Put it this way, if a neighbour (who you hate and who hates you) down the street rigs up a gun in their yard and says it's a defense system against you, then sure it's a defense system against you.
But if that neighbour puts the gun in the yard of your next door neighbour, then while it might still be a "defense system against you" and still not quite "gun to your head" "defense", it doesn't quite give you the same warm fuzzy feeling of "defense against you", hope you know what I mean;).
In other words it sure seems the US likes to do defense in an offensive manner.
Then look at some posters here saying the Mig 25 sucks because it has short range. While that "short range" might make it hard for a country like the USA to attack another country (naturally to defend itself from that evil country), that's not such a big problem if you're only using it to intercept stuff that's entered YOUR country.
Same for the big bomb - sure it's useless in destroying fortified stuff. But in your territory the fortified buildings are mostly yours, and the bomb sure works fine on "trespassers" (troops, supply vehicles, relatively lightly fortified camps).
Same for nukes that can't destroy hardened targets. Yes they're useless for a first strike, but if you have enough of them, maybe the USA won't do that first strike on you (or at least you can have bitter revenge).
A lot of that "crappy" russian stuff isn't so bad if you mainly have defense in mind.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think the Russians are good guys (hah!), but at least they rarely go around pretending or believing they are.
So maybe it is true the Russians are more interested in _DEFENDING_ themselves from the pesky USA who apparently have lots more stuff that's designed to hit protected positions aka OFFENSIVE weapons?
Not saying the russkies are good guys (they aren't), but the US does go around attacking or messing up other countries every now and then, sometimes for no good reasons.
If you look at a lot of the russian military stuff with defense in mind, its not so useless. Maybe their nukes are not good enough to disable the USA's hardened nuke silos, and maybe they can't find and kill the US submarines, but they sure might be enough to discourage the US from attacking them - MAD and all that.
Not like the USSR in the old days was going to tell everyone "our stuff is not as good", nor was it in the interest of the US Gov and Military to downplay the threat of the Evil Russians.
The US definitely does have greater military offensive ability, but we shouldn't assume that military stuff is all about attacking other countries. Sometimes it might actually be for defense.
Maybe the rest of the world might feel a bit more comfortable if the US stopped giving us the impression that they usually see things in terms of "_attacking_ others" (in order to defend the USA from the Axis of Evil of course...).
p.s. The popular "War on X" attitude doesn't help either, seems to be contagious too;).
I do write some music, but I suck and can't _play_ well, plus I'm too lazy to do a "wall/layers of sound" thing on it.
So if someone takes it, and makes it much better, then hey that's a good thing to everyone else.
The world would be a worse place if we were all stuck with halfbaked crappy stuff just because to improve on them would still infringe on some copyright/patent/etc.
Sure in theory you could license stuff, but in practice you often don't even know who to license it from till 5 years later Mr Submarine Patent hits you for X million, plus the equiv of 2+2=4 is pretty stupid thing to have to license.
You're right to reject those- if they can't read and understand what "Python required" means, then they are unlikely to understand important stuff.
However you'd miss out many of those who actually understand - they just wouldn't bother applying.
Maybe if you put sufficiently complex pseudo code in another job posting, you'd weed out the crap and still get the decent ones that'll skip "python required".
Yeah give the gnu hurd a bit more time and it will replace the pesky Linux kernel. It's only been 13 years after all. Maybe it'll be ready by 2038.
Honestly, I'd be happier if we had something better than the Linux kernel.
As it is, thanks for the free software and license stuff RMS, too bad if we're not using it the way you want.
IMO, all that GPL3 stuff isn't going to save you if the courts start treating EULAs like they're worth something and also allow software/stupid patents (means the courts and laws are broken).
FWIW, I think license keys are fine. But phoning home is not a good idea.
If you can link a license key to a mailing address or email address then that's good (could be yahoo mail doesn't matter - it's a matter of getting some stats).
If you're planning to have future versions of your software then you might as well decide on how upgrades and patching is to be done - key upgrades, discounts etc:).
Unless you're one of the rich and powerful, in most countries including democracies you'd end up getting similar to what the common man gets too.
So if you're not in that "club", it is probably in your interest to make sure that the common man gets a better deal than they would get, left to the likes of Microsoft, Fox News, *AA, Sony, Hollywood, MTV, Monsanto etc.
