Good point. I'd like to add that the reason I currently use Perl and not Python (or Ruby) is similar to (one of) the reason(s) I use Vi and not Emacs - Vi or a clone is available on most every platform, and is a quick download if it's not. Emacs isn't. Perl is available on most everything I use [as a sysadmin in a mixed Linux/Win32/Mac environment]. Therefore, when choosing a language/editor to get proficient at, I choose the language that will give me the most bang for my buck. Perl does darn near everything I need easily, and is far and away the easiest way for me to write apps that will run on *nix, Win32, and MacOS with no changes (Java doesn't count, because I really dislike it;)).
That said, as soon as I find a problem that Ruby looks better suited for than Perl (I'm looking), I'll take the time to learn it. Being really good at something is good, but flexibility is a good thing too...:) Is Ruby available for Win32 and/or MacOS?
The last ones I used were the MXII series or something to that effect. The ones that were marketed as "MXII/300" and ran at 266MHz (why the 300, then?). They were supposed to be competitors to the Pentium Pro processors, but ran a lot slower than my PPro 233 even at a higher clock speed. I'm using that cyrix chip in my mobile mp3 player, and had to downclock it to 166 so it wouldn't burn me when I used a cheap heatsink/fan (and mounted the MB under the dash in my car). They may well have gotten better, but I thought they went under not long after those massively bad chips (and National Semi bought them out). I must've been thinking of IDT. I sit corrected.:)
Unfortunately, most of the noise isn't from pulsed explosions that can be reflected around to cancel themselves out or dampened through a matting. If most of the noise in your machine is from fans, a muffler might help some, but you'd have to use something like a Flowmaster to actually allow you to get decent airflow with quiet...
I like the idea of a double-insulated case with liquid cooling, though.:)
You can build some very silent PC's with Cyrix processors
Nothing like a slower, hotter processor to quiet your machine down... I heat my house with Cyrix processors, 'cause they don't waste a lot of power doing actual computing and they put out gobs of heat. At least, that's true of the ones that I've used.
I always did that, but it was partially to bump up the comment-to-code ratio in my programs and partially to protest the MS programming environment that some of the classes used...:)
But then all he needs to do is make the source available after the assignment's due. That makes it easier to understand, anyway. Even if he uses it again and again, year after year, it's not that hard to tell if a student has a grasp on the language being taught or not after just a few moments of talking to them about their code (or someone else's).
It should be impossible to plagarize yourself into a good grade that you don't deserve in a programming class with a competent instructor and a sane grading scheme.
*I* took it a couple of years earlier, when it was taught using scheme. The professor sucked (Sam Kamin, you suck. How you were chosen to replace Friedman as CS dept head, I will never understand.) Luckily, I had a decent TA (Ian? I forget) and managed to pull one of the few A's in that course.
While I have not used Scheme since, or any other functional language, I really feel that I gained much useful knowledge about recursion and programming in general from that, my first programming course. It was followed with a poorly done, 1 credit hour class in C++, where we really learned C for about 2/3 of the course and C++ for the last part. I think that if the C part was better done (every programmer should be exposed to C and to C++), the sequence of Scheme and C would have been an excellent introduction. Perhaps throw Java in on the side for a later introduction to data structures class, so that there are ready-written data structures to use for instructional purposes. Teaching Java as a first language just seems very bad to me, though. I don't approve of teaching VB as a first language, either, for similar reasons.
By the way, "brmiller", how've you been?:)
Re:alternative to nvidia linux only drivers?
on
XFree 4.1.0 Out
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, yeah, why doesn't Sun come out with JavaDrivers? The could call it SippieCup(TM)(R) or something stupid like that, and then it could be really slow like all of the other universal, optimized for the lowest common denominator garbage of that ilk.
I think it's more like iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s internalnet -j SNAT --to 10.1.1.1-10.1.1.254. Whoopie. My firewall has been doing that since I stuck iptables on it. I wouldn't think that it'd take much to randomly select a source IP instead of the current sequential selection...
1) if my car can accelerate faster than yours, then I'll get to my destination faster than you will (assuming all else is the same, and no interference from Johnny Law)
2) I *frequently* use my car as a tool. I've pushed things over with it, used it as a ladder in my front lawn, and used parts of it in ways that they aren't intended. Just like my computer.
