Its what every attempt at communism ALWAYS ends up as. You can cry that they werent sincere attempts all day long, I just wonder how many times youll allow the leaders of a revolution to give it a shot. Who knows, maybe youll get lucky some day.
Till then, no thanks, I like my country run without the mass killings, political repression, and widespread poverty.
The widespread definition of a trojan is an application with a known function which has been repackaged with hidden, malicious / subversive functionality in addition to the normal functionality. Think AIM.exe which allows you to chat with buddies, but also opens a reverse SSH connection to the attacker.
I wasnt being facetious: GP was literally describing what a trojan "malware" is. The term is ancient, and so is the definition. Malware is a relatively recent, fairly ambiguous term: I'm not sure Ive ever heard a solid definition for what is and is not malware. AFAIK malware is "stuff I dont like" and sometimes includes spyware/adware, and sometimes does not.
instead of trying to correct their use of the metaphor.
So because some ignorant AC wants to misuse technical terms, I should simply abandon all precise terminology so that he doesnt feel totally left out? Yea, sorry, no thanks.
You'd be right to say I'm committing the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, except that my definition for communism is consistent and static
The real issue is that the pure communism youre suggesting has never been tried because it is not possible to do so in practice.
Lets flip it around: Show me one country that has tried to be communist and succeeded. Ive shown you several that tried to be communist, failed to be communist, and then utterly failed as a result of their attempt.
How many times do you need to see it attempted before you say "yea, its not working"?
Vietnam is piss poor in actual economic terms. Growing 200% when you per-capita GDP is like $4,000 isnt terribly impressive. That still puts you at roughly the 50% mark, along with a lot of other poor countries. Currently they are below that.
point out at which point Mr. Ho was able to ensure that the means of production in Vietnam were owned by the Vietnamese people as a whole
Please point out anyone who did so. I seem to recall a bloke in Cambodia who gave it a shot-- can you remind me how that went?
Is there something inherently wrong with a state's population owning the means of production, or are you simply parroting a talking point from the cold war era
It has failed and continues to fail everywhere its tried. China is only on the rise because they abandoned communism as an economic system. That just leaves a few terribly poor countries, I guess. Its idealism because the only people not praising communism online are the people in communist countries, because theyre too poor / cut off from the outside world to do so.
I suggest you look up a list of currently existing and former communist states, and let me know how theyre doing currently-- no need to hearken back to the cold war to know that Vietnam isnt a place you terribly want to live.
We're the customer; slashdot isnt an ad provider and their core business is not gathering user data. Their chief revenue is from ads that are viewed by slashdotters.
Losing subscribers doesnt "mean squat to dice" unless they simply dont care whether slashdot makes money.
Half of the existing community is vocally ignorant of most of the things they post on.
Its very possible that the existing community ISNT that valuable. For every truly insightful post out there, there are 5 ignorant posts that were modded insightful. Many of them are factually wrong, and some reek of idealism (like the folks who worship communism and praise Cuba's government or wonder why we need a 5th amendment), but most are just hysterical off-topic comments on whatever the news-of-the-month is (see: constant posts trying to bring the NSA into any and every article). Even the submitted articles are usually not that great; a lot of submissions have headlines that straight up contradict the summary and / or story.
I do still like to come here because there are a lot of oldtimers who periodically surface and provide actual content-- but increasingly thats drowned out by the hysterics and the nonsense of all the newer users. Im strongly considering jumping ship for reddit-- they have a ton of nonsense too, but at least they tend to be pretty solid at filtering out the off-topic crap.
You do realize that packaged-and-deployed malware is typically not modifiable, right? Like, the entire malware business depends on the fact that you cant just find someone else's malware in the wild and repurpose it. You have to buy the kit fresh if you want to use it.
Almost certainly this is some kind of forensics effort, and / or an effort to build better detection.
I had understood your post to be about the relative lack of quality of today's goods vs goods 20 years ago, not the relative value of used vs new.
Stating that there are no amps that stack up to your GFA-565 today is ridiculous. Some quick googling suggests that the Adacom GFA-5802 is significantly better, and its MSRP is roughly half of the GFA-565's MSRP. Whether one is a better value, subjectively, for you has no bearing on whether tech today is lower quality-per-value than tech 20 years ago (which it is not).
