But it has everything to do with not being backward compatible with old x86 instruction set, and going 64 bit is really the only excuse for that you could make and get away with it.
So after all, indirectly, it has helluva lot to do with being a 64 bit processor.
It's not only CO2, you know. Coal plants put gigantic amounts of radioactive isotopes into atmosphere (only place they can do any damage, really. Alpha and Beta radiators are not dangerous unless you ingest or inhale them.) EVERY DAY.
No need for those scary terrorists anyone knows are hiding under every bed, or any extra-disasters. The normal operation of those things is a disaster.
Galileo also had a total over critical mass of Pu-238 in its RTG's, though it was scattered in 144 capsules.
Some nuts even thought it would magically compress (pressure) enough to ignite a fission reaction when crashed into Jupiter and ignite whole planet into a star.
Until then, many people thought that they had simply put a 12-month cap on updates for each release and were preparing themselved for a 12-month cycle. They didn't think the free version was going to go altogether.
Well, they were about right then. Still are.
Free version didn't go anywhere and free version has about 12-month "forced" release cycle. Why should people care if it's named "Fedora" or "Red Hat Linux"?
That may be simple and well written, but it only needs to compile on FreeBSD.
What if you have a package that has to work on FreeBSD AND OpenBSD AND Linux AND bazillion other unixes AND win32/cygwin AND win32/mingw AND.... gazillion other os/library/whatever combinations.
It won't be that simple any more, and at that point it's probably impossible to "write well" as well.
Why don't you just use a 2.4.22 with backported fix that debian (assuming from the username, every other distro too if that's wrong) will put (or probably already has) out.
No need to recompile anything, apt-get update, reboot, safe. If you for some reason NEED to use a homebrew kernel and don't want to recompile, it's probably reasonably safe.
So, you want us to quote the number of YEARS apt and similar tools have existed before Microsoft had even wet dreams about windows update, sus or autoupdate and whatever else they now have?
It might not be easy to tell from just the kernel version but there are obviously errata security warnings on relevant web pages and/or mailing lists (which everyone should at least check if in doubt), that mention the specific package version/release with backported fix.
Maybe it was during Linux 0.000001, but come on, what especially geeky or challenging is there in compiling anything after and including a 2.0 kernel series (unstable branches not included)?
If you find ability to put X's in [ ]'s in a rather well documented configuration interface self-esteem boosting, your self-esteem must be goddamned low to begin with.
You should think bit harder. Well, perhaps thinking isn't one of your strong points.
I wouldn't consider that "a mere theft of internet service."
Why not? If they're not doing that on purpose of framing you then it's nothing more. Stupid wardriver decides to check out his mail, gets pissed of and snaps at those morons without even remembering he is using someone elses connection, or the like.
LOL. You're a moron. I'm not even going to point out how stupid that statement was. Think about it.
Both have troublesome and totally nonthreatening possibilities. I'm sure there has been at least few times someone has came in, if for nothing else, to ask if someone is home (nobody was and forgot to lock the doors). Not scared. Why should I be? Of course the house in question is not in any big population center (nor States), and things could be very different if it was.
Additionally, it's unfair to assume that people will even know how to disable their network connection, even if they realized, "hey, I have a connection right now and I know it's not mine."
But it's fair to assume that everyone who has bought a wireless device knows how to properly secure it or even know that it's not secure by default?
Even if you don't actually break anything, you could scare the shit out of the person if they're home or they come home and see you. It's completely different.
And there aren't any scenarion that come to your mind that could "scare the shit out of a person" from a mere theft of internet service? Like... err, surfing child pr0n, or perhaps only sending threats to spammers, warranting n years of jail time while all the evidence points out to the owner of the connection?
Perhaps you wouldn't do those things. Perhaps you would. Mere possibility is just as much scaring as someone breaking to your house.
How about the presence of plant and/or animal life does not necessarily indicate that the environment has recovered.
It might also indicate that the environment HAS recovered, and we are just too concerned about some readings in a meter even if there is direct and easily observable evidence that life is doing perfectly well.