3) I have a genuine AT motherboard in my car to play music and record information about the car, so with the simple plugging-in of a monitor, I can do everything with my car that I can with a regular computer - as well as driving it.:)
Maybe it would've helped you if they would've posted it when I submitted it yesterday afternoon, or maybe when they rejected it yesterday at 6:44 PM.:) </whining>
They can make a cool case, but what's up with the darned scrolling javascript status bar? I thought that everyone knew to not use blink and scrolling statuses by now, unless absolutely neccesary?:)
Not that I'll be stopped from getting my name on the waiting list anyway, though...
Oh, I'm aware that the IDE and SCSI drives are frequently the same darned thing with a slightly different interface board, and are thus physically capable of sustaining comprable transfer rates. My claim is that in real-world use, where your CPU is doing stuff other than running hard drive benchmarking software, it's unlikely that a drive using the IDE interface is going to be able to sustain high throughput, 'cause the CPU is tied up. SCSI moves a signifigant portion of that "what's the drive doing" load off to an external controller, thus freeing your CPU up to keep the apps rolling along.
Then again, I'm also aware that most common real-world apps don't need sustained transters for any great peroiod of time, thus IDE's success. I wish that more effort would go into making SCSI more affordable, though, rather than adding some bus-mastering to the already crappy IDE. "Look, ma, I've almost got this turd polished!":) 'Course, x86-based processors are still more popular than almost every better design, so turd-polishing isn't just a drive interface thing - but I'm gonna go off on a wild rant tangent here if I son't stop now...
BTW, of my personal machines, only one is SCSI, the rest use the "far more affordable and wholly adequate for my needs" IDE. So, maybe I'm a hypocrite anyway.:)
if you absolutely need more throughput than the 45 MB/sec or so of real-world performance that modern IDE drives give you
45 megaBYTES of real-world perfomance from common IDE drives? Hah! Maybe when reading from a particularly well thought out cache (or 45 megabits/sec), but I have a hard time believing that there's gonna be much more than 20MB/sec sustained over IDE (even super-turbo ata 5000), and you're using a pile of cpu time to do it anyway. They're good performers for the money, but not *that* good of performers...:)
One approach touched on by someone else was LDAP. PAM-LDAP (and NSS-LDAP) verifies the password by attempting to bind to the LDAP server as the user. The user has read access to their own info, and no one else's, so after a succesful bind the other user info can be pulled, or if the bind fails, then the password is invalid.
Essentially, there's a trusted app that handles authentication outside of PAM, with a PAM module to use that trusted app. Same idea as the pam_chkpass helper and some of the other similar solutions.
BTW, try to use ssl for networked authentication everywhere, or you're wasting your time with shadow passwords.
So, once again, some moron thinks that the government should mandate what can and can't be on the internet. Sounds great. Slashdot-style moderation systems work only because there's an option to browse at -1 for those who don't want to be told what they can and can't see. As soon as [insert governing/controlling body here] takes that control away from the users of the information service, a large portion of that information service's users go elsewhere. That would be a terrible thing to do to the internet.
Now, if we could just find a way to run the stupid people away instead...:)
No, you're not the only one confused. I'm also confused by the fact that the article says "reader Gregory Purdy", when the review appears to have been written by Craig Pfeifer. The ISBN for the book reviewed is the same as the O'Reilly Pocket Reference that I have on my desk right now, too. And, what's up with the sheep looking over each other, anyway?
BTW, the O'Reilly is an OK book, but really not the only reference you'll ever need as a startging-out CVS admin. I think that the "8" rating is about accurate.
I forgot the smilie after my statement. At first, I assumed that the insanity of passing around 40MB+ files via email would be obvious, but then, after hitting submit, I thought that a smilie was in order. Eh. Live 'n learn.
So they approve of the format. Whee. I think that the disapproval of mp3 isn't disapproval of the format, it's disapproval of the use. Kinda like, guns are OK but shooting people isn't - DivX;-) is OK, but using it to pass around movies via email isn't. I guess that it's suprising to see logical things out of the MPAA - but nothing more...