Assuming that they were introduced in 1991 (as opposed to "the 80s"), that would be ~$3000 in today's dollars. Stack them up against one of the ones here: http://www.avsforum.com/t/8639...
Im not really one to argue amps (since I dont deal with them), but I would guess that theres a combination of confirmation bias, "grass is greener" / "good old days" thinking which selectively forgets issues had, and a failure to account for the substantial difference in today's dollar and the dollar 20-40 years ago. There is a lot more stuff available for a lot less money (laptops, amps, etc), which can lead people to thinking that "my $200 laptop died, therefore technology today sucks".
There is also a point to be made that today's tech has finer tolerances, and so can be less reliable; stone tablets last for absolute ages compared to harddrives, because their tolerances are so loose. Harddrive platters spin at 7200 RPM and (randomly googled fact) have ~2million bits/inch; stands to reason they will fail more and more easily than the stone tablet, but they are indisputably higher quality. Quality can be had (there are high end disk arrays which all but guarantee you will not have an outage, for example) but it costs money, and a lot of people dont want to spend it.
My 52" DLP Samsung from 7 years ago cost $1800 on sale, and has had a number of parts fail. You're right that its repairable, but thats not much consolation when you constantly have to repair it.
A new LCD or Plasma 52" would cost ~$1100. Given the inflation rate, thats $1000 in 2007 dollars-- almost 1/2 the price for a higher quality screen with better inputs, lower power usage, and more features. Youre not going to convince me that TVs 10 years ago were twice as reliable or twice as good in ANY metric at that price; id be suprised if you could even find a 52" tv 10 years ago for $2000
100gb BDs are ~$50 each on amazon, while LTO5s are $25 each. Thats 30x the cost, 1/4 the speed, and no real archival track record to speak of. I just dont see the rationale.
Youre also missing that LTO5 is 1.5TB native, and in reality will hit 2-3TB.
Correct me if Im wrong, but Mantle is an API like DirectX and has almost nothing to do with LibreOffice. That quote you mentioned doesnt mention mantle either, it mentions HSA which AFAICT is not the same thing.
RE Performance: I should have quoted LTO5, since they are also $25; their "native" speed is 140MB/s, and they boast ~2:1 compression which makes that 280MB/s on average. Thats roughly 4 times the speed of BD. You're right about random access, but luckily random access is about the least important factor when it comes to archival storage; sequential is far more relevant.
If you're in an automated tape or bluray library
I wasnt aware that those existed, or that there were mature backup suites for managing them.
Estimates of the longevity of bluray media is 50-100 years,
Advertising is great. Tape has actually been around for 50 years; Bluray has barely been around for 10. We know that magnetic media tends to be pretty darn stable, and we know that dye-based media (CD, DVD, BD) tend to deteriorate pretty quickly. I would be hesitant to trust anything optical for any sort of vital backups. Theyre also a pain to verify given the terrible performance compared to tape.
Youre right that tape isnt automatically superior, but there are a ton of reasons that its the de facto standard for enterprise backup.
If you want the best deal on LTO, you always use one generation back. LTO5 is far far better in price / storage-- 1.5TB native for $25, and drives for $1500 (autoloaders probably for $3000).
Problems with BD:
* Price
* throughput speed (like if you wanted to make a copy)
* Reliability-- we know how long tape lasts because its been around forever. We also know that optical tends to be piss-poor for archival.
* its write speed sucks
Slashdot Mirror
That's not communism, and we both know that.
Its what every attempt at communism ALWAYS ends up as. You can cry that they werent sincere attempts all day long, I just wonder how many times youll allow the leaders of a revolution to give it a shot. Who knows, maybe youll get lucky some day.
Till then, no thanks, I like my country run without the mass killings, political repression, and widespread poverty.
The widespread definition of a trojan is an application with a known function which has been repackaged with hidden, malicious / subversive functionality in addition to the normal functionality. Think AIM.exe which allows you to chat with buddies, but also opens a reverse SSH connection to the attacker.
