Note that if the identifier is a restricted word or contains special characters you must always quote it with a ` (backtick) when you use it:
mysql> SELECT * FROM `select` WHERE `select`.id > 100;
In a situation where you are unsure if a identifier will be a reserved word, backticks will provide a measure of safety -- and will prevent problems in the future.
Tisk tisk tisk... its perfectly valid SQL. Backticks around field names are used to denote them from reserved words. `desc` referrs to a field. desc referrs to a method of sorting.
how many Laptop Harddisks have been damaged due this very specific problem of the head not being parked(?).during a deacceleration. Does it add any mechanical stability to the harddisk ? What if the hard disk breaks in two pieces ?
A good deal more than you would think. Ever have a bad sector on your hard drive? Ever know about bad sectors on your hard drive? Those are two very different questions.
Modern hard drives have extra space available on them reserved for remapping sectors that fail. The drive can detect these failing as the voltages from the heads fall when reading data. At the first sign of this, the drive logic reads the data, moves it off to a reserved sector, maps it internaly, and goes on about its business. Now, there are a few things that can cause this.
First off, there is straight manufacturing errors. Less common than they used to be (hdd's used to come with tables of bad sectors printed on thier label) but they do happen.
Now, they can also occour when a read head is literaly floating microns above a spinning platter revolving at around 3000 rpm's. Whack that drive with a hammer and the head could contact the media, effectively scratching the disk. Depending on the severity there may be no damage, a bad sector could begin to form, the head could be damaged, or the drive could be shattered to bits.
Moving the head off the platter (or towards the center depending on thier parking mechanics) will almost eliminate problems resulting from the head contacting the media.
Now, parking the head will not add any stability to the drive, but it will greatly increase the g's a drive can experience before being damaged.
If your disk breaks into two pieces, you are going to need to call these people.
Well, first they aren't claiming 3B in lost sales. They are claiming 1B in damages, which in federal court automaticaly gets trippled to 3B.
Damages are not only lost past and future sales, but can include loss of reputation (ha!), contractural damages, hair loss, and basically anything you care to include.
That said, I doubt the SCO execs know how many 0's there are in a billion.
"By so strongly defending the controversial GPL, IBM is also defending a questionable licensing scheme through which it can avoid providing software indemnification for its customers. We continue to urge IBM to provide legal indemnification for its Linux customers"
SCO has been shouting that since the beginning. My bet is they have a legal DDOS already planned to sue every single one of IBM's customers. By IBM providing indeminification, they would be swamped responding to the individual claims. It may be hard to take out a 800lb gorilla with a slingshot, but half a million mosquitoes will suck one dry.
Meanwhile, it does not look like SCO's case against IBM is likely to be settled any time soon. SCO has also filed a motion with the court in Utah asking for more time - until February 4, 2004 - to amend its pleadings and add parties. The case is not expected to go to trial until 2005.
I remember an article or discussion in the last week about Darl getting a bonus and the freedom to cash out more stock once SCO has 4 consecutive profitable quarters. Febuary 4th would round this out nicely. Then Darl is free to jump ship and watch it burn. I'm sure someone will post the link below:)
Actually, I'm guessing that there will have to be side fins for this type of stacking. The spreader between the cpu's will take the heat to the sides, where heat sinks & fans will assist in the eventual heat death of the universe.
Cooling ability is roughly proportional to surface area, and two stacked chips will make twice as much heat but have almost the same surface area as only one (as two sides cancel out). This has to be a problem.
From the article:
The processor we believe, sits in the LGA 775 pin socket, and above it is a very thin heatsink. But, according to sources close to the firm's plans, another permeable heatsink can sit between this and another microprocessor module, giving a stackable design.
There will be a heatsink inbetween the stacked processors, although it would be more properly named a heat spreader. They just call it permeable because it will have holes drilled into it so pins can attach to the lower processor.
I read through the rules just now.. I didn't notice anything saying publicaly available tools/converters/obfuscators weren't legal. Care to post the section that says that?
Success! Complaint Accepted. Thank you for your input.
