But you missed my point, which is that comparing write() to C++ ostreams is not a fair comparison, because write() goes directly to the OS, whereas the ostream has buffering logic. Moreover, the efficiency of the stream depends highly on the implementation, which has no theoretical limit on badness.
If I gave you a hacked up version of the C library that purposefully wasted time whenever you called a library function, would you then tell me that C is naturally a slow language? Of course not.
Don't take this as flamebait, it's not meant as such. But here's why I think case mods are silly.
Can you imagine somebody tricking out an ENIAC? You know, like putting phosphor coatings on choice vacuum tubes, so you can see them switching? Attaching neon tubes to the power rails? It would be a ridiculous looking thing.
Now, a little closer to the present day... Can you imagine a tricked out 486 desktop? Don't you think that would look a little... stupid? Now, remember that in 10 years time, your spiffy modded machine will be the equivalent of a 486. And at that time, it'll seem just as stupid as a tricked out 486 does today.
Not to mention that most of these case mods use huge tower cases with multiple fans, redundant power supply fans, passive heat pipes, etc. Don't you think there's something kind of pointless about calling attention to the power-inefficiency of the machine, as if it was something to be proud of? "Look, my machine burns 500 watts, BOOOYA!"
In the future, computers will hopefully be the size of shirt buttons, run on less than a watt of power, and run at terahertz-equivalent speeds. At that point, we'll look back on all these case mods, shake our heads in shame, and wonder, "What the hell was the point of that?"
Talk about an unfair comparison... The C++ example uses the standard IO library, while the C example uses the UNIX write() call. Of course there's going to be overhead associated with using a buffered IO layer.
This would be much more meaninful if you had used fputs() instead of write() in the C version.
As for "several orders of magnitude," I call bullshit. There's no way in hell the standard C++ IO functions are hundreds of times slower unless they're extremely badly written. Which leads me to another reason why this example sucks: there can be different implementations of the standard libraries.
In conclusion, this "comparison" is a stinky pile of shit, and should be ignored. And it's not even on topic, since it doesn't have a Java version.
I wish I possessed your uncanny ability to flawlessly evaluate the character of anybody, anywhere, without ever having met them.
Re:I'm so glad he's sorry
on
Spammer Apologizes
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
I'll be satisfied when everyone he's ever spammed gets to line up and slap him.
That's not much of a reason for a spammer to apologize then, is it? If we're unwilling to forgive, at least to some degree, then why should they stop doing what they're doing and apologize?
If we treat spammers as scum even once they realize the error of their ways, this will only lead to resentment, possibly recidivism back to spamming again, with renewed intensity driven by hatred of the unforgiving public.
Be careful how you direct your hate. It might feel good to smack somebody around, but in the end it leads to an even worse situation.
I find it appalling that people nowdays act in a manner to prove not innocence, but their lack of guilt, rather than put their feet down and say "I'm innocent until proven guilty, and if you think I'm guilty then it's your job to prove it."
You can put your foot down and say it all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that civil court is based on a preponderance of evidence. In civil court you are not innocent until proven guilty. Whichever side has a stronger case wins. If you do nothing to defend yourself, you will lose, no matter how ridiculous the claims are.
This is why people are so quick to settle when they face corporate harrassment. If they get dragged into a real court, they'll have to invest time and resources collecting evidence to prove their innocence -- this might cost more than it would to simply "pay off" the harrassing corporation. And if you can't prove you're innocent? The coporation wins a settlement against you and you still have to pay your lawyer.
There are good reasons for the preponderance of evidence rule in civil cases. In many of these cases there is no clear "plaintiff" and "victim." One of the parties brought the case to court, but it isn't always clear that that party is the one which should prove guilt. Hence, to compromise, both parties has a responsibility to provide evidence on their own behalf.
But this corporate rape of average consumers is horrible and has to stop.
This will ensure that the telnet session realizes that it is attached to a terminal. Without the -t, everything you type will be double-echoed, including the password for the BBS login. Obviously, you don't want that.
A few people have pointed to telnet BBSes, but are there any that support SSH? I encrypt my e-mail and (some) web surfing - why wouldn't I want to encrypt my BBS session?