I wasnt being facetious: GP was literally describing what a trojan "malware" is. The term is ancient, and so is the definition. Malware is a relatively recent, fairly ambiguous term: I'm not sure Ive ever heard a solid definition for what is and is not malware. AFAIK malware is "stuff I dont like" and sometimes includes spyware/adware, and sometimes does not.
instead of trying to correct their use of the metaphor.
So because some ignorant AC wants to misuse technical terms, I should simply abandon all precise terminology so that he doesnt feel totally left out? Yea, sorry, no thanks.
Gasp, you mean there are architectural security advantages to the way NT is designed vs how Linux is?
Dont let the rest of the community hear you, youll end up tarred and feathered.
In essence, its not even a trojan horse but an app that does hidden, malicious things.
Im pretty sure you just gave us the textbook definition of what a trojan is.
> 1 million malware
With such accurate facts (there are more than a million "malwares" for Unix as well) Im sure you are well qualified to make such a determination.
You'd be right to say I'm committing the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, except that my definition for communism is consistent and static
The real issue is that the pure communism youre suggesting has never been tried because it is not possible to do so in practice.
Lets flip it around: Show me one country that has tried to be communist and succeeded. Ive shown you several that tried to be communist, failed to be communist, and then utterly failed as a result of their attempt.
How many times do you need to see it attempted before you say "yea, its not working"?
Vietnam is piss poor in actual economic terms. Growing 200% when you per-capita GDP is like $4,000 isnt terribly impressive. That still puts you at roughly the 50% mark, along with a lot of other poor countries. Currently they are below that.
point out at which point Mr. Ho was able to ensure that the means of production in Vietnam were owned by the Vietnamese people as a whole
Please point out anyone who did so. I seem to recall a bloke in Cambodia who gave it a shot-- can you remind me how that went?
Is there something inherently wrong with a state's population owning the means of production, or are you simply parroting a talking point from the cold war era
It has failed and continues to fail everywhere its tried. China is only on the rise because they abandoned communism as an economic system. That just leaves a few terribly poor countries, I guess. Its idealism because the only people not praising communism online are the people in communist countries, because theyre too poor / cut off from the outside world to do so.
I suggest you look up a list of currently existing and former communist states, and let me know how theyre doing currently-- no need to hearken back to the cold war to know that Vietnam isnt a place you terribly want to live.
This is exactly what Im talking about.
We're the customer; slashdot isnt an ad provider and their core business is not gathering user data. Their chief revenue is from ads that are viewed by slashdotters.
Losing subscribers doesnt "mean squat to dice" unless they simply dont care whether slashdot makes money.
Half of the existing community is vocally ignorant of most of the things they post on.
Its very possible that the existing community ISNT that valuable. For every truly insightful post out there, there are 5 ignorant posts that were modded insightful. Many of them are factually wrong, and some reek of idealism (like the folks who worship communism and praise Cuba's government or wonder why we need a 5th amendment), but most are just hysterical off-topic comments on whatever the news-of-the-month is (see: constant posts trying to bring the NSA into any and every article). Even the submitted articles are usually not that great; a lot of submissions have headlines that straight up contradict the summary and / or story.
I do still like to come here because there are a lot of oldtimers who periodically surface and provide actual content-- but increasingly thats drowned out by the hysterics and the nonsense of all the newer users. Im strongly considering jumping ship for reddit-- they have a ton of nonsense too, but at least they tend to be pretty solid at filtering out the off-topic crap.
You do realize that packaged-and-deployed malware is typically not modifiable, right? Like, the entire malware business depends on the fact that you cant just find someone else's malware in the wild and repurpose it. You have to buy the kit fresh if you want to use it.
Almost certainly this is some kind of forensics effort, and / or an effort to build better detection.
Stuff in your pockets isnt "public", and I wasnt saying otherwise.
The constitution forbits government intrusion into personal effects without a warrant, not public information / video.
When youre in public, you're fair game-- get over it.
I get the feeling you dont understand how inductive power works.
I had understood your post to be about the relative lack of quality of today's goods vs goods 20 years ago, not the relative value of used vs new.