First Name: Sean Last Name: Tobin Age Range: 20 - 29 Street Address: ********** City: Las Vegas State or Canadian Province: Nevada Country: UNITED STATES Zip Code or Postal Code: ***** E-Mail Address: ***** Home Phone: (702)******* Work Phone: (702)*******Ext. Subject of Your Complaint: Computers/Internet Services Name of Company You Are Complaining About: The SCO Group Street Address: 355 South 520 West
Suite 100 City: Lindon State or Canadian Province: Utah Country: UNITED STATES Zip Code or Postal Code: 84042 Company Web Site: www.sco.com Company E-Mail Address: kmartens@sco.com Phone Number: (801)7654999Ext. How Did the Company Initially Contact You?: Internet (Other) How Much Did the Company Ask You to Pay?: 898 How Much Did You Actually Pay the Company?: 0 How Did You Pay the Company?: Unknown Date Company Contacted You: 08/05/2003 (MM/DD/YYYY) Explain Your Problem: (Please limit your complaint to 2000 characters.): SCO has claimed that I owe them money because thier IP is in the linux kernel, which I use both at home and work. They will not state what exactly I owe them money for, citing pending lawsuits. They demanded that I license thier property from them (which they will not tell me exactly what I'm licensing) for 699 per CPU for business use (1) and 199 per CPU for home use (1) bringing my total bill to 898 to avoid a lawsuit from them. I have never purchased any products from SCO, nor do I have any business relationship with them.
This is a link from thier own website regarding the licensing: http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?Re leaseID=1155 27
a deliberate denial of service attack is illegal whether the victim is an innocent website or an evil spammer. There is no internet equivalent of lawful self defence.
Just do what the/\w{2}AA/i does - change the semantics. We aren't ddosing them, we are localy cacheing the website for future viewing.... And possibly checking for updates every 2 seconds (heck, even internet explorer can do that!)
Wireless networks have greater latencies than wired networks. Its just a fact. Windows NT (and various linux/bsd/other systems) is usually nice enough to automatically adjust the TCP recieve window size to your network latency. Sometimes it gets it right. Other times it gets it wrong.
For this to be a usefull test, you will need to at least publish what the window size was on each end. Also, making sure the immediate area was free of microwaves and blenders helps a bit.
Now, I fully believe that the test was accurate and that the speeds listed are a accurate representation of what an average 802.11g network will experience. But there are many things you can do to tweak your throughput much closer to the theoretical speed.
This will give them blanket immunity from all law suits related to the product.
No, it won't. It will give them blanket immunity assuming thier anti-terrorist watermellons or terror-proof mach-4 razors fail during a terrorist attack. They are still free to be sued for any non-terrorist applications failure. This is of course still America.
Sorry for any MS bashing later in this post, but thier marketing department is asking for it.
First off, lets talk hardware. I'm assuming here that both sets of hardware are going to be identical and normalized. By that I mean no paladium test beds, or winmodems, or other odd hw pieces that would skew things in one direction or another. Just some off the shelf dell's would be good. This is the easy part.
Next, on to the software. We have a company that doesn't know much about linux (I do mean as a company. I'm sure there are some very smart folks up there that know what they are doing. Its just in MS's best interests not to have them around the linux machines.) setting up a linux system. Heck, this sounds like it is just slightly more shady than an "independant testing" lab doing the comparision.
Now, software tuning. Somehow I doubt that the win2k installs are going to be stock. They will tune everything to get every last cycle they can out of it. Now, I wonder if they will do the same in the linux boxen? Heck, I'd put money on them actually slowing down thier benchmarks for thier tuning efforts.
The only set of benchmarks/comparisons I'd respect is a side by side setup. One side has MS's lackies fiddiling with thier server to tune the heck out of it. The other side would have the folks from MySQL*, Apache, RedHat*, and probably ESR for good luck. Then some independant testing machine connected to both doing the same task. (i.e. an actual demo transaction). Why hasn't anyone done something like that?
And tell ESR that hacking the Windows machine before they had a chance to patch it is no fair.
