Good day, PhysicsExpert. I was wondering if you happened to know where my esteemed colleague PhysicsGenius went off to... I miss his information and insights on the fascinating field of Physics.
And thanks for reminding me of the MIT experiment; I've been meaning to duplicate that with my pet hamster, but I keep forgetting about it. Perhaps I'll stop by the local druggist today and get a bottle of bromine.
When I was in school, calculators weren't quite fancy enough to do serious symbolic math; the HP 28C was released in my senior year. However, in the higher level math classes where the point wasn't learning how to do calculus, the prof had a book of integral tables up front for us to use. When doing some integrals is just one small step in solving the problem, it's good to not have to spend a lot of time working on it.
It's not illegal per se... see the definition of non-stoichiometric. One of the first high-temperature superconductors has the formula YBa2Cu3O7-d (d should be a lowercase delta), where d is a small number, so you end up with something like YBa2Cu3O6.95 or YBa2CU3O6.7. However, In this particular case, I think saying that water is like H1.5O is incorrect, or at least misleading.
The problem with Windows that I mentioned is very minor, and doesn't affect usability at all. I'm still waiting for you to cite an example of a program that is practically unusable with large fonts.
Note that using large fonts mode is not recommended.
Not recommended by you, perhaps, but recommended by me:)
Many MANY programs do not display properly in large fonts mode.
...such as...? I run my WinXP system at Custom (139% normal size, 133dpi). Everything I run (mostly development tools like Visual Studio, and occasionally Office) looks great. Well, one thing I did notice is that the little Signal Strength meter on XP's wireless connection status window isn't vertically aligned with its caption--it's a little too high and overlaps the Speed display slightly. I actually reported it to Microsoft during the XP beta, but they said they wouldn't fix it for the release. I was hoping they'd do something about it in SP1, but it's still there. Nothing major though...
Now, some poorly-designed web pages look like crap, since they use CSS and absolute pixel sizes and positioning, making everything too tiny. Or even worse, mix the two (physical sizes for fonts, but pixel sizes for positioning DIVs, so the text ends up too big for the boxes and things overlap illegibly).
Changing Properties->Settings->Advanced->General:Font Size setting allows you to set the system-wide dpi setting to anything you want for all fonts, which affects pretty much everything that the system displays.
Yup, I have a 133dpi LCD on my laptop (1600x1200 on a 15" diagonal), and text is wonderfully clear and easy-to-read. If you tell Windows that your display is 133 dpi, it will use more pixels to make a given point size font compared to the default 96 dpi screen--if you ask for a 12 point font, it'll really be 1/6" high, instead of 3/25".
Correct me if I'm wrong, but using CompactFlash as a storage device on an embedded appliance/application whatever is a bad idea because of the half-life of CF.
Whoa, if your CF cards are that radioactive, you're buying them from the wrong place!
You are more likely to get laid of you can say "courriel" with a nice sexy roll of the tongue.
Except French has the weirdest "r"s I've ever heard... it's pronounced way in the back of the mouth, and "rrrrr" sort of sounds like you're trying to gargle. She might do the Heimlich on you if you say "courrrriellll.":)
1: In order for PCI stuff to work with this platform, you need firmware for PPC. Guess what? The multitude of X86 cheap stuff doesnt work on these platforms. You probably pay 3-6 times what you'd normally pay for NICS and GFX cards. Apple does this all the time.
No, you only need special firmware on the card if you want the computer's firmware to be able to talk to the card. Modern OSes use the firmware for very little, or they don't use it at all. For example, on a PC, you can disable a hard drive in the BIOS, but Linux will still be able to access it (assuming it's not your boot drive). Linux accesses the drive controller directly; it doesn't use the BIOS.
So, you'll only need a special NIC if you want to netboot with that NIC. And you'll only need a special graphics card if you want to see the boot process on that card (you can use a serial console if you don't... at least these machies had better support serial console).
5: What about power consumption issues? Last I've seen the G5's, they gobbled power faster than an overclocked Athlon.
When did you last see a G5? A 1.8GHz PPC970 uses about 42W, while an Athlon XP 2500+ (1.833GHz) draws around 54W. I don't know how fast an overclocked Athlon would gobble power, but I'll note that the max power consumption of a non-overclocked Athlon 3200+ (2.2GHz) is 77W.
I should note that Red Hat's hardware detection system would detect the sound card automatically.
