Disabling Speed Step and power management/power saving/etc in BIOS and the OS(whatever one is installed) is the very first thing I do on any machine. I want it at full power all the time. This also makes it easier to keep my fans at a constant speed as well, which makes for a quieter work environment. Similar to how a clock ticking is filtered out after a few hours or days, a constant low drone from the PC is as well.
Sorry, but that is just stupid.
You gain absolutely nothing from disabling SpeedStep and power management - well, nothing apart from higher energy consumption and higher power bills. There is no performance loss whatsoever by having those things on.
Also, if you hear the fans in your PC, then you either fail at assembling properly-cooled computers, or you are a gamer with a power-hungry graphics card. My computer is cooled by two 800rpm fans that work at constant speed, and I don't hear them; as I'm writing this, the only thing I do hear is the rotational hum of my suspended HDD, so that should tell you how quiet it is (and yeah, it's well past midnight).
Your statement implies that standing in front of the beam would cause you to explode, which I very much doubt. I am curious as to what actually WOULD happen.
That would be "built-in" and "in-line" (or "inline"). Your spoiled cheque cannot correct something that's waiting in line.
Spell check is not a luxury, its a necessity
You don't want a possessive adjective; you merely want a contraction of "it is". Your spelunking chalk cannot correct that, either.
While having a spanking chunk seems a great idea at first glance, it's a very blunt instrument that helps correct the most basic spelling errors and cannot be relied on for anything more than that. As such, it is of extremely limited use and rather unhelpful...
Speed and Acid 3 compliance do not keep me using Firefox, spell check, and adblock do.
...because, amongst other things, it will not transform commas into semicolons, nor remove excess commas, nor properly capitalize names such as Adblock.
I recently installed the Google search provider in IE8. Not only did I have to "Find More Providers", but Google was hidden on the second page of the default list and mislabeled as "Google Search Suggestions". Accidents.
I have just installed IE8 on a machine at the office and Google was on the first page of providers, third from the top, clearly labeled. I'm in Europe. Maybe MS sniffs out your location and changes the list based on that? With all the trouble they have in the EU, it really wouldn't surprise me if they did that.
CNETNate writes about a test on CNET's site which isn't a test at all. They have tried several browsers, described them in two to three paragraphs each, and measured JavaScript execution speed with the help of a nameless benchmark. Not even a mention of which sites were used for testing.
If your own URL shortener becomes popular (it won't), it will have to serve at least a million clicks per day. bit.ly is currently at around 4-5 per day, I think.
You can just perform simple redirects, without logging anything... But then you don't have anything even remotely interesting. The natural urge is to log every visit and let people view logs of their links (if you don't, users won't like your shortener). DB storage quickly piles up. A little bit of AdSense won't help you pay the servers, storage and bandwidth.
It doesn't matter. The universe is HUGE. It's hard to even imagine how huge it is.
Let's assume that people build a billion (!) exploration probes whose sole purpose is to look for extraterrestrial life and resources all around the universe. Let's also assume that it takes an hour to find, travel to and analyse the vicinity of a single star anywhere in the universe and then go back to report on it, so that covers 24 billion stars per day. Meh, let's round it to 25 billion to make things easier.
Let's also assume that the universe has around 100 sextillion stars. That's 100000000000000000000000 stars.
Those billion ships investigating 25 billion stars per day would take 4000000000000 days or 10958904109 years. Yes, that's almost 11 billion years. Guess what happens with the universe and the stars in the meantime?
Are you seriously unaware of how huge the universe is?
Also, maybe we've been visited but we weren't interesting or habitable for visitors. Assume visitors would only be interested if we have technology. Human technology of any value we appreciate has only been in existence for a very narrow slice of time--several thousand years. Not much on the galactic scales.
Yeah. Now see above. What do you think are the odds of finding any kind of a civilization when one of those vast billions of exploration probes visits a star system?
True - maybe we have been visited... a billion years ago. The civilization that visited us is long gone by now.
Lastly, how do you know we're not visited and studied now under a Prime Directive rule?
My family isn't Christian, and I'm personally as far from being religious as possible, but all of us were deeply, deeply saddened when John Paul II died, because even to us, he was perceived as a very kind person -- even "holy". I've just asked around and nobody even knows what the current pope is called, though we do know his real name is Ratzinger, and all six people (myself included) agree that Ratzinger seems "evil". That's what I was aiming at, nothing more; simply the perception of one human being compared to another.
or is this just a "cover our own backs" maneuver to avoid what happened with Galileo, Copernicus and others?
No, because the universe is so fucking huge that the probability of aliens visiting Earth or humans visiting Rsdflkjasd is zero.
There is extraterrestrial life - it's just that nobody will ever get to confirm it.