[*] Please substitute your favorite software package if you feel the need to do so.
My bet is that you can, but there is a very good reason for being cd only. Its much more difficult to screw up a os on a cd than it is to screw up an os on a hdd. When a 12 year old skript kiddie hax0rz your library machine and inverts the mouse buttons, the techno-challenged librarians just need to know how to hit the reset button. No worries about fscks/scandisks, or actually having to undo the switch.
Yes, the above can all be accomplished with some weird write protection on the hdd, but compare costs here. A cheap cdrom can cost under $20. Try and find a hdd in the same price bracket. Then add the cost of all the magic necessary to make it kiddie-proof*.
[*] does not include said kiddies removing cdrom and coating with strawberry jam. But that's what backups are for.
About 10 years ago a few companies experimented with wax based color 'laser' printers. I haven't seen any advertized in quite some time though. There might be one or two companies out there still doing them. As I recall, thier advantages were very low 'ink' (read: wax cartrage) costs, color, price (As compared to color laser at the time... was still 8-10k then). Thier disadvantages were: long warm up times, very slow printing, requiring special paper, poor image detail, inability to laminate, and probably a few others.
Some quick googleing hasn't produced much for results aside from a few kodak photo printer models in the $800-900 range
If anyone has any knowledge as to how these printers evolved, I'm interested as well.
Heh.. how about this. I have a HP laserjet IIP that has gone over 400,000 pages. The thing is a beast! Bought it in '87 with the 1meg memory upgrade. I love the fact that they set the internal page counter to max out at 100k. Not too many products these days that you can roll the odometers on anymore.
Try getting that from an inkjet:) Or even one of the newer hp lasers (which I still think are great printers... just not the beasts they once were)
This is nothing to be upset about. Heck, windows users have had this feature since windows 95. 3-finger salute and end the screen saver task:)
Security via screensavers should never be trusted. I'm not quite sure why its still being put in place. WindowsXP has a slightly better idea in that it will quick log you off if you ask it to... Of course gnome/kde stole that idea before MS was able to integrate it into XP/2k:)
Now, if this can be used as a buffer overflow attack as stated in the second link, that can be a problem. Not so much that a local user will overflow thier own system and gain local root, but the fact that this is the same throughout multiple cocoa apps shows the possibility of one of those being remotely exploitable.
Of course that's only for the 4 people running OSX as a server.
Although the parent is indeed funny, optical mice shouldn't be overlooked.
After using one about 2 years ago I could never go back. I even find myself constantly annoyed when I use a different computer with a non-optical mouse.
Optical mice are quite possibly the biggest leap 'standard' computer mice have made in the last 15 years.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone else think that once machines take over the Earth, all they will do is play chess against eachother?
In a situation where you are unsure if a identifier will be a reserved word, backticks will provide a measure of safety -- and will prevent problems in the future.
Tisk tisk tisk... its perfectly valid SQL. Backticks around field names are used to denote them from reserved words. `desc` referrs to a field. desc referrs to a method of sorting.
For about 10 seconds, I thought that was the greatest thing I had ever seen. Then I noticed it didn't begin with #!/usr/bin/perl and was bummed :(
Modern hard drives have extra space available on them reserved for remapping sectors that fail. The drive can detect these failing as the voltages from the heads fall when reading data. At the first sign of this, the drive logic reads the data, moves it off to a reserved sector, maps it internaly, and goes on about its business. Now, there are a few things that can cause this.
First off, there is straight manufacturing errors. Less common than they used to be (hdd's used to come with tables of bad sectors printed on thier label) but they do happen.
Now, they can also occour when a read head is literaly floating microns above a spinning platter revolving at around 3000 rpm's. Whack that drive with a hammer and the head could contact the media, effectively scratching the disk. Depending on the severity there may be no damage, a bad sector could begin to form, the head could be damaged, or the drive could be shattered to bits.
Moving the head off the platter (or towards the center depending on thier parking mechanics) will almost eliminate problems resulting from the head contacting the media.