To say that a plant accident can't happen again, or can't have the same impact, is naive at best. Not everyone plays by the rules, safety measures can fail, etc..
I didn't claim accidents can't happen, I said that accidents like chernobyl can't happen. All the remaining RBMK class reactors have gone trough major modifications that prevent it, and new designs have much different and better safety measures.
The fact that during the course of over ten thousand reactor years of operation in commercial type plants, there has been only one accident with effects outside the plant, and that new designs are more safe than those old ones should give a good hint, but of course people continue to deliberately ignore the damn facts.
Sure, someone might not play by the rules and deliberately build something damn unsafe but then again, knowingly doing that is no accident, it's by design.
That's a strong possibility, considering how they react to just about everything else in bio-sciences... and to lesser extent in other sciences as well.
But it will probably be limited to fringe groups, most people, while superficially religious, are not really that pious. They are initially ignorant and against just about everything, but will gradually learn to accept even those things they understand nothing about.
Actually, all other things aside, it's around the thermal vents in the deep ocean that most of the life down there is found. So dropping nuclear stuff down subduction zones is probably *more* likely to affect life than putting it in a cold trench somewhere else.
Only if you dump raw waste in there, or containers (which obviously should and would be designed to withstand quite extreme conditions) break down before the stuff is deep enough.
What if they shatter, as has happened quite often in Hamm-Uentropp?
They've got three decades to make improvements to design(s).
And, Hamm-Uentropp didn't blow up despite that, right?
What would be left after that is still no more dangerous than conventional fuel rods scattered into small pieces (which can't go BIG BOOM, even Chernobyl didn't go anywhere near BOOM and it completely melted down). And those uranium particles would still be separated by remains of shells and air, it's not like the dust releasing from pebbles over wide area will magically suck together into extradense clump with an evil intent to start unstoppable chain reaction.
Dogs (and domestic animals in general) are not really a good example since they've been classified as different species from their predecessors more because of convenience than any real biological difference. Wonder how many people would freak out if they knew that their lil' pup is really a wolf.
It's still bit hokey, but much less so if you exclude those few screwed up examples.
Of course these fishes derive from that "extensive research" done for useful purposes so there hasn't been any wasted work exclusively in them either.
And though it initially invites backlash from stupid "eco" groups, if GM pets make it to ordinary items, it will on the long term LESSEN the unrational fears general public has towards genetical research, which would be good for useful research as well.
Well, that's "genetic engineering" rougly in same sense nailing things together is "nanotechnology".
The properties of final "product" may derive from genetics (or properties of very small particles in case of nanotech) but those haven't really been fine tuned. Engineering, sure, but not genetic engineering.
And different dog breeds are NOT different species. Different species can not, by definition, interbreed and produce fertile descendants (though there are rare exceptions). All dogs of all breeds fall into species Canis familiaris, though that's probably an artificial barrier... genetically most are probably still gray wolves, Canis lupus.
Of course there would probably be nothing that prevents cat with same genes that bunny had... except colors, perhaps, you'd have to find albino cat to modify like that bunny was.
not only will the final result still be larger (albeit to a greatly decreased degree)
Small enough that size different is completely insignificant at that point.
mod_gzip (which is a tool that is heavily resource intensive, which is why most sites don't use it) had to spend time processing whitespaces-instead of wasting bandwidth, your wasting processor time.
That could be the case if they were only gzipping for the whitespace, but as they are going to run it anyway, the difference in cpu time spent is marginal. "time" command can't tell the difference, it's 0.003 seconds here (/. is going to have helluva beefier hardware than my trusty 2?00+, and that's for relatively heavy gzip tool itself instead of some kind of embedded version running within apache process that doesn't have startup penalties) for both whitespace-stripped and "original" retooled version... of course there has to be some difference but that's already a damn small number, do you really think it matters if it takes few microseconds more cpu time?
Slashdot Mirror
It *is* backward compatible with old x86 instruction set. In every way.
Only in 32 bit mode.
Those eight extra registers, as well as the address space is only usable on the totally non-backward compatible x86-64 mode.
Well, not directly.