I think Vatican is just trying to get some attention. Ever since the good pope died, nobody truly cared about them. The panzer pope just feels... vile.
Now, what else are cookies used for, that consent should not need to be given for?
We have something similar to a search engine (totally unlike Google, except for a textbox). When initially tracking what users look for, over 80% came to the site and searched for the same thing day after day. So we simply placed their search string into a cookie and had it populate the textbox when they visit again.
I find it very stupid that people will come to the site, search for something, and instead of getting the results they'll get a wall of legalese unless we scrap the cookie system entirely.
It's a modern RTS which utilizes things such as directional cover, suppression and per-squad reinforcements, as well as rewards proper flanking. Unless, of course, you try to prevent said flanking by placing some barbed wire and mines...
There is no such thing as rushing in CoH; the game doesn't reward rushing because it will end with a horribly tragic loss for the player who attempts it (!). You can't wall-off because you need some map control, resources need to be connected to your base in order to receive them, and your low popcap (based on the number of captured sectors) spells your ultimate doom. The nature of the game is that for the most part, each side has no more than ten units on the field. You can be a very good player even if you aren't a hyperactive teen capable of performing ten clicks per second.
Bottom line: if someone wants to rush you, you will win the game in five minutes. But if you want to wall-off, this game isn't for you, as it requires constant fighting on multiple parts of the map.
Is it even possible to buy a graphics card with VGA output these days? From what I can tell, it's pretty much double DVI, with the occasional HDMI/DP added. HDMI isn't very widespread on computers, so DP should have no problems replacing DVI, but when it comes to video equipment it's a different thing...
I'd say it's comparable to SATA. We still get motherboards with a PATA controller, but pretty much all HDDs and optical drives are SATA these days, including the power connectors. In 4-5 years, we shouldn't be seeing DVI anymore.
It was made long before DisplayPort as a DVI replacement. HDMI requires royalties and licensing (DP does not). It is also using a CRT-like raster scan and needs a heartbeat, with sound being transmitted during "blanking" (DP transmits data packets and has an embedded clock). Finally, the hardware is more expensive to produce and more complex.
I'm sure someone knows more - this is what I remember reading some time ago...
$20 is currently 3% of my monthly salary. A bargain it might be, especially since the USD is so pathetically weak right now, but it's still a lot of money.
As a side note, speaking of single-player only... have you seen this tiny but awfully addictive thing called Torchlight?
I have considered buying it after trying the demo, but a friend of mine says the game quickly loses its charm and there's no replayability. There's about 10-12 hours of play inside, and once you're done, there's nothing left to do except roam in some endless dungeon and collect uniques that are worse than your enchanted basic gear... That, and the classes are supposedly all mages in disguise.
1) The European socket has a plastic outside cone for insulation. If the cable is partially unplugged, you cannot touch it with your fingers. The British version has nothing.
2) The European socket allows you to plug the cables upside down (which is extremely helpful in certain situations).
3) Contrary to how it's portrayed in the article, the European socket *does* have grounding. In fact, it has two grounding pins, top and bottom.
OK, that makes sense:) But why were there serious issues with Intel's drive just recently, when changing some password bricked the system entirely and Intel said the data is gone forever?
Yes, but isn't data on SSDs (not regular flash media) encrypted, with the key being somehow hardcoded inside the controller? What if the controller fries?
With hard drives, you can pay lots of money and get some stuff back, but can you do that with SSDs? If not, I foresee a lot of problems once SSDs become mainstream because non-IT people never do backups...
Slashdot Mirror
Disabling Speed Step and power management/power saving/etc in BIOS and the OS(whatever one is installed) is the very first thing I do on any machine. I want it at full power all the time. This also makes it easier to keep my fans at a constant speed as well, which makes for a quieter work environment. Similar to how a clock ticking is filtered out after a few hours or days, a constant low drone from the PC is as well.
Sorry, but that is just stupid.
You gain absolutely nothing from disabling SpeedStep and power management - well, nothing apart from higher energy consumption and higher power bills. There is no performance loss whatsoever by having those things on.
Also, if you hear the fans in your PC, then you either fail at assembling properly-cooled computers, or you are a gamer with a power-hungry graphics card. My computer is cooled by two 800rpm fans that work at constant speed, and I don't hear them; as I'm writing this, the only thing I do hear is the rotational hum of my suspended HDD, so that should tell you how quiet it is (and yeah, it's well past midnight).
Your statement implies that standing in front of the beam would cause you to explode, which I very much doubt.
I am curious as to what actually WOULD happen.
This is the closest thing I could find:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoli_Bugorski
http://forgetomori.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/anatolibugorski3.jpg
Spill chokes will only get you so far.
built in, in line spell check
That would be "built-in" and "in-line" (or "inline"). Your spoiled cheque cannot correct something that's waiting in line.