Now, parking the head will not add any stability to the drive, but it will greatly increase the g's a drive can experience before being damaged.
If your disk breaks into two pieces, you are going to need to call these people.
Well, first they aren't claiming 3B in lost sales. They are claiming 1B in damages, which in federal court automaticaly gets trippled to 3B.
Damages are not only lost past and future sales, but can include loss of reputation (ha!), contractural damages, hair loss, and basically anything you care to include.
That said, I doubt the SCO execs know how many 0's there are in a billion.
SCO has been shouting that since the beginning. My bet is they have a legal DDOS already planned to sue every single one of IBM's customers. By IBM providing indeminification, they would be swamped responding to the individual claims. It may be hard to take out a 800lb gorilla with a slingshot, but half a million mosquitoes will suck one dry.
I remember an article or discussion in the last week about Darl getting a bonus and the freedom to cash out more stock once SCO has 4 consecutive profitable quarters. Febuary 4th would round this out nicely. Then Darl is free to jump ship and watch it burn. I'm sure someone will post the link below
Actually, I'm guessing that there will have to be side fins for this type of stacking. The spreader between the cpu's will take the heat to the sides, where heat sinks & fans will assist in the eventual heat death of the universe.
There will be a heatsink inbetween the stacked processors, although it would be more properly named a heat spreader. They just call it permeable because it will have holes drilled into it so pins can attach to the lower processor.
I'm betting on "Ultra speed" or "Super speed"
I read through the rules just now.. I didn't notice anything saying publicaly available tools/converters/obfuscators weren't legal. Care to post the section that says that?
Time to break out my perl to C converter! You haven't seen obfuscated perl until you've seen it in C!
Success!
e leaseID=1155 27
Complaint Accepted. Thank you for your input.
First Name: Sean
Last Name: Tobin
Age Range: 20 - 29
Street Address: **********
City: Las Vegas
State or Canadian Province: Nevada
Country: UNITED STATES
Zip Code or Postal Code: *****
E-Mail Address: *****
Home Phone: (702)*******
Work Phone: (702)*******Ext.
Subject of Your Complaint: Computers/Internet Services
Name of Company You Are Complaining About: The SCO Group
Street Address: 355 South 520 West
Suite 100
City: Lindon
State or Canadian Province: Utah
Country: UNITED STATES
Zip Code or Postal Code: 84042
Company Web Site: www.sco.com
Company E-Mail Address: kmartens@sco.com
Phone Number: (801)7654999Ext.
How Did the Company Initially Contact You?: Internet (Other)
How Much Did the Company Ask You to Pay?: 898
How Much Did You Actually Pay the Company?: 0
How Did You Pay the Company?: Unknown
Date Company Contacted You: 08/05/2003 (MM/DD/YYYY)
Explain Your Problem: (Please limit your complaint to 2000 characters.): SCO has claimed that I owe them money because thier IP is in the linux kernel, which I use both at home and work. They will not state what exactly I owe them money for, citing pending lawsuits.
They demanded that I license thier property from them (which they will not tell me exactly what I'm licensing) for 699 per CPU for business use (1) and 199 per CPU for home use (1) bringing my total bill to 898 to avoid a lawsuit from them.
I have never purchased any products from SCO, nor do I have any business relationship with them.
This is a link from thier own website regarding the licensing:
http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?R
Check out my webcam!
You can't mod me down! I had adv-adult in the subject line!
Wireless networks have greater latencies than wired networks. Its just a fact. Windows NT (and various linux/bsd/other systems) is usually nice enough to automatically adjust the TCP recieve window size to your network latency. Sometimes it gets it right. Other times it gets it wrong.
For this to be a usefull test, you will need to at least publish what the window size was on each end. Also, making sure the immediate area was free of microwaves and blenders helps a bit.
Now, I fully believe that the test was accurate and that the speeds listed are a accurate representation of what an average 802.11g network will experience. But there are many things you can do to tweak your throughput much closer to the theoretical speed.
Since the helix 'platform' is just a player without codecs, and a server/streamer without codecs...
