Posts by Oninoshiko 1937 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Oct 2008
well google does think that all media should be more wiki-like. Not really checking for proper sources is a great start!
You know, I was talking to an english instructor a couple of years ago, who does not accept anything useing wikipedia as a source. These "journalists" who blindly except wikipedia as fact need to get their jobs revoked. I'm torn if it should happen before or after someone needs to go around google revokeing PhDs.
This is about as reliable as citeing a Poem on the Underground Wall.
"Of course it's still a shit Unix environment compared to Linux or OS X... but people tend to make the best with what they have and either tool provides a nice way to get the Unix tools and Unix source code compatibility without the Linux hardware headaches."
NT with SFU is actually a much better Unix system then Linux, easily acheving that because at has, at least at one point, acheved SUS (Single UNIX Specification) complience. That is a feat that no linux distro has ever acheved.
Mine's the one with The Open Group logo on it.
let me correct that for you:
"Differences of political opinion do not automagically mean you have the right to deface a web site"
Say what you will about the messages of the site in question, and of those defacing it, but it is still a crime. If you want to speak out aganst a group, you don't deface their site, you put up your own. This allows both sides to express their opinion, rather then one just squelshing the views of the other.
I may hate what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
ZFS already does support some hierarchical storage through ZFS, atleast insofar as harddrives to flash and NV RAM disks go. Now it doesn't do tapes, but from what I've seen drive are getting big enough and cheap enough that they are replacing true tapes (albit sometimes in the form of a VTL) anyway.
If IBM where to buy SUNW then IBM owns the copyrights to the solaris kernel. No open-sourcing of AIX would be required. Actually, under the terms of the CDDL, adding any component of Solaris to AIX would not be an issue even if IBM didn't buy SUNW.
Repeat after me: "open source is not the GPL." There are a list of open-source and "libre software" licenses out there, many of which are not as restrictive as the preferred license of the stallmanites.
Mayhaps you should reconsider the security of your privilage seperation. There have been a number of privalige escalation vulnerablities in Linux over the years. Linux really bad about cutting corners to get "performance improvements" at all costs. I highly doubt Linus has changed his policies all that much.
Funny, the guys over at intellasys seem to have a 40-core processor that works nicely (http://www.intellasys.net/). Maybe the problem we are seeing isn't so much an issue with lack of resources, as lack of effecent useage of them. Maybe we should stop expecting the compiler to do all the work of programming, and start managing our resoures ourselves.
Then again, it seems these guys only tested one architecture with one problem domain and El Reg assumed their findings applied to all. Weak, guys, weak.
(Note: This is clearly not an architecture designed for super-computing applications, but one for embedded systems. That is not the point. The point is that maybe we need to be considering other ideas then the 'traditional' idea that a computer is x86)
"If you look back at the people who created the internet they talked very deliberately about creating a space that governments couldn't reach. I think we are having to revisit that stuff seriously now."
You meen the DARPA guys? US-DARPA? The United States Deparment Of Defense Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency? http://www.darpa.mil/ <--these guys?
Why those liberal-commie-hippie-bastards!
Joke alert, that's what this gentlemen is...
umm... lets see... that looks an AWFUL lot like mouse-gestures applied to touch screen interface. Don't patents have to be non-obvious to someone versed in the art?
Haven't we been using touch-screens as mice for years? Hasn't Opera had mouse gestures for years? Doesn't that make this non-novel?
if they want to limit it to JUST multi-touch, they might have a case.
Google knows it too. Search a loss-leader.
Google is an advertising company. Google users are not their clents, Adwords users are. even if they do somthing that we all love, if adwords users hate it (and start to leave because of it) it wont stay around.
So, search queries are not a market, advertisers are a market.
I always liked this one from IRC (which I suppose is not technicly "teh intawebz"). It's fallen out of favor over the last decade or so, but "re" which is short for "re-hello" or "hello, again." It was useful when modems got disconnected.
most of my other favored ones are actually the classic millitary abbriviations, im sure we all know and love.