If you're in that "club", then I'm not surprised you'd feel that way about the "common man", or for that matter everyone else you no longer need[1].
[1] A good measure of a person is how well he or she treats people they don't have to be nice to. I fail pretty badly but at least I know that:).
Next it's going to be illegal to take toilet breaks during TV ads?
And we're all going to have our eyelids forced open and forced to stare at ads when browsing the internet, otherwise it's stealing?
If the ads are really good I might actually tell others about it. e.g. the "will it blend" videos - they're ads, but many of them are fun to watch.
I also wonder how many extra Diet Cokes and mentos were sold because of people watching Fritz Grobe and Stephen Voltz's video and then going off to try a few experiments themselves.
Maybe that weed is much better than whatever you're doing, but oil palms produce 500 gallons per acre. And at least you can choose whether you want to eat the oil or burn it (or eat it then burn it after).
The weed's probably ok for places where you can't grow other stuff.
The algae stuff sounds promising - some figures say a _magnitude_ better than oil palm.
That's a pretty crappy debunking if you call that debunking.
I can come up with my bullshit too: 1) It's English - understanding english requires your brain to be used to parsing weirdness anyway - if you get a few words your brain fills in the rest. 2) Most people can't spell or write English properly so you are probably used to reading the various combinations of typos/scrambling, filling in the missing words, removing dupes or fixing other brokenness near automatically.
I did this for Jon Katz. I think more than a few slashdotters did the same thing too.
As long as kdawson's signal to noise ratio remains tolerable to me I won't be doing that to kdawson.
After all, I think kdawson's story which showed that Miguel de Icaza thought "OOXML is a superb standard" was desirable - lot of people think Miguel is doing the right thing for OSS (heh including Microsoft in a way I suppose;) ).
If you think that kdawson's stories are mostly fluff you can just uncheck that box, if enough people do that, he might go the way of Jon Katz - after all they're not going to pay him to post stories that nobody will see:).
Well thing is, if you wrote stuff that worked right in the first place, bosses don't seem to appreciate it. Not like they'd give you a big raise.
After all you're not working hard like the rest fixing bugs, spending hours to add new features etc. You're also not filling out your timesheet with huge amounts of activity.
And most bosses certainly don't appreciate the "rather long period" when you're just sitting around thinking about it, or vainly trying to given the typical cubicle in a noisy environment.
Lastly, what are the odds that they'd even notice they didn't need to hire Mr Consultant to rewrite the code that was written right?;)
Actually this doesn't mean you should panic and start using difficult passwords for windows.
This just means you shouldn't use the same passwords for windows as you do for other stuff.
If someone can successfully run 0phcrack on your system (or its lanman hashes) it means they're already in, and they probably already have access to the data they want (can install rootkits, keyloggers etc).
It's laughable to think someone is going to physically bring it to your machine and _bother_ using it without your cooperation. Might as well just boot the "Offline NT Password & Registry Editor" disk.
If the "rules" are no reboot then it's far easier to plug in a USB or firewire device and instantly take over your system.
A cleaner could also stick in a hardware keylogger whilst being so nice as to clean the crud from your keyboard.
Being worried about this is like being worried that someone in your house could take photos of your keys, and make duplicates.
On that subject, if a real snoop is targeting you, with all those high res cameras available, they could in theory take pictures of your keys when they are visible e.g. just before you use them (or if you dangle them about somewhere, on your person, or even in the house but visible from outside) and then get in later with no fuss - no need for the lockpick crap or even bumpkey stuff (bumpkeys don't work with certain sort of locks).
Heh probably a coincidence resulting from him being put back into his cage but I found this bit funny:
ALAN ALDA: (Narration) Through that language he shows a grasp of abstract concepts like sameness, or the idea of combining qualities. But the big question for researchers is, do animals think conceptually without the help of human-taught languages?
ALEX: I'm sorry. You're a good boy.
ALAN ALDA: (Narration) That's what we'll explore next.
Assuming the translation is correct, Karl Marx wrote this:
"The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win."
While I am indeed an idiot, I can still read and understand what "forcible overthrow" means and implies (especially given the context). "gewaltsamen Umsturz" = Revolution by force.
My claim still stands - a "Communist Revolution" is one of the best ways to create a dictatorship.
