If not for the entire comment, at least mod it up because of this part I quoted...
But 99.999%????...'average users'???
Hah! I would not touch that statistic with a bleach-soaked 10 foot pole, because I know where you pulled it from, and it's drawing flies already, because it stinks so bad!
he says his company is exploring the concept of using stem cells to extend longevity beyond 120 years.
Maybe it's just me, but I believe that longer average lifespans are not a good idea at all.
It's just more mouths to feed, more people farting, shitting, throwing out trash... If we're planning on extending lifespans, we should at least implement better family planning across the globe, otherwise, we'd just be starving hell of a lot more people in the long run.
Why do some Operating Systems never show uptimes above 497 days ?
The method that Netcraft uses to determine the uptime of a server is bounded by an upper limit of 497 days for some Operating Systems (see above). It is therefore not possible to see uptimes for these systems that go beyond this upper limit. Although we could in theory attempt to compute the true uptime for OS's with this upper limit by monitoring for restarts at the expected time, we prefer not to do this as it can be inaccurate and error prone.
Why does my uptime go back to 0 after 198 days ?
The Linux TCP stack uses the low 32 bits from the system uptime timer, and this timer, in recent kernel releases, runs at 250Hz. This means that the timer value wraps around to 0 after roughly 198 days. Although we could in theory attempt to compute the true uptime for OS's with this upper limit by monitoring for restarts at the expected time, we prefer not to do this as it can be error prone.
Why do you not report uptimes for Linux 2.6 or FreeBSD 6 ?
We only report uptimes for systems where the operating system's timer runs at 100Hz or less. Because the TCP code only uses the low 32 bits of the timer, if the timer runs at say 1000Hz, the value wraps around every 49.7 days (whereas at 100Hz it wraps after 497 days). As there are large numbers of systems which have a higher uptime than this, it is not possible to report accurate uptimes for these systems.
The Linux kernel switched to a higher internal timer rate at kernel version 2.5.26. Linux 2.4 used a rate of 100Hz. Linux 2.6 used a timer at 1000Hz (some architectures were using 1000Hz before this), until the default was changed back to 250Hz in May 2006. (An explanation of the HZ setting in Linux.)
FreeBSD versions 4 and 5 used a 100Hz timer, but FreeBSD 6 has moved to a customisable timer with a default setting of 1000Hz.
So unfortunately this means that we cannot give reliable uptime figures for many Linux and FreeBSD servers.
Yes, this is true. The point is, even companies who create software and don't release source code have pieces of shit developers as well.
A benefit of OSS is that the True Masters of Computer Programming who may be interested in a project but not yet a part of it can view the code and submit a patch (scrutinized by a group of his peers), and close the reported bug.
Sure errors still occur, but I'd be more worried that no bugs were reported for a non-trivial project, because it just means nobody's really given a good look.
...of having a fuckin' IE7 compatibility mode if it isn't going to be compatible with IE7?
Shit, and after I RTFA, it seems that keeping compatibility with IE7 is potentially just as time-consuming as recoding for IE8. Web Designers coding with browser market share in mind, might not really code as close to spec as IE8 can get, instead they'd just make sure it works for both IE7 and 8 under "compatibility" mode!
Microsoft doesn't really give a shit about web standards, IMHO, they're just making sure that they're browser doesn't show ill-rendered XHTML 1.0 Strict, HTML 4.01 and CSS 2. Especially since people who build their sites to spec display badges of honor, the IE dev team would just look bad if they can't properly render those pages.
Considering any site worth a damn have people who code for all major browsers anyways, so my entire post might be just rantish and view as Anti-Microsoft. (not saying it isn't)
Then of course comes the playing of videos. Right now for the life of me I can't download youtube videos and play the flv when I can do it just fine on my Windows box using the same software no less. Firefox with downloadhelper to be exact.
I don't seem to have any problems with this at all. I can play flvs in mplayer, totem and vlc.
I dont even need downloadhelper anymore because the flv streams could be found in the/tmp directory (/tmp/Flash*).
FLVs sure work no problem on VLC, if you want it to play on mplayer... I'm thinking the gstreamer-ugly or -bad packages have it (not sure which one exactly, though). I'm actually downloading streams from Megavideo right now.
I just might be a bit too cynical nowadays but, I don't see how this post would start a flame war. Doesn't almost everyone see current events in this light? I certainly do.
Ahh yes, but they've publicly announced that they'll add in an extension system. Something like Adblock would surely be one of the first ones to be made.
This is so damn ridiculous that I couldn't help but laugh. How the hell can organized crime or terrorists make money out of free downloads?
But then again, as I considered it, they could make money out of bootlegs from the stuff they downloaded from torrents. There are mass disk burning operations where I come from, and since bandwidth isn't as cheap here (the highest bandwidth for residential accounts is, IIRC, 2Mbps) as it is in the US, people come to "bootleg bazaars" in droves to buy 16 movies-in-one DVD9s for PhP50 (~US$1).