But it has everything to do with not being backward compatible with old x86 instruction set, and going 64 bit is really the only excuse for that you could make and get away with it.
So after all, indirectly, it has helluva lot to do with being a 64 bit processor.
This thing doesn't have ANYWHERE near the range of flying from NZ to North Korea.
And it doesn't have any payload capacity, even if it did. It's a demonstration of feasibility. Not a real missile that goes boom.
It's not only CO2, you know. Coal plants put gigantic amounts of radioactive isotopes into atmosphere (only place they can do any damage, really. Alpha and Beta radiators are not dangerous unless you ingest or inhale them.) EVERY DAY.
No need for those scary terrorists anyone knows are hiding under every bed, or any extra-disasters. The normal operation of those things is a disaster.
Galileo also had a total over critical mass of Pu-238 in its RTG's, though it was scattered in 144 capsules.
Some nuts even thought it would magically compress (pressure) enough to ignite a fission reaction when crashed into Jupiter and ignite whole planet into a star.
Until then, many people thought that they had simply put a 12-month cap on updates for each release and were preparing themselved for a 12-month cycle. They didn't think the free version was going to go altogether.
Well, they were about right then. Still are.
Free version didn't go anywhere and free version has about 12-month "forced" release cycle. Why should people care if it's named "Fedora" or "Red Hat Linux"?
That may be simple and well written, but it only needs to compile on FreeBSD.
.... gazillion other os/library/whatever combinations.
What if you have a package that has to work on FreeBSD AND OpenBSD AND Linux AND bazillion other unixes AND win32/cygwin AND win32/mingw AND
It won't be that simple any more, and at that point it's probably impossible to "write well" as well.
Why don't you just use a 2.4.22 with backported fix that debian (assuming from the username, every other distro too if that's wrong) will put (or probably already has) out.
No need to recompile anything, apt-get update, reboot, safe. If you for some reason NEED to use a homebrew kernel and don't want to recompile, it's probably reasonably safe.
So, you want us to quote the number of YEARS apt and similar tools have existed before Microsoft had even wet dreams about windows update, sus or autoupdate and whatever else they now have?
It might not be easy to tell from just the kernel version but there are obviously errata security warnings on relevant web pages and/or mailing lists (which everyone should at least check if in doubt), that mention the specific package version/release with backported fix.
Maybe it was during Linux 0.000001, but come on, what especially geeky or challenging is there in compiling anything after and including a 2.0 kernel series (unstable branches not included)?
If you find ability to put X's in [ ]'s in a rather well documented configuration interface self-esteem boosting, your self-esteem must be goddamned low to begin with.
Nope.
You should think bit harder. Well, perhaps thinking isn't one of your strong points.
I wouldn't consider that "a mere theft of internet service."
Why not? If they're not doing that on purpose of framing you then it's nothing more. Stupid wardriver decides to check out his mail, gets pissed of and snaps at those morons without even remembering he is using someone elses connection, or the like.
LOL. You're a moron. I'm not even going to point out how stupid that statement was. Think about it.
Both have troublesome and totally nonthreatening possibilities. I'm sure there has been at least few times someone has came in, if for nothing else, to ask if someone is home (nobody was and forgot to lock the doors). Not scared. Why should I be? Of course the house in question is not in any big population center (nor States), and things could be very different if it was.
Additionally, it's unfair to assume that people will even know how to disable their network connection, even if they realized, "hey, I have a connection right now and I know it's not mine."
But it's fair to assume that everyone who has bought a wireless device knows how to properly secure it or even know that it's not secure by default?
Give me a break.
Even if you don't actually break anything, you could scare the shit out of the person if they're home or they come home and see you. It's completely different.
And there aren't any scenarion that come to your mind that could "scare the shit out of a person" from a mere theft of internet service? Like... err, surfing child pr0n, or perhaps only sending threats to spammers, warranting n years of jail time while all the evidence points out to the owner of the connection?
Perhaps you wouldn't do those things. Perhaps you would. Mere possibility is just as much scaring as someone breaking to your house.
How about the presence of plant and/or animal life does not necessarily indicate that the environment has recovered.