India is still a democracy (they don't use Diebold voting machines the last I checked), so they can and should still fix things in nonviolent ways. The many communists in India might prefer the Marx approach but if they choose that they're being ignorant or evil.
Still, it's good to know you're no longer falling for it. Hope that makes you less likely to click on other dubious links as well.
One of my colleague's sending dubious links in his skype today, and the other day I got IM'ed a message that said to the effect that the person's mom died in a car crash and linked to the pictures.
Another thing you might want to watch out for - stuff like tinyurl. You can turn on the "preview" feature in tinyurl, but I wouldn't assume that'll always work - after all it could be tinyur1.com instead of tinyurl.com;).
Usually when a government gets violently overthrown, what replaces it is a Dictatorship that's willing and capable of the most violence.
Violent revolutions should only be reserved for "last resort" - there absolutely is no other choice[1]. Given that India is a democracy, they have a choice, and if you don't like the candidates, get others to stand for election then.
That's why Karl Marx was either an idiot or an evil person because he recommended violence as normal standard procedure.
[1] Even if you're already stuck in a dictatorship, sometimes it's just better to wait till the next generation takes over. See China - things actually got better and most steps after Mao's time, whereas if you had another violent revolution, you'd probably get another Mao in charge.
Violent revolutions are like playing russian roulette with 5 out of 6 bullets loaded in your revolver. You're hoping you get a benevolent dictator who'd set things up properly then peacefully and orderly hand over power to the citizens. This does happen sometimes, but never bet on it.
Would you give up 1 billion dollars if you found it in your bank account due to someone _else_ doing illegal stuff AND you know you can get away with it due to some loophole? There are a few people who'd say "sure, because it is just wrong to keep it". The Dictators you'd want are an even smaller _subset_ of those people (you need them to be competent dictators as well;) ).
"In practicality, that's impossible. Nobody is just going to turn off all of the lights in their cities."
Wasn't there a blackout not so long ago?:).
People like bright lights.
It's just too hard to give everyone wide-angle view full-colour night vision goggles + info overlay (for "fake billboards" of your choice), and then light the cities with star light, or minimal lighting. Even though that would probably save a fair bit of energy.
The goggles will hide your face and cramp your "style" if you have any.
All that SSE-bazillion stuff is nice but how about:
A better timekeeping feature than TSC and HPET. TSC isn't necessarily synced between cores, and HPET isn't fast enough or ubiquitous enough (it needs to be on a mandatory chip).
And also stuff that'll help make-
synchronization easier (and across cluster nodes too)- mutex, locks, semaphores etc
doing things atomically easier.
Things like epoll/select more efficient (or allow the creation of something even better?).
"Wait for Event" easier/more efficient - maybe something like "When memory location A changes to hold the value V, raise interrupt and set a register X to value F". Doesn't look scalable though so hopefully someone smarter can solve that (make it hierachical?). Maybe it won't help much?
It would also be good to have a separate stack for data/parameters from that used for return addresses, currently it seems common practice to mix return addresses and parameters in the same stack which is "bad hygiene" (poorer security). I'm also guessing that not mixing the stacks could make it easier to do branch prediction.
Or just ignore me and talk to people who'd know what hardware features would make O/Ss, clustering, databases more efficient (and safer).
Slashdot Mirror
Put it this way, if a neighbour (who you hate and who hates you) down the street rigs up a gun in their yard and says it's a defense system against you, then sure it's a defense system against you.
;).
But if that neighbour puts the gun in the yard of your next door neighbour, then while it might still be a "defense system against you" and still not quite "gun to your head" "defense", it doesn't quite give you the same warm fuzzy feeling of "defense against you", hope you know what I mean
In other words it sure seems the US likes to do defense in an offensive manner.
Then look at some posters here saying the Mig 25 sucks because it has short range. While that "short range" might make it hard for a country like the USA to attack another country (naturally to defend itself from that evil country), that's not such a big problem if you're only using it to intercept stuff that's entered YOUR country.
Same for the big bomb - sure it's useless in destroying fortified stuff. But in your territory the fortified buildings are mostly yours, and the bomb sure works fine on "trespassers" (troops, supply vehicles, relatively lightly fortified camps).