This could indeed fund organized crime. It is certainly a possibility, as there is a market for bootlegs even though movies and other such content is freely available online. I myself bought more than 150 disks since DVDs went mainstream here (about 8 years ago) and I was still on dial-up, and almost everyone I know did the same.
Banning file-sharing won't actually do anything to stop this though, maybe if the damn movie/music industry would price their stuff more reasonably rather than spiking the price of every crappy new release, none of this would happen.
Right now, I blame RIAA/MPAA. If anyone's funding organized crime and terrorists, it's them.
The thing about complex systems such as the ecosystem is that something that has no direct impact may have some indirect impact that may just be even worse, maybe not.
My brain is still in conflict with itself with the pointlessness of rescuing (and selectively eradicating) a species, however. We don't know if the extinction of this particular species would be a boon or not. It might not even matter, but wouldn't it be better to maintain the status quo and eradicate the fungus? At least we know, more or less how the local ecosystem functions at that state.
But then again, maybe the fungal species changed the dynamics of the ecosystem too much already. I guess you're right about the pointlessness of meddling then.
The fresh graduates from college are the ones who'd probably benefit the most from contributing something to a complex OSS project, as they usually do not have lots of prior experience.
It's going to be tough, but you need all the help you can get. The more quality code you put in, the better your chances. In this day and age, marginally better is better than nothing.
Might even be a plus, because management might think they could get you for a lower salary range than the next guy because you'd actually do it for free.
It's an effort make sure that web developers of such tools like Online Banking try coding to open standards instead of locking themselves and their customers to use IE only.
It would be bad for the Mac if the bosses can't do their transactions on it. Sure Linux will be able to handle it, but consider how hard it is to convince a PHB to use Linux instead of Windows or a Mac.
Slashdot Mirror
But 99.999%????...'average users'??? Hah! I would not touch that statistic with a bleach-soaked 10 foot pole, because I know where you pulled it from, and it's drawing flies already, because it stinks so bad!
Things going the way it is now, it's just a matter of time until the UK government starts asking people to pay 10% tax every time they pay taxes...
Showing penetration? you know this isn't the actual up and coming movie, right?
But does it matter? You know everything's better with butter.
he says his company is exploring the concept of using stem cells to extend longevity beyond 120 years.
Maybe it's just me, but I believe that longer average lifespans are not a good idea at all.
It's just more mouths to feed, more people farting, shitting, throwing out trash... If we're planning on extending lifespans, we should at least implement better family planning across the globe, otherwise, we'd just be starving hell of a lot more people in the long run.
Heh, I clicked the headline just to post something like this... Firefox 3.5 hit 93 somewhere in the late Alphas, if IIRC (it was still 3.1 then).
Why do some Operating Systems never show uptimes above 497 days ?
The method that Netcraft uses to determine the uptime of a server is bounded by an upper limit of 497 days for some Operating Systems (see above). It is therefore not possible to see uptimes for these systems that go beyond this upper limit. Although we could in theory attempt to compute the true uptime for OS's with this upper limit by monitoring for restarts at the expected time, we prefer not to do this as it can be inaccurate and error prone.
Why does my uptime go back to 0 after 198 days ?
The Linux TCP stack uses the low 32 bits from the system uptime timer, and this timer, in recent kernel releases, runs at 250Hz. This means that the timer value wraps around to 0 after roughly 198 days. Although we could in theory attempt to compute the true uptime for OS's with this upper limit by monitoring for restarts at the expected time, we prefer not to do this as it can be error prone.
Why do you not report uptimes for Linux 2.6 or FreeBSD 6 ?
We only report uptimes for systems where the operating system's timer runs at 100Hz or less. Because the TCP code only uses the low 32 bits of the timer, if the timer runs at say 1000Hz, the value wraps around every 49.7 days (whereas at 100Hz it wraps after 497 days). As there are large numbers of systems which have a higher uptime than this, it is not possible to report accurate uptimes for these systems.
The Linux kernel switched to a higher internal timer rate at kernel version 2.5.26. Linux 2.4 used a rate of 100Hz. Linux 2.6 used a timer at 1000Hz (some architectures were using 1000Hz before this), until the default was changed back to 250Hz in May 2006. (An explanation of the HZ setting in Linux.)
FreeBSD versions 4 and 5 used a 100Hz timer, but FreeBSD 6 has moved to a customisable timer with a default setting of 1000Hz.
So unfortunately this means that we cannot give reliable uptime figures for many Linux and FreeBSD servers.
meh...
Next thing you know they'll be afraid to hug their hairy-nosed uncle.
Hmmm... I dunno if this is a bad thing. Maybe little girls need to be a afraid to hug their hairy-nosed uncles a bit...
