Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Fri 25th Jul 2008 16:08 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Daniel Phillips has announced the prototype design of a new linux filesystem (implementation has only begun). The most interesting thing seems to be a different way of implementing versioning: "Unlike the currently fashionable recursive copy on write designs with one tree root per version, Tux3 stores all its versioning information in the leaves of btrees using the versioned pointer algorithm. This method promises a significant shrinkage of metadata for heavily versioned filesystems as compared to ZFS and Btrfs".
Thread beginning with comment 324607
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-11-21
What happened to Tux2? I took his hint and googled, and the answer is this:
http://herbie.ucs.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0010.0/0343.ht...
http://herbie.ucs.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0010.0/0343.ht...
From the mailing list link:
- If we did not have any form of patent, humanity would be better off.
- If we did not have any form of patent, the world economy would benefit. Yes, that means corporations too.
- If we did not have any form of patent, *most voters would benefit* <-- pay close attention to this one
........
What a load of crap.
Member since:2006-01-19
What a load of crap.
I haven't thought extensively on patents on physical objects; on the one hand I don't think they are unwarranted, but on the other hand they make me think of situations like this one (from wikipedia on Thomas Tallis):
Elizabeth granted to Tallis and Byrd a twenty-one year monopoly in 1575 for polyphonic music (Holman 1) and a patent to print and publish music, which was one of the first arrangements of that type in the country (Thomas 137). Tallis' monoply covered 'set songe or songes in parts, and he was able to compose in English, Latin, French, Italian, or other tongues as long as they served for music in the Church or chamber (Holman 1). Tallis had exclusive rights to print any music, in any language (Barber 25).
Point is, the custom of the patent way predates any idea of innovation; here, the Queen thought he was an allright guy, so she did him a little favor. I don't think the basic idea of a government-protected monopoly has changed, just the justification. Is it justified? I don't know.
On the other hand, as a (hack) programmer, I think software patents are ludicrous. Programs are no more than ideas, and what patent officer can tell the difference between an obvious and essential solution, and an "innovative" one? I would argue that the cost of normal developers avoiding patents, in aggregate, offsets any social gain for promoting innovation.
Besides, it is obvious in this business that sales and support are what make fiscal success. Compare IBM and, yes, Netapp, to the great-technology failures of the last two decades: DEC, Next, lisp machines, and on and on. Technology is just a small, small part in the money making puzzle.
Member since:2005-11-10
Some people think that intellectual property is a bad concept. It's not a load of crap it's based on some sound economic theories. There is some question as to whether or not intellectual property helps or hinders our further development. I remember reading a history of econ essay that spoke of the emergence of market based trademarks and that only later did governments co-opt this function.
http://mises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_1.pdf
http://danny.oz.au/free-software/advocacy/against_IP.html
Member since:2005-07-06
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-01-19
What happened to Tux2? I took his hint and googled, and the answer is this:
http://herbie.ucs.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0010.0/0343.ht...