Well, at least this is newer and less repetitive than the "BSD is dying" troll, but it's no more true. This guy is banking on current anti-conservative sentiment here, and most people's complete lack of knowledge of the bible. The bible speaks repeatedly about this issue. I don't know why people even keep trying to argue it.
When Microsoft does the same thing with IE/MSN, then it's called 'anticompetitive' and 'unfair'.
That's because when Microsoft does it, it IS anticompetitive and unfair. Microsoft always locks everything else out, except their own.
What Google is doing is inherently fair, because they aren't just playing favorites for one browser/search engine. Microsoft's browser could get in on this deal just as easily as Opera or Firefox, if they weren't so busy being anticompetitive and forcing their crappy search engine upon unsuspecting users;-).
Hence the huge difference... The difference between Microsoft being unfair and anticompetitive and Google being inherently fair and pro-competitive.
Heck, I'm almost ready to make the case in favor of MSN - at least if Yahoo goes down Google won't have a search monopoly.
MSN really sucks. Yahoo isn't so terrible, but they're still not very good. For Google's competition, I'd much prefer to have it be Clusty/Vivismo rather than anyone else. Nice side-effects: good search engine--not part of 800lb gorrilla monopolistic corporation.
Yes, and those embedded systems don't have multi-GB hard drives either, so they don't need as much CPU power to compute hashes on smaller files.
Wasting cycles uses extra electricity and generates extra heat.
The difference in electricity and heat output between MD5 and a newer hash is trivially small. Absolutely no-one will notice the difference. Just think about wasted CPU cycles to service the interrupts in comparison.
Hash functions that generate hight bit count output can waste network bandwidth.
Again, it's a trivially small difference, unless you're on a 2400baud connection.
It's more difficult to compare long hash output by eye.
I certainly don't agree with that. Comparing only 10 bytes of MD5 strings wouldn't be any better than comparing only 10 bytes of a Tiger hash. etc.
Use the right tool for the right job. In general, you'll be glad you did in the long run.
Using a slightly over-powered tool for the job (rather than one that is just barely adequate) works even better in the long-run.
I'd much rather have an interface that makes it easy to get things done, or an easy setup for my wireless network card, or any number of things other than utilizing hardware as efficiently as possible.
I've never heard anyone say they'd like Windows to be SLOWER before. The incredibly resource-hungry mess that is Windows is not just untuned, it seems to have numerous intentional slowdowns written-in.
You might say you don't care about speed, but I bet you Windows users upgrade your hardware several times more often than those of us using other OSes.
So something that has limits of the limitations that can be enforced is too restrictive? I think he has it backwards!
Complete bullshit. The GPL has several serious restrictions as to what you can do with the code and binaries. The fact that it prohibits certain restrictions does not eliminate the fact that it has numerous other restrictions.
But all that enables you to do is replace an MD5'd file with garbage that happens to have the same MD5 sum.
It's not nearly as scary as swaping one document for another, or one binary for another, but it's still quite useful.
Think of P2P networks. Gnutella uses SHA1 hashes to verify files, file mirrors, and the final downloaded file. If some RIAA employees could find the SHA1 hash of a very popular song, and generate junk with the same hash, they could have people downloading their junk (pardon the pun) and the P2P app wouldn't know it was corrupt, and wouldn't have any way to avoid the junk file.
This post is completely and very obviously wrong. The poster even came back and replied to say that he was wrong. Can someone please mod it down? and stop these moderators in M2, since they don't bother to even give a cursory check of the posts they are moderating? This is totally ridiculous./. moderation has been very obviously broken over the past few months. Taco! Do something!
It would be silly, stupid even, to use a larger hash that requires more (slower) computation in these situations.
Since hash functions are all equally IO-bound, and not processor-bound, I can't see any reason NOT TO upgrade to a more CPU-intensive hash function for everything. At least, not on a 4GHz PC where there's tons of CPU power to go around.
Thanks for the links. Nice manual units, but as you've said, they're much too expensive. The solar stills unfortunately need to be very large, don't produce much fresh water even in ideal conditions, and obviously won't operate at night, and don't work very well on overcast days.
You need to see how well Earl fared in mythbusters.
I haven't seen that one, and I certainly don't care to. The MythBusters have repeatedly shown themselves as completely and totally incompotent at proving or disproving ANYTHING.
Mobs don't stop to think, even if the front of the mob broke up and ran, the ones behind them still have to, and the people behind THOSE ones are pushing them forward because the people behind THEM are pushing....
That's really ridiculous. One shot-gun blast and everyone in the crowd would be running in on direction or another.
Even if they don't, it's not as if a shotgun is just a motivation device... It will kill or seriously injure a very large percentage of the crowd with just a few shots.
Individuals respect cop's authority. Even large crowds generally respect police. But an angry mob? No way would two smart cops do anything about that on their own beyond getting reenforcements.