Same for nukes that can't destroy hardened targets. Yes they're useless for a first strike, but if you have enough of them, maybe the USA won't do that first strike on you (or at least you can have bitter revenge).
A lot of that "crappy" russian stuff isn't so bad if you mainly have defense in mind.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think the Russians are good guys (hah!), but at least they rarely go around pretending or believing they are.
So maybe it is true the Russians are more interested in _DEFENDING_ themselves from the pesky USA who apparently have lots more stuff that's designed to hit protected positions aka OFFENSIVE weapons?
;).
Not saying the russkies are good guys (they aren't), but the US does go around attacking or messing up other countries every now and then, sometimes for no good reasons.
If you look at a lot of the russian military stuff with defense in mind, its not so useless. Maybe their nukes are not good enough to disable the USA's hardened nuke silos, and maybe they can't find and kill the US submarines, but they sure might be enough to discourage the US from attacking them - MAD and all that.
Not like the USSR in the old days was going to tell everyone "our stuff is not as good", nor was it in the interest of the US Gov and Military to downplay the threat of the Evil Russians.
The US definitely does have greater military offensive ability, but we shouldn't assume that military stuff is all about attacking other countries. Sometimes it might actually be for defense.
Maybe the rest of the world might feel a bit more comfortable if the US stopped giving us the impression that they usually see things in terms of "_attacking_ others" (in order to defend the USA from the Axis of Evil of course...).
p.s. The popular "War on X" attitude doesn't help either, seems to be contagious too
I do write some music, but I suck and can't _play_ well, plus I'm too lazy to do a "wall/layers of sound" thing on it.
So if someone takes it, and makes it much better, then hey that's a good thing to everyone else.
The world would be a worse place if we were all stuck with halfbaked crappy stuff just because to improve on them would still infringe on some copyright/patent/etc.
Sure in theory you could license stuff, but in practice you often don't even know who to license it from till 5 years later Mr Submarine Patent hits you for X million, plus the equiv of 2+2=4 is pretty stupid thing to have to license.
You're right to reject those- if they can't read and understand what "Python required" means, then they are unlikely to understand important stuff.
However you'd miss out many of those who actually understand - they just wouldn't bother applying.
Maybe if you put sufficiently complex pseudo code in another job posting, you'd weed out the crap and still get the decent ones that'll skip "python required".
Yeah give the gnu hurd a bit more time and it will replace the pesky Linux kernel. It's only been 13 years after all. Maybe it'll be ready by 2038.
Honestly, I'd be happier if we had something better than the Linux kernel.
As it is, thanks for the free software and license stuff RMS, too bad if we're not using it the way you want.
IMO, all that GPL3 stuff isn't going to save you if the courts start treating EULAs like they're worth something and also allow software/stupid patents (means the courts and laws are broken).
As you would have them do unto you.
:).
FWIW, I think license keys are fine. But phoning home is not a good idea.
If you can link a license key to a mailing address or email address then that's good (could be yahoo mail doesn't matter - it's a matter of getting some stats).
If you're planning to have future versions of your software then you might as well decide on how upgrades and patching is to be done - key upgrades, discounts etc
If it's a delay line what happens when the power is switched off?
With a normal hard drive, the data on the platter persists, and if you switch it back on the platter respins again and the data can be read again.
Unless you're one of the rich and powerful, in most countries including democracies you'd end up getting similar to what the common man gets too.
:).
So if you're not in that "club", it is probably in your interest to make sure that the common man gets a better deal than they would get, left to the likes of Microsoft, Fox News, *AA, Sony, Hollywood, MTV, Monsanto etc.
If you're in that "club", then I'm not surprised you'd feel that way about the "common man", or for that matter everyone else you no longer need[1].
[1] A good measure of a person is how well he or she treats people they don't have to be nice to. I fail pretty badly but at least I know that
Next it's going to be illegal to take toilet breaks during TV ads?
And we're all going to have our eyelids forced open and forced to stare at ads when browsing the internet, otherwise it's stealing?
If the ads are really good I might actually tell others about it. e.g. the "will it blend" videos - they're ads, but many of them are fun to watch.
I also wonder how many extra Diet Cokes and mentos were sold because of people watching Fritz Grobe and Stephen Voltz's video and then going off to try a few experiments themselves.