This is simple. Suppose the server running the BBS is called server1. Suppose server1 has two interfaces, lo (loopback) and eth0 (connection to internet). Furthermore, suppose the BBS is listening on port 12345.
1. Reconfigure the BBS/MUD/whatever so that it binds to the lo interface instead of eth0. This will prevent any direct telnet connections from coming in from the outside.
2. Create an account called 'bbs' or some other appropriate name on server1.
3. To login remotely over ssh, do the following:
ssh bbs@server1 telnet localhost 12345
After entering the password for the 'bbs' account, you will drop to the normal BBS login screen. But you're doing it over ssh.
You don't need a good password for the bbs account, because it's just a trampoline used to provide a cryptographic shell for the real system. You could just use 'bbs' if you want.
Also, make sure the bbs account is locked down tight so people can't log in with shell access. That could potentially be a security problem.
Weird. Despite having been registered with the NYTimes for 2 years now, I've never received any communications from them be it news/spam/anything else nor has the email address I provided them been given to anyone.
Wow, after two years, their system must be chock full of tasty information about you, your reading habits, hell, maybe they have a program to work up a full psychological profile of you. Congratulations! Why not call the CIA and invite them over for a few beers?
It is basically a paradox. People pay for Internet service, so they figure everything out there should already be paid for
They must be stupid then. You pay for telephone service, does that mean you expect that when you call in a pizza order the pizza should be free because you've already paid for the phone? What the hell kind of logic is that?
Anyhow, I've got a microwave, nothing 15 seconds in there won't fix.
An RFID coil will get extremely hot when exposed to microwaves. If it is embedded in a flammable item, such as a garment, that garment will almost certainly catch fire, destroying the garment, quite probably the microwave, and possibly your house as well.
Do not attempt the above as a method of neutralizing an RFID device.
But unlike when there is a bug in windows a fix is on the way as fast as possible. In fact, there is a patch on the site right now!
The patch is not a fix. It just covers up the problem long enough for a real fix to come out. Don't gloat over this "instant fix," because it isn't. Instant bandaid, more like it.
It isn't a fix, just a patch. Think of it as a software bandaid. It covers the problem and gives the kernel developers time to fix it the right way, but in the meantime, it interferes with normal operations. Just like a real bandaid.
My point was, yes, you can just walk around and forget about it. But doing so without ANY water protection is braindead, regardless of what you're "used to."
That's your opinion, bucko. Tell me how exactly the rain is hurtful, and why we should stay out of it? I doubt the maturity of somebody who feels it necessary to ridicule how people deal with their own climate.
And you want to see "torrents"? Go to Florida where when it rains, you have to pull over to the side of road while driving because it floods your windshield and overwhelms your wipers.
Happens here too, especially in spring. The difference is, the wimps in Florida pull over.
Anyway, this entire conversation is pointless and stupid. Grow up a little.
It's just the idiots that don't bother with the raincoat, the floppy hat and the rubber overshoes.
This isn't "insightful," moderators. It's condescending, rude, and asinine.
Just because we're used to rain up here doesn't make us "idiots" for walking around without a silly raincoat. To us, people from drier climes look a little goofy when they bundle up with a raincoat and umbrella. It's just water, it isn't going to dissolve you.
People, the rain in Portland (and the whole region) falls in torrents at times. Usually the hardest rain is during sudden spring storms. Compared to these deluges, the light sprinkle we have pretty much constantly all through fall and winter is nothing. Why do the "idiots" ignore the rain? Because they hardly notice it. We grew up under the clouds, and to us, drier regions (such as it is east of the Cascade mountains here) appear almost desert-like.
I could sit here and ridicule you for being a wussy who can't handle a little water on his head. I could laugh at you for living in a dry, barren wasteland. In fact, I'd really like to, seeing as you consider us all to be idiots anyway, but that just wouldn't be the Portland thing to do.
Anyway, Linus, welcome to the Northwest. The weather might get you down, but the natives are here to show you all the ways to cope with that. Don't worry, it's not like we're idiots.
Really moderators, you should be ashamed of bolstering this flamebait.
To really get BlueTooth accepted with the masses, it needs a Killer App. I don't think cell phone address book exchange is it.