Spell check is not a luxury, its a necessity
You don't want a possessive adjective; you merely want a contraction of "it is". Your spelunking chalk cannot correct that, either.
While having a spanking chunk seems a great idea at first glance, it's a very blunt instrument that helps correct the most basic spelling errors and cannot be relied on for anything more than that. As such, it is of extremely limited use and rather unhelpful...
Speed and Acid 3 compliance do not keep me using Firefox, spell check, and adblock do.
...because, amongst other things, it will not transform commas into semicolons, nor remove excess commas, nor properly capitalize names such as Adblock.
I recently installed the Google search provider in IE8. Not only did I have to "Find More Providers", but Google was hidden on the second page of the default list and mislabeled as "Google Search Suggestions". Accidents.
I have just installed IE8 on a machine at the office and Google was on the first page of providers, third from the top, clearly labeled. I'm in Europe. Maybe MS sniffs out your location and changes the list based on that? With all the trouble they have in the EU, it really wouldn't surprise me if they did that.
Sorry. All that "next page" clicking ate my brain.
But it's not like there's no benchmark cheating...
You clicked on a CNET article. Surprised?
After that "test" and eight pages (the ninth contains nothing), "surprised" is not the word I'd use to describe how I feel...
I've learned a lesson. Never again will I click on a link leading to one of CNET's sites.
CNETNate writes about a test on CNET's site which isn't a test at all. They have tried several browsers, described them in two to three paragraphs each, and measured JavaScript execution speed with the help of a nameless benchmark. Not even a mention of which sites were used for testing.
Great job!
If your own URL shortener becomes popular (it won't), it will have to serve at least a million clicks per day. bit.ly is currently at around 4-5 per day, I think.
You can just perform simple redirects, without logging anything... But then you don't have anything even remotely interesting. The natural urge is to log every visit and let people view logs of their links (if you don't, users won't like your shortener). DB storage quickly piles up. A little bit of AdSense won't help you pay the servers, storage and bandwidth.
And if near instantaneous travel is discovered?
It doesn't matter. The universe is HUGE. It's hard to even imagine how huge it is.
Let's assume that people build a billion (!) exploration probes whose sole purpose is to look for extraterrestrial life and resources all around the universe. Let's also assume that it takes an hour to find, travel to and analyse the vicinity of a single star anywhere in the universe and then go back to report on it, so that covers 24 billion stars per day. Meh, let's round it to 25 billion to make things easier.
Let's also assume that the universe has around 100 sextillion stars. That's 100000000000000000000000 stars.
Those billion ships investigating 25 billion stars per day would take 4000000000000 days or 10958904109 years. Yes, that's almost 11 billion years. Guess what happens with the universe and the stars in the meantime?
Are you seriously unaware of how huge the universe is?
Also, maybe we've been visited but we weren't interesting or habitable for visitors. Assume visitors would only be interested if we have technology. Human technology of any value we appreciate has only been in existence for a very narrow slice of time--several thousand years. Not much on the galactic scales.
Yeah. Now see above. What do you think are the odds of finding any kind of a civilization when one of those vast billions of exploration probes visits a star system?
True - maybe we have been visited... a billion years ago. The civilization that visited us is long gone by now.
Lastly, how do you know we're not visited and studied now under a Prime Directive rule?
Because this is real life, not a movie.
My family isn't Christian, and I'm personally as far from being religious as possible, but all of us were deeply, deeply saddened when John Paul II died, because even to us, he was perceived as a very kind person -- even "holy". I've just asked around and nobody even knows what the current pope is called, though we do know his real name is Ratzinger, and all six people (myself included) agree that Ratzinger seems "evil". That's what I was aiming at, nothing more; simply the perception of one human being compared to another.
or is this just a "cover our own backs" maneuver to avoid what happened with Galileo, Copernicus and others?
No, because the universe is so fucking huge that the probability of aliens visiting Earth or humans visiting Rsdflkjasd is zero.
There is extraterrestrial life - it's just that nobody will ever get to confirm it.
I think Vatican is just trying to get some attention. Ever since the good pope died, nobody truly cared about them. The panzer pope just feels... vile.
Show me a top level replay with a baserush involved and I'll admit you are right ;) The only time that happens is when the game is over.
Now, what else are cookies used for, that consent should not need to be given for?
We have something similar to a search engine (totally unlike Google, except for a textbox). When initially tracking what users look for, over 80% came to the site and searched for the same thing day after day. So we simply placed their search string into a cookie and had it populate the textbox when they visit again.
I find it very stupid that people will come to the site, search for something, and instead of getting the results they'll get a wall of legalese unless we scrap the cookie system entirely.