Well then, I'll note that I recently installed RedHat 9 on a machine with two NICs, an Intel PRO 100S and some Accton. Only the Intel NIC was detected--no sign of the Accton except for a brief mention in/proc/pci. Eventually, I found out that I was supposed to use the 8139too module. That module is included with RH9, so why wasn't the card detected automatically?
Depends on what you mean by "un-breathable." It's unbreathable in the same way that nitrogen is unbreathable, but I've managed to survive for a few decades breathing approximately 80% nitrogen/20% oxygen.
this means that if someone is in the house when the system releases its gas, that that person/animal is dead. it starves the air of oxygen.
No, that's not true. As the OSHA says, "Not acutely toxic at <10% by volume" and "Generally used at <7% by volume." The National Fire Protection Association agrees, stating that a concentration of 5 percent Halon in air is sufficient for most flame extinguishment. It doesn't work by removing oxygen from the air--CO2 and nitrogen flood systems do that. It works by actively interfering with the chain reaction of a flame.
As the OSHA site mentions, there are some downsides... breathing 15% or so for a couple of minutes might cause some irregular heartbeats in some people. Also, Halon decomposes into hydrofluoric acid and hydrobromic acid when it's exposed to fire. But then again, it'll put out the fire almost instantly (halon will even stop an explosion in progress)--the minute quantities of HF and HBr are much better than the large quantities of other toxic gasses that burning things put out.
But the bottom line is that no, you won't die if the Halon system goes off in a room you're in. I've heard that when Halon was first introduced, they'd demo it by putting a guy in a closed room and have him light a cigarette and candle, then dump in the Halon. The cigarette and candle would go out, and the guy would be in there with no ill effects.
Right... I don't know why everyone likes to say that Halon fire supression systems will kill you if you're in the room, or that they work by removing oxygen. It's reached urban legend status...
There is no doubt that Halon does replace oxygen to some degree and therefore does present a potential danger of asphyxia.
A 7% concentration of Halon 1301 will put out a fire... that leaves plenty of oxygen for breathing. Sure, you'll have problems if you flood the room with the 50% or so that an inert gas like CO2 requires (up to 75% CO2 for dust fires), but Halon is/was expensive--there's no point in releasing that much Halon.
Halon is banned due to it being an ozone-depleting fluorocarbon, not due to it being a health hazard. BTW, Halon 1301 means 1 Carbon, 3 Fluorine, 0 Chlorine, 1 Bromine--CF3Br.
I guess it's my turn to be the guy who points out the obvious by saying: checksums are completely useless against these attacks.
Well, not completely useless, although certainly much weaker than a signature. While having a checksum only on mozilla.org would be useless against this type of attack, checksums tend to get mirrored in various places--an attacker would potentially have to modify the checksum on tens/hundreds/thousands of machines. For example, that's how the OpenSSH trojan was noticed (within a few hours of the files being tampered with); the FreeBSD ports system keeps a checksum of the distribution file for this exact reason, as does NetBSD's pkgsrc.
But yes, a real digital signature would be so much better...
This reminds me... shouldn't Mozilla provide checksums and/or PGP signatures for these files? While I'm not 100% trusting of files on mozilla.org (servers can, and have been, compromised and files trojaned), I don't trust software from random.torrents at all...
FWIW, this torrent is probably fine--it's identical to the one on www.mozilla.org. Checksums are:
MD5(mozilla-win32-1.4-installer.exe)= 28cb37dfe56476fe0c5a74689cdc0063
SHA1(mozilla-win32-1.4-installer.exe)= c46336c7ceeeaa349f2546c1009f53271b186213
But you shouldn't take my word for it... Mozilla should be providing checksums; their distribution build instructions even recommend making a MD5SUM file.
It would have been nice for you to mention that you're using a Mac, instead of obtusely implying it
My advice is to stick to using 9.1 on your 8600. And don't generalize about BSD from your situation; it's an extreme.
It's a search-and-replace of an ancient troll--the original was about classic MacOS; it's been reposted as about MacOS X, and now as about BSD.
In general, keep in mind that stories in the BSD and Apple sections will always have these stock trolls (e.g., "BSD is dying," "Elegy for BSD," "Developer Laments," "Dear Apple," "Dear Fr. O'Day," etc...).
with much gayness,
Dahan, C.S.B.