Considering that this page passes W3C validation (4 warnings), any rendering problems you might be having with it is the fault of a shoddy browser. I'll admit I haven't checked EVERY page, on el Reg. Also I have flash, JS, and java disabled (which is always the case unless I have a need for them (when I do Tim Berners-Lee smashes an open standard on the pavement, with a sledge-hammer... all Gallager-like))
Yes, mines the one running Opera for Solaris, thanks.
Maybe because rambus' patents are overbroad, littered with prior art, fail to be novel to someone experenced in the art, or just plain don't apply. If nVidia beleaves just ONE of these, then they should refuse to pay. The dirty bit about US law, is that nVidia can't bring a suit over the matter though, they lack what in US law is called "standing." They have to refuse to pay it and wait for Rambus to sue them.
It's just like if MS sent me a letter telling me I needed to pay them for licensing, I would do EXACTLY what nVidia did... giggle a bit while i drop it in the waste-basket. I'm not useing their product, so bugger off.
Mine's the one with the square made of the letter 's' on it...
I agree FULLY with SB. write w3c complient pages, and EVERY REASONABLE BROWSER works with them. In addition you get the advantage of remembering to include support for making your page more accessable (like for blind computer users).
note: many versions of IE are not "reasonable" as they do not properly process xhtml without browser optimisations. but these things should be the exception to workaround a browser-bug, not the rule. (or better yet, how come the richest company makeing a browser can't seem to manage to keep up with w3c specs? maybe they could work on shipping a solid browser rather then a flash look-alike?)
on a seperate note: "grabbing a chunk of memory" likely wouldnt work either, unless all OSes FF runs on allow you to tag the memory as "non-pageable" if it ever hits the HD for any reason, your SOL... if your that parinoid.
mines the one with the saved el Reg password
As much as you guys may want to be mad as Sprint, this is the third time Cogent has been depeered by a backbone provider. Each time it has been a different provider. So, is it that all the backbone providers are conspiring against poor little Cogent, or is it that Cogent doesn't like to actually carry data for the companies it 'peers' with?
After you have been through enough marriages, maybe its not them...
There was a study out of the University of Washington (US) that used a vary similer feedback system (i think it was flowers growing, and butterflies would appear) to get people to exersize. It actually was well receved and proved effective, as silly as it sounds.
Even adults respond well to getting a gold star, most of us just aren't honest enough to admit it.
http://dub.washington.edu/djangosite/media/papers/UbiComp188-consolvo.pdf
(WOW! It's a real, honest to god, primary source)
For the most part, in a embedded system, "it's open-source" is a non-sequitor, reinstalling an embedded system is less of a trivial matter then reinstalling a computer, and a large section of the population cannot manage that. That said, lets go back over the points of my post:
1) I souldn't have to trust google will only install things I want on my phone without my permission.
2) I souldn't have to trust google will not lose their key, thereby forceing me to trust someone else to only install things I want on my phone without my permission. (really, with all the companies/government agencies losing information, do you think this is something that shouldn't be considered?)
3) Google should not use their monolopoly status in one market to acheve an advatage in another. (a monopoly in android application distrobution should not equal an advantage for your android apps)
Frankly the third point, while it stands on it's own, is still the lowest of my conserns.
Having embedded this type of a backdoor in the system, I would require a full audit of the code in order to think about trusting it. Again, the cost/benifit of doing that is a no-brainer, yes I CAN audit it, but they have already proven that it has to happen in order to trust them. It's far more cost effective to go with a company that has not earned my distrust.
If you can't guess, I will not be buying one.
The problem isn't that 3rd party vendors can't install things without asking, it's that google CAN install things without asking. Apart from meaning that I now am required to trust google, it also provides them with a competitive edge. Just like Micorsofts control of the base install of the Windows platform gave it an edge in Internet Explorer vs. Netscape.
>> here is a little clue, for most web sites we go to do not charge us.
>True.
>>Running a web-site though costs money
>True.
>>(unless your in russia, where websites run you!).
>Very, very tired meme. Stop it, child.
As long as we are brining up logical fallacies (as you try to later), I call argumentum ad hominem. The entire point is that it is tired, so congradulations, you almost got it.
>>Whoever is running it has to be able to eat, pay for houseing.
>True. So do I. So do all of us. Running a web site or not. Strawman.