That said, this is still news for nerds & stuff that matters.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Good point. I'd like to add that the reason I currently use Perl and not Python (or Ruby) is similar to (one of) the reason(s) I use Vi and not Emacs - Vi or a clone is available on most every platform, and is a quick download if it's not. Emacs isn't. Perl is available on most everything I use [as a sysadmin in a mixed Linux/Win32/Mac environment]. Therefore, when choosing a language/editor to get proficient at, I choose the language that will give me the most bang for my buck. Perl does darn near everything I need easily, and is far and away the easiest way for me to write apps that will run on *nix, Win32, and MacOS with no changes (Java doesn't count, because I really dislike it ;)).
That said, as soon as I find a problem that Ruby looks better suited for than Perl (I'm looking), I'll take the time to learn it. Being really good at something is good, but flexibility is a good thing too... :) Is Ruby available for Win32 and/or MacOS?
The last ones I used were the MXII series or something to that effect. The ones that were marketed as "MXII/300" and ran at 266MHz (why the 300, then?). They were supposed to be competitors to the Pentium Pro processors, but ran a lot slower than my PPro 233 even at a higher clock speed. I'm using that cyrix chip in my mobile mp3 player, and had to downclock it to 166 so it wouldn't burn me when I used a cheap heatsink/fan (and mounted the MB under the dash in my car). They may well have gotten better, but I thought they went under not long after those massively bad chips (and National Semi bought them out). I must've been thinking of IDT. I sit corrected. :)
Nor did humans (or our ancestors) more than several thousand years ago.
Sure they did - haven't you seen the Discover Card commercial where the cavepeople use teeth as currency, and subsequently starve to death?
I like the idea of a double-insulated case with liquid cooling, though. :)
You can build some very silent PC's with Cyrix processors
Nothing like a slower, hotter processor to quiet your machine down... I heat my house with Cyrix processors, 'cause they don't waste a lot of power doing actual computing and they put out gobs of heat. At least, that's true of the ones that I've used.
I always did that, but it was partially to bump up the comment-to-code ratio in my programs and partially to protest the MS programming environment that some of the classes used... :)
But then all he needs to do is make the source available after the assignment's due. That makes it easier to understand, anyway. Even if he uses it again and again, year after year, it's not that hard to tell if a student has a grasp on the language being taught or not after just a few moments of talking to them about their code (or someone else's).
It should be impossible to plagarize yourself into a good grade that you don't deserve in a programming class with a competent instructor and a sane grading scheme.
*I* took it a couple of years earlier, when it was taught using scheme. The professor sucked (Sam Kamin, you suck. How you were chosen to replace Friedman as CS dept head, I will never understand.) Luckily, I had a decent TA (Ian? I forget) and managed to pull one of the few A's in that course.
While I have not used Scheme since, or any other functional language, I really feel that I gained much useful knowledge about recursion and programming in general from that, my first programming course. It was followed with a poorly done, 1 credit hour class in C++, where we really learned C for about 2/3 of the course and C++ for the last part. I think that if the C part was better done (every programmer should be exposed to C and to C++), the sequence of Scheme and C would have been an excellent introduction. Perhaps throw Java in on the side for a later introduction to data structures class, so that there are ready-written data structures to use for instructional purposes. Teaching Java as a first language just seems very bad to me, though. I don't approve of teaching VB as a first language, either, for similar reasons.
By the way, "brmiller", how've you been? :)
Yeah, yeah, why doesn't Sun come out with JavaDrivers? The could call it SippieCup(TM)(R) or something stupid like that, and then it could be really slow like all of the other universal, optimized for the lowest common denominator garbage of that ilk.
I think it's more like iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s internalnet -j SNAT --to 10.1.1.1-10.1.1.254. Whoopie. My firewall has been doing that since I stuck iptables on it. I wouldn't think that it'd take much to randomly select a source IP instead of the current sequential selection...
1) if my car can accelerate faster than yours, then I'll get to my destination faster than you will (assuming all else is the same, and no interference from Johnny Law)
2) I *frequently* use my car as a tool. I've pushed things over with it, used it as a ladder in my front lawn, and used parts of it in ways that they aren't intended. Just like my computer.