How does 'respect' enter into it? I don't care if it's a 90lb homosexual transvestite dressed in a pink tutu that's pointing the shot-gun at me; I'm damn sure going to get the hell out of their way, and find cover.
the crowd will temporarily disperse, the police officers will get shot
That's why cops use their vehicles as cover. Nobody in the crowd is going to have something big enough to go through an engine block, and as soon as they unload a couple shots, they'll find themselves on the wrong end of said shotgun.
A hand-cranked device that could produce 3-5 days of food and water would probably be popular.
Most people can live for more than a month with no food. Those who are over-weight, even longer:-) If you want to stock-up on food, you should be doing it for the long-term, not just 5 days worth.
Water is critical, and it's very smart to have supplies of it, but you should be able to scrounge some up. Water heaters are a good source, several gallons of nice clean water, with a tap at the bottom.
IMHO, the biggest problem in a (short-term, 3-5 days) emergency is medicine. Most people don't seem to buy their critical medications more than a day ahead of when they will need it, and those that do may lose their entire medicine cabinet in the disaster.
Things like insulin are hard to keep in your emergency packs. It needs to be kept cold, and it's only good for a couple months after you get it. I really can't think of any ways to solve that kind of problem.
And BTW, I have been designing a hand-cranked device that produces water. I was thinking of it being stocked in life-boats, but in disasters it would be equally useful.
(I'm assuming that we don't want further compression because it degrades the image which looks like shit on a big screen TV)
Don't blame the problems you've had with some particular crappy codec on "compression" as a whole.
Using libavcodec, I can re-encode a DVD to MPEG-2 at 1/2 the size or sometimes less. With MPEG-4, halve that again (1/4 the size) but won't play on most DVD players. And that's all without artifacts, without quality degredation of any kind (even on a "big screen"). In fact, the copies usually look better than the original, thanks to very good noise reduction.
I must admit I find it both funny and sad that Hollywood will spend hundreds of millions of dollars making a movie, then use cheap-crap encoders to churn out a DVD that looks like badly scratched-up film with compression artifacts. Everything from "Gettysburg" to Terminator 2: Ultra Super Duper Mega Edition (For Real This Time)".
Well- Dow management and shareholders didn't seem to have much trouble sleeping at night after buying Union Carbide for a song
Why should they? Perhaps they bought Union Carbide with the specific intention of FIXING the company... Making it safer, cleaner, etc. I don't know if that is the case, but that senario happens all the time.
When you buy a piece of land in the USA, do you have much trouble sleeping at night, knowing you got that land through the mass murder of millions upon millions of Native Americans?
I would if I could find some. Buying online doesn't work well for large heavy items, and the big stores that sell monitors are all aspiring to have as little quality as possible, ala Walmart.
I've never seen a blacklist where the false-positive rate was acceptably low and the filtering on hard spam was usefully high, but I'd love to find out I was wrong about that too. What are you using?
Those lists cover the majority of the spam I recieve.
Re:Exactly what *is* the Dell aversion to AMD?
on
Dell Dumping Itanium
·
· Score: 1
Every time, the answer has been that AMD can't provide chips fast enough to make them viable for distribution. Basically, they don't feel like they'd be able to meet demand,
Dell seems to be quite good convincing people that this is true, but it's certainly not.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, at least this is newer and less repetitive than the "BSD is dying" troll, but it's no more true. This guy is banking on current anti-conservative sentiment here, and most people's complete lack of knowledge of the bible. The bible speaks repeatedly about this issue. I don't know why people even keep trying to argue it.
You make it sound as if that's difficult. A quick Google search turns up plenty:
http://www.democrats.com/impeachment-reasons
http://www.impeachnow.org/pages/grounds.html
http://www.thefourreasons.org/
http://www.impeachbush.tv/impeach/grounds.html
http://zzpat.bravehost.com/category/impeachable_o
No, not just Bush. But Bush has been, BY FAR the biggest abuser of executive powers we've ever seen.
Uhh, what? I'm using Firefox on FreeBSD right now, and it's been the most stable browser I've ever used on any platform.
That's because when Microsoft does it, it IS anticompetitive and unfair. Microsoft always locks everything else out, except their own.
What Google is doing is inherently fair, because they aren't just playing favorites for one browser/search engine. Microsoft's browser could get in on this deal just as easily as Opera or Firefox, if they weren't so busy being anticompetitive and forcing their crappy search engine upon unsuspecting users
Hence the huge difference... The difference between Microsoft being unfair and anticompetitive and Google being inherently fair and pro-competitive.
MSN really sucks. Yahoo isn't so terrible, but they're still not very good. For Google's competition, I'd much prefer to have it be Clusty/Vivismo rather than anyone else. Nice side-effects: good search engine--not part of 800lb gorrilla monopolistic corporation.
Yes, and those embedded systems don't have multi-GB hard drives either, so they don't need as much CPU power to compute hashes on smaller files.
The difference in electricity and heat output between MD5 and a newer hash is trivially small. Absolutely no-one will notice the difference. Just think about wasted CPU cycles to service the interrupts in comparison.
Again, it's a trivially small difference, unless you're on a 2400baud connection.
I certainly don't agree with that. Comparing only 10 bytes of MD5 strings wouldn't be any better than comparing only 10 bytes of a Tiger hash. etc.
