Front page: click on "site map"
Site map: click on "Policies"
Policies: click on "What is the AT&T@Home Cable Internet Service Subscriber Agreement?"
What is the AT&T@Home Cable Internet Service Subscriber Agreement?: click on "Leased Modem Subscriber Agreement"
It's right there in 9(b)
Sure, it seems like an environmentally friendly source, until you consider what going into manufacturing a John Katz. Couple that with the waste it produces while in use, the relatively short life span, and the disposal problems, propane is much better.
My bad. I realize now that you were objecting to the fact that only now does cellular matter become property. Your original post really looked like you were objecting to the fact that only now do cells survive outside of the body. Mostly from the choice of words like "I know a number of locks of his hair have survived to the present day" (you are using survived in a different sense than the block you quoted), and then later "medically useful living cells" vs souvenirs looked like the disctinction was that these were "medically useful" not "medically useful and living".
Now that I understand your post, I was going to speak to it. But then I realized that it just has a question in it (as does your response to me). I don't have the answers to these questions. I think it's certainly possible that the same marketplace economics should be applied to the medically useful cells as the souveniers, but that the two are in different situations. If we could somehow revive Napoleon's cells and then cause them to reproduce, then I really don't see why the marketplace economics should be different. But since we haven't done that with Napoleon's cells, we're going to have to use these ones on their own to determine the rights involved. Then later, when we can revive Napoleon's cells, we can apply the marketplace economics we've established here.
That's not true. You just aren't allowed to circumvent it for the purposes of violating copyright. If you circumvent it for fair use, then you haven't broken copyright, so the DMCA doesn't apply
That is surprising, considering hair is made of dead cells. Not only were they kept alive for so long, but apparently the shaft of his hair was still alive on his head.
It's more likely that you can do this test on dead hair cells. Most other forensics work fine on lay people's hair, which is made up of dead cells.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, how about posting the actual "ring errors" that your lan admins were seeing. Also, did you try contacting Madge, since they supply the card and drivers? I'm still not really sure why this is an Ask Slashdot. While I'm sure it's within the realm of possibility that an errant (or improper configuration of a) driver hosed the network (an ex-admin of ours hosed our network with the linux box after he was let go), there isn't much detail here, there are many mailing lists devoted to this kind of thing, and your hardware vendor does support your card under linux. From their website:
yada yada. The fact that you posted this as an Ask Slashdot (and the complete lack of details), make me question the veracity of this report. Regardless, if this did happen, it is too bad. People at your work will undoubtedly have a bad impression of linux from this. Such is life.The admin password is sent in clear text on each request anyways. All Challenge/Response usernames and passwords use Basic authentication which is the username:password base64'd
You should consider replacing your linksys. I have the BEFSR41 and have never had to reset it except when I upgraded the software on it by choice (it had more better forwarding options). I'm constantly ssh'ed in (through ssh forwarding I do other things) while I am at work. If you box is that unstable, get it replaced. It shouldn't be like that.
Designing 5-9s software for commercial use is like making a knife out of diamonds. Sure, it's more durable, but it costs a hell of a lot more than people are willing to pay.
I'll tell you exactly why. Because the requirement for ebook protection is born from outside of the technical department. Then it is passed around the techies who either refuse to do it because they know it will be cracked (and don't want to be accountable) or who will do it reluctantly because they don't want to lose their jobs. If they do have the balls and swing to say no, then it gets put out in front of a bunch of contracting companies. Some will know they can't and pass on the contract, others will line up at the teet and milk the cow.
No, you are thinking of the 64K barrier, not the 640K one. The 640K one was a DOS restriction. 64K was because of the 8088's 16-bit addressing. 640K was for no real good reason other than "it should be enough". While Bill G may have never said those exect words, his company okayed the philosophy behind them.
Is anyone else here really bothered by the fact that there is no close parenthesis in the story. Just for my piece of mind I have to post a )
What seems to be lost in this thread is the real reason why patents exist. The purpose of the patents are to trade the secret for limited exclusive use. If there were no patents and this company did develop this drug, then they would keep the drug secret, develop obfusticated pills, and continue to only allow that x% access into perpetuity. At least with patents, it convices the companies to give everyone access after the expiry.