Exposé? Gratuitous accent usage...
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 1
People shouldnâ(TM)t try to sound cool by using foreign words when they donâ(TM)t know what they mean or how to spell them... on Appleâ(TM)s Panther page:
Too bad TTR didn't give credit. (k5 article posted Thu Jun 19th, 2003 at 07:41:20 PM EST, which is 2003-06-20 00:41:20 GMT. The Register article was posted a few hours earlier, 2003-06-19 21:55 GMT).
Slashdot Mirror
And thanks for reminding me of the MIT experiment; I've been meaning to duplicate that with my pet hamster, but I keep forgetting about it. Perhaps I'll stop by the local druggist today and get a bottle of bromine.
The Ford Simulator.
Hey :P I'm just waiting for the right girl... yeah, that's the ticket!
Uh, "no prior experience with ... XP" means that they've never used XP, not that they've never seen it.
But my resume sure would look awesome if I could claim experience with stuff that I had seen somewhere!
Dunno why you GNU folks seem to prefer bc... it was originally just a preprocessor for dc, which is an RPN calculator.
When I was in school, calculators weren't quite fancy enough to do serious symbolic math; the HP 28C was released in my senior year. However, in the higher level math classes where the point wasn't learning how to do calculus, the prof had a book of integral tables up front for us to use. When doing some integrals is just one small step in solving the problem, it's good to not have to spend a lot of time working on it.
It's not illegal per se... see the definition of non-stoichiometric. One of the first high-temperature superconductors has the formula YBa2Cu3O7-d (d should be a lowercase delta), where d is a small number, so you end up with something like YBa2Cu3O6.95 or YBa2CU3O6.7. However, In this particular case, I think saying that water is like H1.5O is incorrect, or at least misleading.
The problem with Windows that I mentioned is very minor, and doesn't affect usability at all. I'm still waiting for you to cite an example of a program that is practically unusable with large fonts.
It doesn't? Works For Me; Mozilla 1.4, Windows XP. Preferences dialog at 96 dpi and 133 dpi.
Not recommended by you, perhaps, but recommended by me :)
Many MANY programs do not display properly in large fonts mode.
...such as...? I run my WinXP system at Custom (139% normal size, 133dpi). Everything I run (mostly development tools like Visual Studio, and occasionally Office) looks great. Well, one thing I did notice is that the little Signal Strength meter on XP's wireless connection status window isn't vertically aligned with its caption--it's a little too high and overlaps the Speed display slightly. I actually reported it to Microsoft during the XP beta, but they said they wouldn't fix it for the release. I was hoping they'd do something about it in SP1, but it's still there. Nothing major though...
Now, some poorly-designed web pages look like crap, since they use CSS and absolute pixel sizes and positioning, making everything too tiny. Or even worse, mix the two (physical sizes for fonts, but pixel sizes for positioning DIVs, so the text ends up too big for the boxes and things overlap illegibly).
Yup, I have a 133dpi LCD on my laptop (1600x1200 on a 15" diagonal), and text is wonderfully clear and easy-to-read. If you tell Windows that your display is 133 dpi, it will use more pixels to make a given point size font compared to the default 96 dpi screen--if you ask for a 12 point font, it'll really be 1/6" high, instead of 3/25".
Whoa, if your CF cards are that radioactive, you're buying them from the wrong place!
Except French has the weirdest "r"s I've ever heard... it's pronounced way in the back of the mouth, and "rrrrr" sort of sounds like you're trying to gargle. She might do the Heimlich on you if you say "courrrriellll." :)
No, you only need special firmware on the card if you want the computer's firmware to be able to talk to the card. Modern OSes use the firmware for very little, or they don't use it at all. For example, on a PC, you can disable a hard drive in the BIOS, but Linux will still be able to access it (assuming it's not your boot drive). Linux accesses the drive controller directly; it doesn't use the BIOS.
So, you'll only need a special NIC if you want to netboot with that NIC. And you'll only need a special graphics card if you want to see the boot process on that card (you can use a serial console if you don't... at least these machies had better support serial console).
5: What about power consumption issues? Last I've seen the G5's, they gobbled power faster than an overclocked Athlon.
When did you last see a G5? A 1.8GHz PPC970 uses about 42W, while an Athlon XP 2500+ (1.833GHz) draws around 54W. I don't know how fast an overclocked Athlon would gobble power, but I'll note that the max power consumption of a non-overclocked Athlon 3200+ (2.2GHz) is 77W.