The killer app for BlueTooth will be a BlueTooth enabled key fob that you hang on your keychain. Lost your keys again? Just dial a magic key sequence on your cell phone, which then sends out a BlueTooth transmission. This wakes the key fob, which begins beeping loudly. Now you just walk to the sound and pick up your keys.
The real thing which makes this a killer app is that any BlueTooth enabled device can be used to find your keys. A cell phone is simply the most convenient.
It works the other way, too. Suppose you've lost your cell phone in your bedroom somewhere. Pick up your keychain, press the little button on the key fob, and your cell phone starts ringing.
It might be kind of irritating on a bus or train, however, if some wanker walks in with an activator and all of a sudden 300 peoples' key chains start beeping!:-)
That assumes that reclaming cache is a low-cost or no-cost operation. Is it really that lightweight?
Yes. The process has already requested a page, so the VM page allocation code is going to run, period. It's no more expensive to steal a page from cache than to take a page from the unallocated pool (which doesn't really exist on Linux, since all unallocated pages are available for cache).
Of course, the situation is different if the cache page is dirty and needs to be written back to disk. At that point, the process needs to wait for that IO to take place before it can map its page. But even if there was no disk cache, that dirty page would have had to be written sometime, anyway. All the cache does is timeshift the writes into the future a little bit. This is an okay trade, because of the enormous performance boost when you can read a page out of cache.
Not at all. If you aren't using your memory for anything, why should it sit around going to waste? It ought to be used to cache disk blocks.
This is a common misunderstanding. The memory used by disk and buffer caches is available memory. If some process needs memory, the OS will shrink the cache and give those pages to the process. The kernel won't even begin to swap until the caches reach zero size.
In other words, when you run "free" to see system memory usage, you must also count the "buffered" and "cached" numbers as available, because they are. It's the system doing what it should -- making the most use of the memory you have.
When I saw that movie, I was extremely distracted by the resemblences of the main character to Sandra Bullock. Her "boyfriend" also reminded me vaguely of Ben Affleck. I'm not saying they looked exactly like them, but there were similarities.
I found this very unnerving. I suppose they couldn't come up with lifelike humanoid models from scratch, so they had to model them after real people?
So if a guy fails you should never listen to him again?
It took Einstein many tries to arrive at the correct fomulation for general relativity. I guess according to you, he should have just given up after his first failure?
Never mind that this language is so broad it could be applied to almost anything with circuitry.
Just circuitry? This treaty refers to a "device or system." That's by no means limited to circuitry.
The atmosphere is a system, a physical one, which provides sustenance to humans and allows them to remain alive so they can decrypt signals. Hence, this treaty outlaws the atmosphere.
A human is a system, a biological one, which is capable of decrypting signals. Hence, this treaty outlaws humans.
The universe is a system, the ultimate system, in which the pesky humans and their decrypting computers exist. Were it not for the universe, nobody would be able to break their precious signals. Hence, this treaty outlaws the universe.
Jeez, if you're going to hold people to the letter of the law, you better make damn sure your law doesn't accidentally outlaw the universe.
participate in the manufacture, importation, sale, or any other act that makes available a device or system capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal
That doesn't just outlaw PCs, it outlaws everything. It outlaws the Earth, because on the Earth is a living system of organisms, one of which (homo sapiens) is capable of decrypting a program-carrying signal. Without the support system of the Earth, humans could not exist, therefore the Earth is "helping to decrypt."
I have to wonder how people, who are obviously incapable of drafting a treaty without accidentally outlawing all of existence, have ever reached such positions of legal authority...
"Thats an interesting asumption- that the conservatives are racists."
He didn't imply that at all. Specifically, he said "racist conservatives." Are you denying that there exist racist conservatives? It's you who reads way too much into it.
I dunno some one should show me were the republicans are racists
Remember, he's talking about the '60s. How old are you? Are you aware of the shit that went on in the '60s? The world hasn't always been the way you see it now.
BTW, isn't bushes cabinate comprised of more minorities then most if not all other presidents? could that be the reason everyone says he is an idiot?