The gummint is wasting magnitudes more of your tax money in other things, and it can't even afford decent electronic voting systems...
Somehow it still got voted in twice (or was that "voted" in?).
Makes me wonder who are the ones on drugs.
Maybe that weed is much better than whatever you're doing, but oil palms produce 500 gallons per acre. And at least you can choose whether you want to eat the oil or burn it (or eat it then burn it after).
The weed's probably ok for places where you can't grow other stuff.
The algae stuff sounds promising - some figures say a _magnitude_ better than oil palm.
That's a pretty crappy debunking if you call that debunking.
I can come up with my bullshit too:
1) It's English - understanding english requires your brain to be used to parsing weirdness anyway - if you get a few words your brain fills in the rest.
2) Most people can't spell or write English properly so you are probably used to reading the various combinations of typos/scrambling, filling in the missing words, removing dupes or fixing other brokenness near automatically.
smoe srlbceams anret splime to usrantnedd.
How can anyone praise a standard like OOXML?
It's like praising a book on recipes with instructions that go:
'Bake the cake just like Aunt "Word 95" Marge used to do it', but doesn't actually tell you how.
It's ok if the recipe is just a single joke the editors allowed through to amuse the readers.
But if MANY of the recipes are like that, it's not a "superb" recipe book, it's not even a recipe book.
OOXML is not a "superb standard", whether it is even a standard at all could be debated.
If any HTML/HTTP/SSL standard/RFC said stuff like - do this the way Netscape 1.0 does it AND doesn't say how, then it should be treated with contempt.
Anyone who _honestly_ thinks OOXML is a good standard is stupid/ignorant.
Anyone who doesn't think it is good but claims it is good is being evil.
If you don't want any stories from kdawson just go to:
;) ).
:).
http://slashdot.org/users.pl?op=edithome
And uncheck kdawson.
I did this for Jon Katz. I think more than a few slashdotters did the same thing too.
As long as kdawson's signal to noise ratio remains tolerable to me I won't be doing that to kdawson.
After all, I think kdawson's story which showed that Miguel de Icaza thought "OOXML is a superb standard" was desirable - lot of people think Miguel is doing the right thing for OSS (heh including Microsoft in a way I suppose
If you think that kdawson's stories are mostly fluff you can just uncheck that box, if enough people do that, he might go the way of Jon Katz - after all they're not going to pay him to post stories that nobody will see
"Why didn't it work right in the first place?"
;)
Well thing is, if you wrote stuff that worked right in the first place, bosses don't seem to appreciate it. Not like they'd give you a big raise.
After all you're not working hard like the rest fixing bugs, spending hours to add new features etc. You're also not filling out your timesheet with huge amounts of activity.
And most bosses certainly don't appreciate the "rather long period" when you're just sitting around thinking about it, or vainly trying to given the typical cubicle in a noisy environment.
Lastly, what are the odds that they'd even notice they didn't need to hire Mr Consultant to rewrite the code that was written right?
Actually this doesn't mean you should panic and start using difficult passwords for windows.
This just means you shouldn't use the same passwords for windows as you do for other stuff.
If someone can successfully run 0phcrack on your system (or its lanman hashes) it means they're already in, and they probably already have access to the data they want (can install rootkits, keyloggers etc).
It's laughable to think someone is going to physically bring it to your machine and _bother_ using it without your cooperation. Might as well just boot the "Offline NT Password & Registry Editor" disk.
If the "rules" are no reboot then it's far easier to plug in a USB or firewire device and instantly take over your system.
A cleaner could also stick in a hardware keylogger whilst being so nice as to clean the crud from your keyboard.
Being worried about this is like being worried that someone in your house could take photos of your keys, and make duplicates.
On that subject, if a real snoop is targeting you, with all those high res cameras available, they could in theory take pictures of your keys when they are visible e.g. just before you use them (or if you dangle them about somewhere, on your person, or even in the house but visible from outside) and then get in later with no fuss - no need for the lockpick crap or even bumpkey stuff (bumpkeys don't work with certain sort of locks).
Burglars will just break in.
Why not? Some seem to be fond of the following technologies:
1) "Lie detectors"
2) fingerprints
Heh probably a coincidence resulting from him being put back into his cage but I found this bit funny:
h tm#4
ALAN ALDA: (Narration) Through that language he shows a grasp of abstract concepts like sameness, or the idea of combining qualities. But the big question for researchers is, do animals think conceptually without the help of human-taught languages?
