Re:The number 1 story is almost what you want.
on
Bone-Headed IT Mistakes
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I understand what you are saying, but this twitter guy is really starting to get annoying. So I think the anti-twitters are doing a service to us all.
I disagree. I do not even notice twitter's posts. There's a lot of bullshit posted to slashdot, and I guess over the years I've just learned to filter it out without even thinking about it.
Anti-twitters, however, seem unignoreable. They post not about the article nor about anything related to the article, they point their fingers and stomp their feet and whinge and carry on like a gradeschool tattle-tale. Why is it I notice them but not twitter? I can think of two reasons: first, twitter's particular brand of bullshit fits in and is easily dismissable. second: the anti-twitter posts are jarring and do nothing but promote themselves. I don't even think twitter's posts do that; they just spread BS.
Perhaps slashdot needs another filter category: twitter wankfest. That's really what it is: who can spot the twitter post fast enough and piss and moan about it the loudest. I'd happily filter it all out in an instant, and as I said I am starting to filter out the anti-twitter self-righteous asshats as I encounter them. Twitter's no friend of mine, but at least he isn't interrupting the thread.
Re:The number 1 story is almost what you want.
on
Bone-Headed IT Mistakes
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
I have to ask.
What do you get from posting about twitter's use of slashdot? Honestly, I can't tell if it's just you, or if there are a dozen people just like you who crap up the articles I read here. I don't even notice twitter's postings, but you guys, the twitter whingers, drive me insane. I'm about a half a minute away from foe-ing every single last one of you.
It's you people who are crapping up slashdot, not twitter.
Does Wall Street really need anything offered in the realtime kernel patchset? I mean standard preemptive linux has latency that I would think would be drowned by network, disk or human response time... Trades don't happen in millisecond time, do they?
I understand realtime requirements, and I have a half-assed notion of what goes on on the trading floor... what on earth do they have there that demands the realtime patchset?
I can't stand interruptions when I'm trying to figure something out. My email client does not notify me when new email comes in, my IM is fairly unnoticeable in the corner unless I look at it, and I thankfully don't get many phone calls, and often ignore it anyway when it does ring. Now I have IRC and IM open all the time, but I can manage those kinds of interruptions much easier because I hit them when I'm at a point where a brief interruption won't bug me or disrupt my thinking. I guess the easiest analogy is reading a particularly interesting book; at a paragraph break or chapter break I can look up, talk to someone for a moment, or get a drink. However if someone came up to me and broke the "spell" I was under because I was in the middle of a paragraph, it's frustrating, and can ruin the experience.
It's quite common for me to forget to eat or put off washroom breaks for several hours when I'm in the middle of something. Someone poking their head in my office during one of those moments would probably cause me to lose all concentration for a good 15 to 30 minutes afterward, but if they were to send me an IM and I could get at it a minute (or even 15 seconds) later than they would have poked their head in, it wouldn't cause any issue at all.
There's no "might want to try that" to it -- some people just think and work differently than others. I'm not special or anything like that, but just because you have managed to organize your thoughts on paper and can handle interruptions doesn't mean that that method works particularly well for me. I generally recover from interruptions just fine, but people tend to interrupt me at points where it's not a good time to be interrupted, and that causes particular frustration, especially when it has happened for the third or fourth time that day.
I read volumes of email in an 80 character terminal. If I need to see code (something that should never be wrapped), I expand my screen. I sure as hell don't need the entire email adjusting so I get paragraphs as wide as my screen.
There's lots of reason why line length is traditionally set at around 72 characters. Unless, of course, you're one of those that believe emails are written for your benefit, and not the benefit of the reader.
I can't tell if you're a proponent or opponent of hard-wrapping email at about 72 characters. I agree with you that most of my email is read in a smaller-than-screen-width window, but that would suggest to me that you want soft returns, so you can size your window any way you like to read it. That also solves the problem for mobile users.
Your next paragraph, however, suggests that you prefer fixed-width (hard returns) email lines, especially since you suggest that mobile users are a problem. Which side of the fence are you on? I can't tell whether I'm in agreement or not.:-)
You're mixing up technologies. CDMA, TDMA, FDMA, OFDMA are all ways of getting the data in and out of the air. CDMA the cellular technology isn't just the air interface.