If he selected minorities merely to appear racially sensitive, then yes, he's an idiot. The President and his cabinet are far too important to be playing stupid affirmative action games -- he needs the best people he can possibly get, regardless of their sex/race. OTOH, if he chose those people because they are good assets to his administration, then no, it's not stupid.
But I have a hunch why people call him an idiot, and it has nothing to do with his cabinet.
If peer review is a good thing, I think an open and transparent peer review would be even better.
The problem is, most people are idiots, so if everyone is a reviewer, then most reviews will be bad. Not everyone is qualified to judge scientific research, it's a simple fact.
The analog on Slashdot would be to only give mod points to people who actually deserve them. "Karma" is a kludge to approximate this behavior, but it doesn't work well at all.
Just why are you still giving the journals that power? Publish your information whatever way you see fit.
Because any idiot can put a PDF on a website. The value of the journals is the extensive peer review prior to publication. This makes a publication in a highly respected journal a very valuable thing to get, because it proves to your scientific colleagues that your work has past the inspection of a diverse array of professionals in the same field.
This concept is so ingrained into scientists' heads (including mine) that I don't really consider a "paper" to be a paper unless it's been published in a reviewed journal. No matter how good the research looks, if it hasn't been reviewed for publication, it's always suspect.
Slashdot Mirror
If I gave you a hacked up version of the C library that purposefully wasted time whenever you called a library function, would you then tell me that C is naturally a slow language? Of course not.
Can you imagine somebody tricking out an ENIAC? You know, like putting phosphor coatings on choice vacuum tubes, so you can see them switching? Attaching neon tubes to the power rails? It would be a ridiculous looking thing.
Now, a little closer to the present day... Can you imagine a tricked out 486 desktop? Don't you think that would look a little... stupid? Now, remember that in 10 years time, your spiffy modded machine will be the equivalent of a 486. And at that time, it'll seem just as stupid as a tricked out 486 does today.
Not to mention that most of these case mods use huge tower cases with multiple fans, redundant power supply fans, passive heat pipes, etc. Don't you think there's something kind of pointless about calling attention to the power-inefficiency of the machine, as if it was something to be proud of? "Look, my machine burns 500 watts, BOOOYA!"
In the future, computers will hopefully be the size of shirt buttons, run on less than a watt of power, and run at terahertz-equivalent speeds. At that point, we'll look back on all these case mods, shake our heads in shame, and wonder, "What the hell was the point of that?"
This would be much more meaninful if you had used fputs() instead of write() in the C version.
As for "several orders of magnitude," I call bullshit. There's no way in hell the standard C++ IO functions are hundreds of times slower unless they're extremely badly written. Which leads me to another reason why this example sucks: there can be different implementations of the standard libraries.
In conclusion, this "comparison" is a stinky pile of shit, and should be ignored. And it's not even on topic, since it doesn't have a Java version.
I wish I possessed your uncanny ability to flawlessly evaluate the character of anybody, anywhere, without ever having met them.
That's not much of a reason for a spammer to apologize then, is it? If we're unwilling to forgive, at least to some degree, then why should they stop doing what they're doing and apologize?
If we treat spammers as scum even once they realize the error of their ways, this will only lead to resentment, possibly recidivism back to spamming again, with renewed intensity driven by hatred of the unforgiving public.
Be careful how you direct your hate. It might feel good to smack somebody around, but in the end it leads to an even worse situation.
You can put your foot down and say it all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that civil court is based on a preponderance of evidence. In civil court you are not innocent until proven guilty. Whichever side has a stronger case wins. If you do nothing to defend yourself, you will lose, no matter how ridiculous the claims are.
This is why people are so quick to settle when they face corporate harrassment. If they get dragged into a real court, they'll have to invest time and resources collecting evidence to prove their innocence -- this might cost more than it would to simply "pay off" the harrassing corporation. And if you can't prove you're innocent? The coporation wins a settlement against you and you still have to pay your lawyer.
There are good reasons for the preponderance of evidence rule in civil cases. In many of these cases there is no clear "plaintiff" and "victim." One of the parties brought the case to court, but it isn't always clear that that party is the one which should prove guilt. Hence, to compromise, both parties has a responsibility to provide evidence on their own behalf.