It's not a strawman, it is the fundemental point. If you don't get paid for your employment, you won't (or at least shouldn't) do it for vary long. If your employer doesn't get paid for goods and services provided, they won't be in "bussness" vary long. (I only put bussness in quotes because if they are not getting paid for good/services, it's not much of a busness.)
>>Then they still have to pay for upkeep of the site,
>Not my issue. Their choice. The Web is hardly life or death.
I dont know why you felt the need to seperate the concept of "this costs money" into what the cost is, but this is addressed above.
>>hosting fees,
>Not my issue. Their choice. The Web is hardly life or death.
again, there is absolutely no reason for this to have been seperated out of the sentance.
>>creation of new content.
>Not my issue. Rarely my choice. Have you actually seen "new content" recently? I sure haven't. Porn's still porn, news is still news, user comments are still user comments, and really bad web sites designed by people who think "comment icons" and fixed width web pages are a good idea are still really bad web sites ... oh ... hang on ... Oops.
At least here you have actually done more then repeat yourself when you seperated out a section of a sentance, so I'll be happy to address it.
Apperently you must have some future version of sites that havent been released to all us little mortals. Every time I look at el Reg, there is new content. There are stories that were not there yesterday. By definition that is "new." Since this is what is contained on the site, it is "content." Hence "new content."
BTW: The format of the page is of little consequence, thats format, not content.
>>It begs the question, where is this money comming from?
>Not my issue, except for my own sites.
It is your issue if you want to have access to these sites without paying the owners of them. Nothing is free.
>>So, unless you want to pay for your browsing,
>I do pay. Monthly. This DSL line costs (a little bit of) money. My OC-96 costs a lot more. The three T-1 lines that I thought were a good idea when I got 'em in '93 cost even more (thankfully I only got a three year lease on 'em ...).
No, you pay for your bandwith, not your browsing. You do not pay El Reg to read it instead, they have ads. were it not for said ads, this site would not exsist (for long).
>>you need to accept ads.
>No, I don't. My computer, my bandwidth, my CPU, my disk, my rules.
You have ONCE AGAIN seperated a part of a complete sentence rather then taking it as a whole. This is what programmers call an "If-then" statement. it is true that you are free to not use the websites in question, and I never indicated to the contrary.
>>Your free access to content is the value that advertisers create.
>No. Totally incorrect. Advertisers create nothing but loud, ugly artwork. Haven't you noticed that for virtually all ad-driven sites that have any merit, there are several dozen other sites that are built as a labor of love, offering essentially the same content, with no advertising?
So why are you still here? You dont like ads, El Reg has ads. If there are several dozen other sites offering essentially the same content with no advertiseing I would expect you to be jumping ship.
>>If you don't like it, you're (mostly) going to have to limit yourself to sites which charge for service
>Not in this lifetime.
Since you are still here, It would appear you have choosen to put up with ads. Good for you. Now if you could just stop crying about that choice, you did have other options.
>>Welcome to First Life.
>Sadville1.0? You actually relate to that?
>Sad.
You don't relate to real life?
Now that IS sad.
here is a little clue, for most web sites we go to do not charge us. Running a web-site though costs money (unless your in russia, where websites run you!). Whoever is running it has to be able to eat, pay for houseing. Then they still have to pay for upkeep of the site, hosting fees, creation of new content. It begs the question, where is this money comming from?
So, unless you want to pay for your browsing, you need to accept ads. Your free access to content is the value that advertisers create. If you don't like it, you're (mostly) going to have to limit yourself to sites which charge for service.
Welcome to First Life.
Obviously, listing government documents such as these as public domain is a truely awful idea. It could lead to such horrible results as people being able to look up what their government is actually doing.
Then again, it could lead to people saying "well, now that we can just look, I'm sure someone is looking into it. I'm glad I dont have to worry about being all upset about it." Clearly the yanks are ahead in their closed, opressive socity by having it open...
Funny this should come up. I was at VMWorld '08 and ask anyone there... MS was handing out 1USD chips to try to encourage us to use their virtualization product.
I never played the chip, and still have it. It was so amusing at the time to say "see? MS tried to bribe me." Now it's not as funny, it's just sad...
Thanks guys, you ruined my fun :(
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