It might also indicate that the environment HAS recovered, and we are just too concerned about some readings in a meter even if there is direct and easily observable evidence that life is doing perfectly well.
To say that a plant accident can't happen again, or can't have the same impact, is naive at best. Not everyone plays by the rules, safety measures can fail, etc..
I didn't claim accidents can't happen, I said that accidents like chernobyl can't happen. All the remaining RBMK class reactors have gone trough major modifications that prevent it, and new designs have much different and better safety measures.
The fact that during the course of over ten thousand reactor years of operation in commercial type plants, there has been only one accident with effects outside the plant, and that new designs are more safe than those old ones should give a good hint, but of course people continue to deliberately ignore the damn facts.
Sure, someone might not play by the rules and deliberately build something damn unsafe but then again, knowingly doing that is no accident, it's by design.
That's a strong possibility, considering how they react to just about everything else in bio-sciences... and to lesser extent in other sciences as well.
But it will probably be limited to fringe groups, most people, while superficially religious, are not really that pious. They are initially ignorant and against just about everything, but will gradually learn to accept even those things they understand nothing about.
Useless it might be, but you can't claim "CSS is broken" if a solution exist.
IE is broken, and the web with it. Blame Microsoft.
Actually, all other things aside, it's around the thermal vents in the deep ocean that most of the life down there is found. So dropping nuclear stuff down subduction zones is probably *more* likely to affect life than putting it in a cold trench somewhere else.
Only if you dump raw waste in there, or containers (which obviously should and would be designed to withstand quite extreme conditions) break down before the stuff is deep enough.
What if they shatter, as has happened quite often in Hamm-Uentropp?
They've got three decades to make improvements to design(s).
And, Hamm-Uentropp didn't blow up despite that, right?
What would be left after that is still no more dangerous than conventional fuel rods scattered into small pieces (which can't go BIG BOOM, even Chernobyl didn't go anywhere near BOOM and it completely melted down). And those uranium particles would still be separated by remains of shells and air, it's not like the dust releasing from pebbles over wide area will magically suck together into extradense clump with an evil intent to start unstoppable chain reaction.
Dogs (and domestic animals in general) are not really a good example since they've been classified as different species from their predecessors more because of convenience than any real biological difference. Wonder how many people would freak out if they knew that their lil' pup is really a wolf.
It's still bit hokey, but much less so if you exclude those few screwed up examples.
Well, imagine your cat with teeth 3 times as big as it's current arsenal.
I, for one, will welcome our new miniature sabre tooth domestic cat overlords... err, wouldn't want one biting my finger off, that is.
Of course these fishes derive from that "extensive research" done for useful purposes so there hasn't been any wasted work exclusively in them either.
And though it initially invites backlash from stupid "eco" groups, if GM pets make it to ordinary items, it will on the long term LESSEN the unrational fears general public has towards genetical research, which would be good for useful research as well.
Well, that's "genetic engineering" rougly in same sense nailing things together is "nanotechnology".
The properties of final "product" may derive from genetics (or properties of very small particles in case of nanotech) but those haven't really been fine tuned. Engineering, sure, but not genetic engineering.
And different dog breeds are NOT different species. Different species can not, by definition, interbreed and produce fertile descendants (though there are rare exceptions). All dogs of all breeds fall into species Canis familiaris, though that's probably an artificial barrier... genetically most are probably still gray wolves, Canis lupus.
Of course there would probably be nothing that prevents cat with same genes that bunny had... except colors, perhaps, you'd have to find albino cat to modify like that bunny was.
Small enough that size different is completely insignificant at that point.
That could be the case if they were only gzipping for the whitespace, but as they are going to run it anyway, the difference in cpu time spent is marginal. "time" command can't tell the difference, it's 0.003 seconds here (/. is going to have helluva beefier hardware than my trusty 2?00+, and that's for relatively heavy gzip tool itself instead of some kind of embedded version running within apache process that doesn't have startup penalties) for both whitespace-stripped and "original" retooled version... of course there has to be some difference but that's already a damn small number, do you really think it matters if it takes few microseconds more cpu time?