:)
Would they give me money for porting the Ogg stuff to thier platform
Sorry for any MS bashing later in this post, but thier marketing department is asking for it.
First off, lets talk hardware. I'm assuming here that both sets of hardware are going to be identical and normalized. By that I mean no paladium test beds, or winmodems, or other odd hw pieces that would skew things in one direction or another. Just some off the shelf dell's would be good. This is the easy part.
Next, on to the software. We have a company that doesn't know much about linux (I do mean as a company. I'm sure there are some very smart folks up there that know what they are doing. Its just in MS's best interests not to have them around the linux machines.) setting up a linux system. Heck, this sounds like it is just slightly more shady than an "independant testing" lab doing the comparision.
Now, software tuning. Somehow I doubt that the win2k installs are going to be stock. They will tune everything to get every last cycle they can out of it. Now, I wonder if they will do the same in the linux boxen? Heck, I'd put money on them actually slowing down thier benchmarks for thier tuning efforts.
The only set of benchmarks/comparisons I'd respect is a side by side setup. One side has MS's lackies fiddiling with thier server to tune the heck out of it. The other side would have the folks from MySQL*, Apache, RedHat*, and probably ESR for good luck. Then some independant testing machine connected to both doing the same task. (i.e. an actual demo transaction). Why hasn't anyone done something like that?
And tell ESR that hacking the Windows machine before they had a chance to patch it is no fair.
[*] Please substitute your favorite software package if you feel the need to do so.
Its always better to fight the devil you know.
My bet is that you can, but there is a very good reason for being cd only. Its much more difficult to screw up a os on a cd than it is to screw up an os on a hdd. When a 12 year old skript kiddie hax0rz your library machine and inverts the mouse buttons, the techno-challenged librarians just need to know how to hit the reset button. No worries about fscks/scandisks, or actually having to undo the switch.
Yes, the above can all be accomplished with some weird write protection on the hdd, but compare costs here. A cheap cdrom can cost under $20. Try and find a hdd in the same price bracket. Then add the cost of all the magic necessary to make it kiddie-proof*.
[*] does not include said kiddies removing cdrom and coating with strawberry jam. But that's what backups are for.
About 10 years ago a few companies experimented with wax based color 'laser' printers. I haven't seen any advertized in quite some time though. There might be one or two companies out there still doing them. As I recall, thier advantages were very low 'ink' (read: wax cartrage) costs, color, price (As compared to color laser at the time... was still 8-10k then). Thier disadvantages were: long warm up times, very slow printing, requiring special paper, poor image detail, inability to laminate, and probably a few others.
Some quick googleing hasn't produced much for results aside from a few kodak photo printer models in the $800-900 range
If anyone has any knowledge as to how these printers evolved, I'm interested as well.
Heh.. how about this. I have a HP laserjet IIP that has gone over 400,000 pages. The thing is a beast! Bought it in '87 with the 1meg memory upgrade. I love the fact that they set the internal page counter to max out at 100k. Not too many products these days that you can roll the odometers on anymore.
:) Or even one of the newer hp lasers (which I still think are great printers... just not the beasts they once were)
Try getting that from an inkjet
This is nothing to be upset about. Heck, windows users have had this feature since windows 95. 3-finger salute and end the screen saver task :)
:)
Security via screensavers should never be trusted. I'm not quite sure why its still being put in place. WindowsXP has a slightly better idea in that it will quick log you off if you ask it to... Of course gnome/kde stole that idea before MS was able to integrate it into XP/2k
Now, if this can be used as a buffer overflow attack as stated in the second link, that can be a problem. Not so much that a local user will overflow thier own system and gain local root, but the fact that this is the same throughout multiple cocoa apps shows the possibility of one of those being remotely exploitable.
Of course that's only for the 4 people running OSX as a server.
Although the parent is indeed funny, optical mice shouldn't be overlooked.
After using one about 2 years ago I could never go back. I even find myself constantly annoyed when I use a different computer with a non-optical mouse.
Optical mice are quite possibly the biggest leap 'standard' computer mice have made in the last 15 years.