If she's a female paladin who's still a virgin, I really don't think she'd be hot in a chainmail bikini... I don't believe she'd even be hot at all.
I can attest to that dog food ad, and it tastes quite good, thank you very much!
Yes, this is true. The point is, even companies who create software and don't release source code have pieces of shit developers as well.
A benefit of OSS is that the True Masters of Computer Programming who may be interested in a project but not yet a part of it can view the code and submit a patch (scrutinized by a group of his peers), and close the reported bug.
Sure errors still occur, but I'd be more worried that no bugs were reported for a non-trivial project, because it just means nobody's really given a good look.
Shit, and after I RTFA, it seems that keeping compatibility with IE7 is potentially just as time-consuming as recoding for IE8. Web Designers coding with browser market share in mind, might not really code as close to spec as IE8 can get, instead they'd just make sure it works for both IE7 and 8 under "compatibility" mode!
Microsoft doesn't really give a shit about web standards, IMHO, they're just making sure that they're browser doesn't show ill-rendered XHTML 1.0 Strict, HTML 4.01 and CSS 2. Especially since people who build their sites to spec display badges of honor, the IE dev team would just look bad if they can't properly render those pages.
Considering any site worth a damn have people who code for all major browsers anyways, so my entire post might be just rantish and view as Anti-Microsoft. (not saying it isn't)
and blink, I hated blink with a vengeance!
Then of course comes the playing of videos. Right now for the life of me I can't download youtube videos and play the flv when I can do it just fine on my Windows box using the same software no less. Firefox with downloadhelper to be exact.
I don't seem to have any problems with this at all. I can play flvs in mplayer, totem and vlc.
I dont even need downloadhelper anymore because the flv streams could be found in the /tmp directory (/tmp/Flash*).
FLVs sure work no problem on VLC, if you want it to play on mplayer... I'm thinking the gstreamer-ugly or -bad packages have it (not sure which one exactly, though). I'm actually downloading streams from Megavideo right now.
I just might be a bit too cynical nowadays but, I don't see how this post would start a flame war. Doesn't almost everyone see current events in this light? I certainly do.
Ahh yes, but they've publicly announced that they'll add in an extension system. Something like Adblock would surely be one of the first ones to be made.
This is so damn ridiculous that I couldn't help but laugh. How the hell can organized crime or terrorists make money out of free downloads?
But then again, as I considered it, they could make money out of bootlegs from the stuff they downloaded from torrents. There are mass disk burning operations where I come from, and since bandwidth isn't as cheap here (the highest bandwidth for residential accounts is, IIRC, 2Mbps) as it is in the US, people come to "bootleg bazaars" in droves to buy 16 movies-in-one DVD9s for PhP50 (~US$1).
This could indeed fund organized crime. It is certainly a possibility, as there is a market for bootlegs even though movies and other such content is freely available online. I myself bought more than 150 disks since DVDs went mainstream here (about 8 years ago) and I was still on dial-up, and almost everyone I know did the same.
Banning file-sharing won't actually do anything to stop this though, maybe if the damn movie/music industry would price their stuff more reasonably rather than spiking the price of every crappy new release, none of this would happen.
Right now, I blame RIAA/MPAA. If anyone's funding organized crime and terrorists, it's them.
Better yet, just ban people altogether, that'll shut them up.
Lots of moons for a little guy! So size doesn't matter.
Not that I'm small or anything... no.
Not good.
The thing about complex systems such as the ecosystem is that something that has no direct impact may have some indirect impact that may just be even worse, maybe not.
My brain is still in conflict with itself with the pointlessness of rescuing (and selectively eradicating) a species, however. We don't know if the extinction of this particular species would be a boon or not. It might not even matter, but wouldn't it be better to maintain the status quo and eradicate the fungus? At least we know, more or less how the local ecosystem functions at that state.
But then again, maybe the fungal species changed the dynamics of the ecosystem too much already. I guess you're right about the pointlessness of meddling then.
Meh to whatever happens as a result.
Nah, Evolution and Intelligent Design isn't necessarily mutually exclusive, IMO.
The only problem about ID is that if life on this planet was designed by a vastly superior being/species, who created our creator/s?
Same handiness to a kidnapper, or better yet, an assassin, too, don't you think?
The fresh graduates from college are the ones who'd probably benefit the most from contributing something to a complex OSS project, as they usually do not have lots of prior experience.
It's going to be tough, but you need all the help you can get. The more quality code you put in, the better your chances. In this day and age, marginally better is better than nothing.
Might even be a plus, because management might think they could get you for a lower salary range than the next guy because you'd actually do it for free.
It's an effort make sure that web developers of such tools like Online Banking try coding to open standards instead of locking themselves and their customers to use IE only.
It would be bad for the Mac if the bosses can't do their transactions on it. Sure Linux will be able to handle it, but consider how hard it is to convince a PHB to use Linux instead of Windows or a Mac.