"Point griefing"? :)
DoW2 is much too simplistic compared to CoH. It's a CoH-like RTS for casual gamers.
How would you rather it be setup? I have not found a single RTS that isn't dominated by Rushing Tactics.
Company of Heroes. http://www.companyofheroes.com/
It's a modern RTS which utilizes things such as directional cover, suppression and per-squad reinforcements, as well as rewards proper flanking. Unless, of course, you try to prevent said flanking by placing some barbed wire and mines...
There is no such thing as rushing in CoH; the game doesn't reward rushing because it will end with a horribly tragic loss for the player who attempts it (!). You can't wall-off because you need some map control, resources need to be connected to your base in order to receive them, and your low popcap (based on the number of captured sectors) spells your ultimate doom. The nature of the game is that for the most part, each side has no more than ten units on the field. You can be a very good player even if you aren't a hyperactive teen capable of performing ten clicks per second.
Bottom line: if someone wants to rush you, you will win the game in five minutes. But if you want to wall-off, this game isn't for you, as it requires constant fighting on multiple parts of the map.
Is it even possible to buy a graphics card with VGA output these days? From what I can tell, it's pretty much double DVI, with the occasional HDMI/DP added. HDMI isn't very widespread on computers, so DP should have no problems replacing DVI, but when it comes to video equipment it's a different thing...
I'd say it's comparable to SATA. We still get motherboards with a PATA controller, but pretty much all HDDs and optical drives are SATA these days, including the power connectors. In 4-5 years, we shouldn't be seeing DVI anymore.
What happened to HDMI?
It was made long before DisplayPort as a DVI replacement. HDMI requires royalties and licensing (DP does not). It is also using a CRT-like raster scan and needs a heartbeat, with sound being transmitted during "blanking" (DP transmits data packets and has an embedded clock). Finally, the hardware is more expensive to produce and more complex.
I'm sure someone knows more - this is what I remember reading some time ago...
Wouldn't help much, unless I move to a different country (and then get attacked by xenophobes).
$20 is currently 3% of my monthly salary. A bargain it might be, especially since the USD is so pathetically weak right now, but it's still a lot of money.
As a side note, speaking of single-player only... have you seen this tiny but awfully addictive thing called Torchlight?
I have considered buying it after trying the demo, but a friend of mine says the game quickly loses its charm and there's no replayability. There's about 10-12 hours of play inside, and once you're done, there's nothing left to do except roam in some endless dungeon and collect uniques that are worse than your enchanted basic gear... That, and the classes are supposedly all mages in disguise.
You also get insulated pins on the "small" version of the Europlug, though it's not such a big deal overall.
Being able to invert the plugs is great when you have vertical sockets* that look like this http://www.stockphotopro.com/photo-thumbs-2/B0YTD7.jpg - often you have appliances which have perpendicular cables http://jiefei.win.mofcom.gov.cn/www/1/jiefei/img/200952310743.jpg so plugging in two of those simply isn't going to work unless one is upside-down.
* For some reason, horizontal double sockets aren't that common, so you take the vertical one and mount it horizontally.
Sorry, what?
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/0,39029552,49303764-4,00.htm
These cables can only carry currents of up to 2.5A
WHAT? Where the hell did the author get this information?!
Here's a random picture that I found through Google, for those of you who don't know how European wall sockets look like: http://www.goodlogo.com/images/extended.info/b/bcc/wall_socket_NL_GE.jpg
Here's the miserable excuse for the British wall socket: http://www.made-in-china.com/image/2f0j00PvutNFZDbIcQM/Socket-A091-.jpg
1) The European socket has a plastic outside cone for insulation. If the cable is partially unplugged, you cannot touch it with your fingers. The British version has nothing.
2) The European socket allows you to plug the cables upside down (which is extremely helpful in certain situations).
3) Contrary to how it's portrayed in the article, the European socket *does* have grounding. In fact, it has two grounding pins, top and bottom.
4) Some people have mentioned the size of the plugs themselves. Here's the one with the grounding http://www.advin.com/uv-eraser-plug-FE-W512.JPG and here's the one used for small appliances and gadgets http://www.tuxgraphics.org/electronics/powersockets/power_plug_euro.jpg
What a stupid article... Stupid British arrogance.
OK, that makes sense :) But why were there serious issues with Intel's drive just recently, when changing some password bricked the system entirely and Intel said the data is gone forever?
Yes, but isn't data on SSDs (not regular flash media) encrypted, with the key being somehow hardcoded inside the controller? What if the controller fries?
I really have no clue how those things work.
When an SSD dies, how do you pull data from it?
With hard drives, you can pay lots of money and get some stuff back, but can you do that with SSDs? If not, I foresee a lot of problems once SSDs become mainstream because non-IT people never do backups...