But this corporate rape of average consumers is horrible and has to stop.
ssh -t bbs@server1 telnet localhost 12345
This will ensure that the telnet session realizes that it is attached to a terminal. Without the -t, everything you type will be double-echoed, including the password for the BBS login. Obviously, you don't want that.
This is simple. Suppose the server running the BBS is called server1. Suppose server1 has two interfaces, lo (loopback) and eth0 (connection to internet). Furthermore, suppose the BBS is listening on port 12345.
1. Reconfigure the BBS/MUD/whatever so that it binds to the lo interface instead of eth0. This will prevent any direct telnet connections from coming in from the outside.
2. Create an account called 'bbs' or some other appropriate name on server1.
3. To login remotely over ssh, do the following:
ssh bbs@server1 telnet localhost 12345
After entering the password for the 'bbs' account, you will drop to the normal BBS login screen. But you're doing it over ssh.
You don't need a good password for the bbs account, because it's just a trampoline used to provide a cryptographic shell for the real system. You could just use 'bbs' if you want.
Also, make sure the bbs account is locked down tight so people can't log in with shell access. That could potentially be a security problem.
Wow, after two years, their system must be chock full of tasty information about you, your reading habits, hell, maybe they have a program to work up a full psychological profile of you. Congratulations! Why not call the CIA and invite them over for a few beers?
They must be stupid then. You pay for telephone service, does that mean you expect that when you call in a pizza order the pizza should be free because you've already paid for the phone? What the hell kind of logic is that?
Anybody who "figures" as you suggest is an idiot.
An RFID coil will get extremely hot when exposed to microwaves. If it is embedded in a flammable item, such as a garment, that garment will almost certainly catch fire, destroying the garment, quite probably the microwave, and possibly your house as well.
Do not attempt the above as a method of neutralizing an RFID device.
The patch is not a fix. It just covers up the problem long enough for a real fix to come out. Don't gloat over this "instant fix," because it isn't. Instant bandaid, more like it.
And nobody ever said bandaids were bad, right?
That's your opinion, bucko. Tell me how exactly the rain is hurtful, and why we should stay out of it? I doubt the maturity of somebody who feels it necessary to ridicule how people deal with their own climate.
And you want to see "torrents"? Go to Florida where when it rains, you have to pull over to the side of road while driving because it floods your windshield and overwhelms your wipers.
Happens here too, especially in spring. The difference is, the wimps in Florida pull over.
Anyway, this entire conversation is pointless and stupid. Grow up a little.
This isn't "insightful," moderators. It's condescending, rude, and asinine.
Just because we're used to rain up here doesn't make us "idiots" for walking around without a silly raincoat. To us, people from drier climes look a little goofy when they bundle up with a raincoat and umbrella. It's just water, it isn't going to dissolve you.
People, the rain in Portland (and the whole region) falls in torrents at times. Usually the hardest rain is during sudden spring storms. Compared to these deluges, the light sprinkle we have pretty much constantly all through fall and winter is nothing. Why do the "idiots" ignore the rain? Because they hardly notice it. We grew up under the clouds, and to us, drier regions (such as it is east of the Cascade mountains here) appear almost desert-like.
I could sit here and ridicule you for being a wussy who can't handle a little water on his head. I could laugh at you for living in a dry, barren wasteland. In fact, I'd really like to, seeing as you consider us all to be idiots anyway, but that just wouldn't be the Portland thing to do.
Anyway, Linus, welcome to the Northwest. The weather might get you down, but the natives are here to show you all the ways to cope with that. Don't worry, it's not like we're idiots.
Really moderators, you should be ashamed of bolstering this flamebait.
The killer app for BlueTooth will be a BlueTooth enabled key fob that you hang on your keychain. Lost your keys again? Just dial a magic key sequence on your cell phone, which then sends out a BlueTooth transmission. This wakes the key fob, which begins beeping loudly. Now you just walk to the sound and pick up your keys.
The real thing which makes this a killer app is that any BlueTooth enabled device can be used to find your keys. A cell phone is simply the most convenient.
It works the other way, too. Suppose you've lost your cell phone in your bedroom somewhere. Pick up your keychain, press the little button on the key fob, and your cell phone starts ringing.