Indeed, this is precisely the reason I use a Mac. It's a very attractive tangerine colour.
Well then, I'll note that I recently installed RedHat 9 on a machine with two NICs, an Intel PRO 100S and some Accton. Only the Intel NIC was detected--no sign of the Accton except for a brief mention in /proc/pci. Eventually, I found out that I was supposed to use the 8139too module. That module is included with RH9, so why wasn't the card detected automatically?
Depends on what you mean by "un-breathable." It's unbreathable in the same way that nitrogen is unbreathable, but I've managed to survive for a few decades breathing approximately 80% nitrogen/20% oxygen.
this means that if someone is in the house when the system releases its gas, that that person/animal is dead. it starves the air of oxygen.
No, that's not true. As the OSHA says, "Not acutely toxic at <10% by volume" and "Generally used at <7% by volume." The National Fire Protection Association agrees, stating that a concentration of 5 percent Halon in air is sufficient for most flame extinguishment. It doesn't work by removing oxygen from the air--CO2 and nitrogen flood systems do that. It works by actively interfering with the chain reaction of a flame.
As the OSHA site mentions, there are some downsides... breathing 15% or so for a couple of minutes might cause some irregular heartbeats in some people. Also, Halon decomposes into hydrofluoric acid and hydrobromic acid when it's exposed to fire. But then again, it'll put out the fire almost instantly (halon will even stop an explosion in progress)--the minute quantities of HF and HBr are much better than the large quantities of other toxic gasses that burning things put out.
But the bottom line is that no, you won't die if the Halon system goes off in a room you're in. I've heard that when Halon was first introduced, they'd demo it by putting a guy in a closed room and have him light a cigarette and candle, then dump in the Halon. The cigarette and candle would go out, and the guy would be in there with no ill effects.
There is no doubt that Halon does replace oxygen to some degree and therefore does present a potential danger of asphyxia.
A 7% concentration of Halon 1301 will put out a fire... that leaves plenty of oxygen for breathing. Sure, you'll have problems if you flood the room with the 50% or so that an inert gas like CO2 requires (up to 75% CO2 for dust fires), but Halon is/was expensive--there's no point in releasing that much Halon.
Halon is banned due to it being an ozone-depleting fluorocarbon, not due to it being a health hazard. BTW, Halon 1301 means 1 Carbon, 3 Fluorine, 0 Chlorine, 1 Bromine--CF3Br.
Have you tried View -> Message Body As -> Plain Text?
Well, not completely useless, although certainly much weaker than a signature. While having a checksum only on mozilla.org would be useless against this type of attack, checksums tend to get mirrored in various places--an attacker would potentially have to modify the checksum on tens/hundreds/thousands of machines. For example, that's how the OpenSSH trojan was noticed (within a few hours of the files being tampered with); the FreeBSD ports system keeps a checksum of the distribution file for this exact reason, as does NetBSD's pkgsrc.
But yes, a real digital signature would be so much better...
FWIW, this torrent is probably fine--it's identical to the one on www.mozilla.org. Checksums are:
MD5(mozilla-win32-1.4-installer.exe)= 28cb37dfe56476fe0c5a74689cdc0063
SHA1(mozilla-win32-1.4-installer.exe)= c46336c7ceeeaa349f2546c1009f53271b186213
But you shouldn't take my word for it... Mozilla should be providing checksums; their distribution build instructions even recommend making a MD5SUM file.
I thought the Raging Homosexuals were San Francisco's football team?
My advice is to stick to using 9.1 on your 8600. And don't generalize about BSD from your situation; it's an extreme.
It's a search-and-replace of an ancient troll--the original was about classic MacOS; it's been reposted as about MacOS X, and now as about BSD.
In general, keep in mind that stories in the BSD and Apple sections will always have these stock trolls (e.g., "BSD is dying," "Elegy for BSD," "Developer Laments," "Dear Apple," "Dear Fr. O'Day," etc...).
with much gayness,
Dahan, C.S.B.
Too bad TTR didn't give credit. (k5 article posted Thu Jun 19th, 2003 at 07:41:20 PM EST, which is 2003-06-20 00:41:20 GMT. The Register article was posted a few hours earlier, 2003-06-19 21:55 GMT).