Stating that there are no amps that stack up to your GFA-565 today is ridiculous. Some quick googling suggests that the Adacom GFA-5802 is significantly better, and its MSRP is roughly half of the GFA-565's MSRP. Whether one is a better value, subjectively, for you has no bearing on whether tech today is lower quality-per-value than tech 20 years ago (which it is not).
According to this article from 1991, they cost $1700-1900.
Assuming that they were introduced in 1991 (as opposed to "the 80s"), that would be ~$3000 in today's dollars. Stack them up against one of the ones here:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/8639...
Im not really one to argue amps (since I dont deal with them), but I would guess that theres a combination of confirmation bias, "grass is greener" / "good old days" thinking which selectively forgets issues had, and a failure to account for the substantial difference in today's dollar and the dollar 20-40 years ago. There is a lot more stuff available for a lot less money (laptops, amps, etc), which can lead people to thinking that "my $200 laptop died, therefore technology today sucks".
There is also a point to be made that today's tech has finer tolerances, and so can be less reliable; stone tablets last for absolute ages compared to harddrives, because their tolerances are so loose. Harddrive platters spin at 7200 RPM and (randomly googled fact) have ~2million bits/inch; stands to reason they will fail more and more easily than the stone tablet, but they are indisputably higher quality. Quality can be had (there are high end disk arrays which all but guarantee you will not have an outage, for example) but it costs money, and a lot of people dont want to spend it.
Its also higher quality, but whatever-- if power is your concern get an LCD.
My 52" DLP Samsung from 7 years ago cost $1800 on sale, and has had a number of parts fail. You're right that its repairable, but thats not much consolation when you constantly have to repair it.
A new LCD or Plasma 52" would cost ~$1100. Given the inflation rate, thats $1000 in 2007 dollars-- almost 1/2 the price for a higher quality screen with better inputs, lower power usage, and more features. Youre not going to convince me that TVs 10 years ago were twice as reliable or twice as good in ANY metric at that price; id be suprised if you could even find a 52" tv 10 years ago for $2000
Im not sure if you're serious. Im pretty sure theyve been spying on analog lines for decades now.
Thats really only because analog phones were also providing power. Such a thing exists for digital phones, too.
YEA INEFFICIENCY!
Seriously, who gives a flying crap if their expenses go down, if theres no downside? Is your primary goal in life to "stick it to the man"?
100gb BDs are ~$50 each on amazon, while LTO5s are $25 each. Thats 30x the cost, 1/4 the speed, and no real archival track record to speak of. I just dont see the rationale.
Youre also missing that LTO5 is 1.5TB native, and in reality will hit 2-3TB.
Correct me if Im wrong, but Mantle is an API like DirectX and has almost nothing to do with LibreOffice. That quote you mentioned doesnt mention mantle either, it mentions HSA which AFAICT is not the same thing.
RE Performance:
I should have quoted LTO5, since they are also $25; their "native" speed is 140MB/s, and they boast ~2:1 compression which makes that 280MB/s on average. Thats roughly 4 times the speed of BD. You're right about random access, but luckily random access is about the least important factor when it comes to archival storage; sequential is far more relevant.
If you're in an automated tape or bluray library
I wasnt aware that those existed, or that there were mature backup suites for managing them.
Estimates of the longevity of bluray media is 50-100 years,
Advertising is great. Tape has actually been around for 50 years; Bluray has barely been around for 10. We know that magnetic media tends to be pretty darn stable, and we know that dye-based media (CD, DVD, BD) tend to deteriorate pretty quickly. I would be hesitant to trust anything optical for any sort of vital backups. Theyre also a pain to verify given the terrible performance compared to tape.
Youre right that tape isnt automatically superior, but there are a ton of reasons that its the de facto standard for enterprise backup.
A drive that is almost 8 years old
A sentence that is almost complete!
If you want the best deal on LTO, you always use one generation back. LTO5 is far far better in price / storage-- 1.5TB native for $25, and drives for $1500 (autoloaders probably for $3000).
Problems with BD:
* Price
* throughput speed (like if you wanted to make a copy)
* Reliability-- we know how long tape lasts because its been around forever. We also know that optical tends to be piss-poor for archival.
* its write speed sucks