It might be kind of irritating on a bus or train, however, if some wanker walks in with an activator and all of a sudden 300 peoples' key chains start beeping! :-)
Yes. The process has already requested a page, so the VM page allocation code is going to run, period. It's no more expensive to steal a page from cache than to take a page from the unallocated pool (which doesn't really exist on Linux, since all unallocated pages are available for cache).
Of course, the situation is different if the cache page is dirty and needs to be written back to disk. At that point, the process needs to wait for that IO to take place before it can map its page. But even if there was no disk cache, that dirty page would have had to be written sometime, anyway. All the cache does is timeshift the writes into the future a little bit. This is an okay trade, because of the enormous performance boost when you can read a page out of cache.
Not at all. If you aren't using your memory for anything, why should it sit around going to waste? It ought to be used to cache disk blocks.
This is a common misunderstanding. The memory used by disk and buffer caches is available memory. If some process needs memory, the OS will shrink the cache and give those pages to the process. The kernel won't even begin to swap until the caches reach zero size.
In other words, when you run "free" to see system memory usage, you must also count the "buffered" and "cached" numbers as available, because they are. It's the system doing what it should -- making the most use of the memory you have.
Believe me, the kernel's not stupid.
I found this very unnerving. I suppose they couldn't come up with lifelike humanoid models from scratch, so they had to model them after real people?
It took Einstein many tries to arrive at the correct fomulation for general relativity. I guess according to you, he should have just given up after his first failure?
Just circuitry? This treaty refers to a "device or system." That's by no means limited to circuitry.
The atmosphere is a system, a physical one, which provides sustenance to humans and allows them to remain alive so they can decrypt signals. Hence, this treaty outlaws the atmosphere.
A human is a system, a biological one, which is capable of decrypting signals. Hence, this treaty outlaws humans.
The universe is a system, the ultimate system, in which the pesky humans and their decrypting computers exist. Were it not for the universe, nobody would be able to break their precious signals. Hence, this treaty outlaws the universe.
Jeez, if you're going to hold people to the letter of the law, you better make damn sure your law doesn't accidentally outlaw the universe.
That doesn't just outlaw PCs, it outlaws everything. It outlaws the Earth, because on the Earth is a living system of organisms, one of which (homo sapiens) is capable of decrypting a program-carrying signal. Without the support system of the Earth, humans could not exist, therefore the Earth is "helping to decrypt."
I have to wonder how people, who are obviously incapable of drafting a treaty without accidentally outlawing all of existence, have ever reached such positions of legal authority...
He didn't imply that at all. Specifically, he said "racist conservatives." Are you denying that there exist racist conservatives? It's you who reads way too much into it.
I dunno some one should show me were the republicans are racists
Remember, he's talking about the '60s. How old are you? Are you aware of the shit that went on in the '60s? The world hasn't always been the way you see it now.
BTW, isn't bushes cabinate comprised of more minorities then most if not all other presidents? could that be the reason everyone says he is an idiot?
If he selected minorities merely to appear racially sensitive, then yes, he's an idiot. The President and his cabinet are far too important to be playing stupid affirmative action games -- he needs the best people he can possibly get, regardless of their sex/race. OTOH, if he chose those people because they are good assets to his administration, then no, it's not stupid.
But I have a hunch why people call him an idiot, and it has nothing to do with his cabinet.
The problem is, most people are idiots, so if everyone is a reviewer, then most reviews will be bad. Not everyone is qualified to judge scientific research, it's a simple fact.
The analog on Slashdot would be to only give mod points to people who actually deserve them. "Karma" is a kludge to approximate this behavior, but it doesn't work well at all.
Because any idiot can put a PDF on a website. The value of the journals is the extensive peer review prior to publication. This makes a publication in a highly respected journal a very valuable thing to get, because it proves to your scientific colleagues that your work has past the inspection of a diverse array of professionals in the same field.
This concept is so ingrained into scientists' heads (including mine) that I don't really consider a "paper" to be a paper unless it's been published in a reviewed journal. No matter how good the research looks, if it hasn't been reviewed for publication, it's always suspect.