Using a slightly over-powered tool for the job (rather than one that is just barely adequate) works even better in the long-run.
I've never heard anyone say they'd like Windows to be SLOWER before. The incredibly resource-hungry mess that is Windows is not just untuned, it seems to have numerous intentional slowdowns written-in.
You might say you don't care about speed, but I bet you Windows users upgrade your hardware several times more often than those of us using other OSes.
SCO is Microsoft's schill. I see no reason for people not to extend their hate of SCO directly to Microsoft. The money trail is clear.
Complete bullshit. The GPL has several serious restrictions as to what you can do with the code and binaries. The fact that it prohibits certain restrictions does not eliminate the fact that it has numerous other restrictions.
It's not nearly as scary as swaping one document for another, or one binary for another, but it's still quite useful.
Think of P2P networks. Gnutella uses SHA1 hashes to verify files, file mirrors, and the final downloaded file. If some RIAA employees could find the SHA1 hash of a very popular song, and generate junk with the same hash, they could have people downloading their junk (pardon the pun) and the P2P app wouldn't know it was corrupt, and wouldn't have any way to avoid the junk file.
This post is completely and very obviously wrong. The poster even came back and replied to say that he was wrong. Can someone please mod it down? and stop these moderators in M2, since they don't bother to even give a cursory check of the posts they are moderating? This is totally ridiculous. /. moderation has been very obviously broken over the past few months. Taco! Do something!
It's not the file itself that is the problem, it's the software that handles the files. RPM is crap.
Since hash functions are all equally IO-bound, and not processor-bound, I can't see any reason NOT TO upgrade to a more CPU-intensive hash function for everything. At least, not on a 4GHz PC where there's tons of CPU power to go around.
Can you?
Thanks for the links. Nice manual units, but as you've said, they're much too expensive. The solar stills unfortunately need to be very large, don't produce much fresh water even in ideal conditions, and obviously won't operate at night, and don't work very well on overcast days.
I haven't seen that one, and I certainly don't care to. The MythBusters have repeatedly shown themselves as completely and totally incompotent at proving or disproving ANYTHING.
That's really ridiculous. One shot-gun blast and everyone in the crowd would be running in on direction or another.
Even if they don't, it's not as if a shotgun is just a motivation device... It will kill or seriously injure a very large percentage of the crowd with just a few shots.
You should tell that to the cops. I'm sure they'd be quite surprised.
Or better yet, just watch some footage of the Bank of America shoot-out.
How does 'respect' enter into it? I don't care if it's a 90lb homosexual transvestite dressed in a pink tutu that's pointing the shot-gun at me; I'm damn sure going to get the hell out of their way, and find cover.
That's why cops use their vehicles as cover. Nobody in the crowd is going to have something big enough to go through an engine block, and as soon as they unload a couple shots, they'll find themselves on the wrong end of said shotgun.
Most people can live for more than a month with no food. Those who are over-weight, even longer
Water is critical, and it's very smart to have supplies of it, but you should be able to scrounge some up. Water heaters are a good source, several gallons of nice clean water, with a tap at the bottom.
IMHO, the biggest problem in a (short-term, 3-5 days) emergency is medicine. Most people don't seem to buy their critical medications more than a day ahead of when they will need it, and those that do may lose their entire medicine cabinet in the disaster.
Things like insulin are hard to keep in your emergency packs. It needs to be kept cold, and it's only good for a couple months after you get it. I really can't think of any ways to solve that kind of problem.
And BTW, I have been designing a hand-cranked device that produces water. I was thinking of it being stocked in life-boats, but in disasters it would be equally useful.
Don't blame the problems you've had with some particular crappy codec on "compression" as a whole.
Using libavcodec, I can re-encode a DVD to MPEG-2 at 1/2 the size or sometimes less. With MPEG-4, halve that again (1/4 the size) but won't play on most DVD players. And that's all without artifacts, without quality degredation of any kind (even on a "big screen"). In fact, the copies usually look better than the original, thanks to very good noise reduction.
I must admit I find it both funny and sad that Hollywood will spend hundreds of millions of dollars making a movie, then use cheap-crap encoders to churn out a DVD that looks like badly scratched-up film with compression artifacts. Everything from "Gettysburg" to Terminator 2: Ultra Super Duper Mega Edition (For Real This Time)".
Why should they? Perhaps they bought Union Carbide with the specific intention of FIXING the company... Making it safer, cleaner, etc. I don't know if that is the case, but that senario happens all the time.
When you buy a piece of land in the USA, do you have much trouble sleeping at night, knowing you got that land through the mass murder of millions upon millions of Native Americans?
I would if I could find some. Buying online doesn't work well for large heavy items, and the big stores that sell monitors are all aspiring to have as little quality as possible, ala Walmart.
bl.spamcop.net
cn.rbl.cluecentral.net
korea.services.net
sbl.spamhaus.org
l1.spews.dnsbl.sorbs.net
Those lists cover the majority of the spam I recieve.
Dell seems to be quite good convincing people that this is true, but it's certainly not.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=158117&cid=13