3) I have a genuine AT motherboard in my car to play music and record information about the car, so with the simple plugging-in of a monitor, I can do everything with my car that I can with a regular computer - as well as driving it. :)
Maybe it would've helped you if they would've posted it when I submitted it yesterday afternoon, or maybe when they rejected it yesterday at 6:44 PM. :) </whining>
They can make a cool case, but what's up with the darned scrolling javascript status bar? I thought that everyone knew to not use blink and scrolling statuses by now, unless absolutely neccesary? :)
Not that I'll be stopped from getting my name on the waiting list anyway, though...
I don't think that accidentally creating a crappy network is the same thing as having a honeynet...
Oh, I'm aware that the IDE and SCSI drives are frequently the same darned thing with a slightly different interface board, and are thus physically capable of sustaining comprable transfer rates. My claim is that in real-world use, where your CPU is doing stuff other than running hard drive benchmarking software, it's unlikely that a drive using the IDE interface is going to be able to sustain high throughput, 'cause the CPU is tied up. SCSI moves a signifigant portion of that "what's the drive doing" load off to an external controller, thus freeing your CPU up to keep the apps rolling along.
Then again, I'm also aware that most common real-world apps don't need sustained transters for any great peroiod of time, thus IDE's success. I wish that more effort would go into making SCSI more affordable, though, rather than adding some bus-mastering to the already crappy IDE. "Look, ma, I've almost got this turd polished!" :) 'Course, x86-based processors are still more popular than almost every better design, so turd-polishing isn't just a drive interface thing - but I'm gonna go off on a wild rant tangent here if I son't stop now...
BTW, of my personal machines, only one is SCSI, the rest use the "far more affordable and wholly adequate for my needs" IDE. So, maybe I'm a hypocrite anyway. :)
Whoops, we took too much of your money. Here, you can have a little back, but we're keeping the rest. "Gee, thanks IRS! That's swell!" :)
45 megaBYTES of real-world perfomance from common IDE drives? Hah! Maybe when reading from a particularly well thought out cache (or 45 megabits/sec), but I have a hard time believing that there's gonna be much more than 20MB/sec sustained over IDE (even super-turbo ata 5000), and you're using a pile of cpu time to do it anyway. They're good performers for the money, but not *that* good of performers... :)
One approach touched on by someone else was LDAP. PAM-LDAP (and NSS-LDAP) verifies the password by attempting to bind to the LDAP server as the user. The user has read access to their own info, and no one else's, so after a succesful bind the other user info can be pulled, or if the bind fails, then the password is invalid.
Essentially, there's a trusted app that handles authentication outside of PAM, with a PAM module to use that trusted app. Same idea as the pam_chkpass helper and some of the other similar solutions.
BTW, try to use ssl for networked authentication everywhere, or you're wasting your time with shadow passwords.
I forgot what day it is today. Now I feel better...
I think you mean find ~/../ -iname *.jpg -exec rm -f '{}' \; HTH
So, once again, some moron thinks that the government should mandate what can and can't be on the internet. Sounds great. Slashdot-style moderation systems work only because there's an option to browse at -1 for those who don't want to be told what they can and can't see. As soon as [insert governing/controlling body here] takes that control away from the users of the information service, a large portion of that information service's users go elsewhere. That would be a terrible thing to do to the internet.
:)
Now, if we could just find a way to run the stupid people away instead...
No, you're not the only one confused. I'm also confused by the fact that the article says "reader Gregory Purdy", when the review appears to have been written by Craig Pfeifer. The ISBN for the book reviewed is the same as the O'Reilly Pocket Reference that I have on my desk right now, too. And, what's up with the sheep looking over each other, anyway?
BTW, the O'Reilly is an OK book, but really not the only reference you'll ever need as a startging-out CVS admin. I think that the "8" rating is about accurate.
I forgot the smilie after my statement. At first, I assumed that the insanity of passing around 40MB+ files via email would be obvious, but then, after hitting submit, I thought that a smilie was in order. Eh. Live 'n learn.
That said, this is still news for nerds & stuff that matters. :)