Another thing that has been lost in this thread is the difference between the typical
But I do object to "One-click shopping" because it basically patents a requirement. If you ask an average person skilled in dynamic web design to build a "one-click" system, they are going to use a database, and likely similar technologies that are covered by the one-click patent. It isn't innovative. It's trivial. Even
Similarily, if someone were to say to an average skilled biochemist, "make a drug that increases survival of AIDS patients," it isn't likely that said person would come up with this drug (or anything at all). I would object to a patent on all "pills or capsule taken orally that increase survival of AIDS patients" because that would be patenting a requirement.
You need a lot of years, because you aren't just covering the R&D of the successful projects, but that of the failed ones too.
Stop being brain washed. It isn't healthy.
I see a net loss. When companies "up north" can no longer recoup their R&D they will being able to develop the drugs needed to combat diseases. Then a new disease and mutation will come out, and there will be no feasible way to fight it.
This may work if only one country does it. But then why is Brazil allowed to do it while others aren't? All and all this is a bad situation.
Dude, I think you need to pick up a history book. Yes, the war of 1812 was started by the Americans invading what we now call Canada (yes, I'm Canadian). Both the French and the British fought the US in that war because they had land stakes in that area. The war went to December 24, 1814. In 1814, the British took Washington. Undoubtedly there were French militia with them since they were fight with the British in the war.
Even if we suppose that there is a global conspiracy to cover up a different burning of the White House not in 1814 but during the war of 1812 prior to that which happened during the British occupation of Washington in 1814, it still doesn't explain why there is a letter from 1811 refering to it at the White House (did this burning of the pink house happen both during the war of 1812 and before 1811?). If you don't trust snopes, then the encyclopoedia britannica, which is a British publication, states that the term "White House" was commonly used in 1810.
Quite frankly, your version of history does not make sence (starting with the sentance "It happened during the war of 1812, not in 1814") because it isn't reality. You were duped by an urban legend. It happens.
Did you read the link? It doesn't question if the white house was burned down. In fact, it states that it was burned down when Washington was taken in 1814. But it clearly states that it was white before this happened. It even has a quote from a letter in 1811 refering to it as "the White House".
I think one of the reasons why extensions became so tightly tied to the mime-type is because of FTP. In the early days of the web, you could set up helper applications for mime-types, but if you were FTPing, you had to set it up as an extension. Now they are just linked.
If you have to know, the White House is white in order to protect the locally-quarried sandstone used for the exterior against deterioriation. The poster you are replying to is probably confused by
a popular urban legend, though.
You know, I've read the Java Virtual Machine Specifications, and I wrote a small compiler that would output Java classes, and I don't recall any op codes with garbage collection built into them. Perhaps you can share which ones these are?
I love the first bid on that auction.
Did anyone else notcie that goatse.cx now has a warning. That wasn't there on the weekend.
Spoken like an unmarried man.
I was:
Front page: click on "site map"
Site map: click on "Policies"
Policies: click on "What is the AT&T@Home Cable Internet Service Subscriber Agreement?"
What is the AT&T@Home Cable Internet Service Subscriber Agreement?: click on "Leased Modem Subscriber Agreement"
It's right there in 9(b)
Sure, it seems like an environmentally friendly source, until you consider what going into manufacturing a John Katz. Couple that with the waste it produces while in use, the relatively short life span, and the disposal problems, propane is much better.
Now that I understand your post, I was going to speak to it. But then I realized that it just has a question in it (as does your response to me). I don't have the answers to these questions. I think it's certainly possible that the same marketplace economics should be applied to the medically useful cells as the souveniers, but that the two are in different situations. If we could somehow revive Napoleon's cells and then cause them to reproduce, then I really don't see why the marketplace economics should be different. But since we haven't done that with Napoleon's cells, we're going to have to use these ones on their own to determine the rights involved. Then later, when we can revive Napoleon's cells, we can apply the marketplace economics we've established here.
That's not true. You just aren't allowed to circumvent it for the purposes of violating copyright. If you circumvent it for fair use, then you haven't broken copyright, so the DMCA doesn't apply
It's more likely that you can do this test on dead hair cells. Most other forensics work fine on lay people's hair, which is made up of dead cells.
Be sure to use a free long distance software like MSN or Net2Phone. Why have it on your bill?
This program doesn't alter the contents of the HTML either. It changes the way it is displayed.