ALEX: I'm sorry. You're a good boy.
ALAN ALDA: (Narration) That's what we'll explore next.
ALEX: I love you.
From the bit just above: http://www.pbs.org/saf/transcripts/transcript903.
Assuming the translation is correct, Karl Marx wrote this:
"The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by
the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win."
While I am indeed an idiot, I can still read and understand what "forcible overthrow" means and implies (especially given the context).
"gewaltsamen Umsturz" = Revolution by force.
My claim still stands - a "Communist Revolution" is one of the best ways to create a dictatorship.
India is still a democracy (they don't use Diebold voting machines the last I checked), so they can and should still fix things in nonviolent ways. The many communists in India might prefer the Marx approach but if they choose that they're being ignorant or evil.
I'm saying people should not seek or condone violent revolution when there are other options.
Death is inevitable. But that does not mean we should choose options that would reduce the average lifespans AND not improve living conditions either.
Sorry bout that.
;).
Still, it's good to know you're no longer falling for it. Hope that makes you less likely to click on other dubious links as well.
One of my colleague's sending dubious links in his skype today, and the other day I got IM'ed a message that said to the effect that the person's mom died in a car crash and linked to the pictures.
Another thing you might want to watch out for - stuff like tinyurl. You can turn on the "preview" feature in tinyurl, but I wouldn't assume that'll always work - after all it could be tinyur1.com instead of tinyurl.com
Usually when a government gets violently overthrown, what replaces it is a Dictatorship that's willing and capable of the most violence.
;) ).
Violent revolutions should only be reserved for "last resort" - there absolutely is no other choice[1]. Given that India is a democracy, they have a choice, and if you don't like the candidates, get others to stand for election then.
That's why Karl Marx was either an idiot or an evil person because he recommended violence as normal standard procedure.
[1] Even if you're already stuck in a dictatorship, sometimes it's just better to wait till the next generation takes over. See China - things actually got better and most steps after Mao's time, whereas if you had another violent revolution, you'd probably get another Mao in charge.
Violent revolutions are like playing russian roulette with 5 out of 6 bullets loaded in your revolver. You're hoping you get a benevolent dictator who'd set things up properly then peacefully and orderly hand over power to the citizens. This does happen sometimes, but never bet on it.
Would you give up 1 billion dollars if you found it in your bank account due to someone _else_ doing illegal stuff AND you know you can get away with it due to some loophole? There are a few people who'd say "sure, because it is just wrong to keep it". The Dictators you'd want are an even smaller _subset_ of those people (you need them to be competent dictators as well
Maybe they stopped using crystals and are just using capacitors.
Or they just don't bother to calibrate/adjust the crystals.
"In practicality, that's impossible. Nobody is just going to turn off all of the lights in their cities."
:).
Wasn't there a blackout not so long ago?
People like bright lights.
It's just too hard to give everyone wide-angle view full-colour night vision goggles + info overlay (for "fake billboards" of your choice), and then light the cities with star light, or minimal lighting. Even though that would probably save a fair bit of energy.
The goggles will hide your face and cramp your "style" if you have any.
All that SSE-bazillion stuff is nice but how about:
A better timekeeping feature than TSC and HPET. TSC isn't necessarily synced between cores, and HPET isn't fast enough or ubiquitous enough (it needs to be on a mandatory chip).
And also stuff that'll help make-
synchronization easier (and across cluster nodes too)- mutex, locks, semaphores etc
doing things atomically easier.
Things like epoll/select more efficient (or allow the creation of something even better?).
"Wait for Event" easier/more efficient - maybe something like "When memory location A changes to hold the value V, raise interrupt and set a register X to value F". Doesn't look scalable though so hopefully someone smarter can solve that (make it hierachical?). Maybe it won't help much?
It would also be good to have a separate stack for data/parameters from that used for return addresses, currently it seems common practice to mix return addresses and parameters in the same stack which is "bad hygiene" (poorer security). I'm also guessing that not mixing the stacks could make it easier to do branch prediction.
Or just ignore me and talk to people who'd know what hardware features would make O/Ss, clustering, databases more efficient (and safer).