GSM 3G uses W-CDMA as an air interface. That says nothing about which frequency bands, authentication or other interoperability barriers you'll encounter. It's just the way they utilize the bandwidth. LTE is based on OFDMA, which is kind of like CDMA crossed with TDMA and FDMA (your data is not only XORed with a chipping code like CDMA, but you also have timeslots to transmit them in and a number of subcarriers you're allowed to use.)
I don't think you'll see a grand unified mobile network anytime soon.:-)
Do you not agree that "last mile" carriers for both DSL and cable actively throttling and using DPI to shape the traffic of their wholesale customers creates a situation where I cannot get unfucked-with bandwidth at a reasonable cost? Now I don't quite agree that unfucked-with bandwidth is necessarily a right, but when the government-sanctioned monopolies of the last mile are also a supplier to the end-user, I think that is an unfair market, and *that* is something the government is in control of.
I'm genuinely curious if Bell believes that DPI and throttling of their commercial customers (not just their wholesale providers) is acceptable, too. I.e. if I get my own 10 meg LAN extension to a server at 151 Front, and my provider there is cross-connected with Bell... would Bell feel justified in throttling traffic to/from my IP into their network?
The problem is that the ISPs know that there are no choices. They know their competitors are also throttled. Leave Rogers for Bell, someone is leaving Bell for Rogers. Threaten Teksavvy and they know, like the banks, people rotate providers every few years.
I'm not saying I'm defeated; Of course threatening the provider is what I do. However, you also must rattle the cages of the MPs and MPPs to get something done.
I too am in Canada, and at least in Waterloo (the country (or world?)'s "most intelligent" community) -- there ain't no choice.
Rogers or nothing. There is no resold cable. 3Web used to do it but not anymore.
DSL? I am on DSL through a third party, but as you are well aware, Bell is throttling the wholesalers.
Wireless? Wimax is not here (yet, but will be throttled and capped). 3G is capped and expensive. 802.11b/g is expensive and capped, and possibly throttled.
Satellite? Don't make me laugh.
Registering a complaint's all we have, and the government isn't interested in listening.
I think he was trying to verify past the "it powers on" stage and eliminate the "most likely" part of your statement.:-) Also, just because it powers on at no-load (what you and gp are doing) doesn't ensure that it is still capable of delivering regulated power under rated load. You need a good resistor bank or active load to test that.
LVM does work exactly as advertised - It just shouldn't have anywhere near the popularity it currently enjoys. For example, several Linux distros (Fedora comes to mind) set up an LVM by default. Ouch.
What the heck's wrong with that? I've been doing that manually on my cheap slackware systems for ages. I don't want hard partitions, and those who do are generally too young to remember the hell of C: D: E: F: G: H: drives in the old DOS days. Take a 250G drive, put a 5G / on it and LVM the rest for/usr,/home and most importantly,/var. I don't want all that shit together, and nobody is increasing the failure rate with a single drive.
Hell, I'm running LVM on my laptop, for christ's sake. It's just good sense.
I don't know about the rest of y'all, but my filesystems are generally RAID arrays running LVM on top of them.
i.e. my home fileserver has a pair of 300G drives, four 250G drives and a pair of 200G drives. I have it configured into two RAID1s and a RAID5, and the three/dev/mdx nodes are PVs which go into my VG.
I can survive any single drive failure without losing the VG, and I can grow it as I want, without having to worry about my older "big" drives getting waylaid. It's perhaps not an ideal setup, but unless you're a business with the budget to just toss old but good hardware, this works just fine for me.
According to their description, it's a memory cell that retains information without needing power. In other words, non-volatile RAM. It actually (according to their description) looks pretty darn similar to FeRAM.
That's great and all, but how does this make the memristor a fourth basic element of electricity, after the resistor, inductor and capacitor? It sounds like something far more high level than that, along the lines of a transistor. I know I certainly don't regard a DRAM or SRAM cell as a basic element of electricity.
My Canon Pixma MP530 will print until the tank is bone-dry, although quality will obviously suffer near the end. These tanks are chipped, but I haven't had any trouble yet, much like your Epson. I was nervous when I saw the little chip carrier on the tank, but after it warned me that it was low, then alarm that it was empty, and still dutifully printed I wasn't so uneasy. I don't plan on ever updating the firmware of this thing, so until something breaks, I'm good.:-)
My pixma mp530 does not have this problem. I run with the cartridges low/empty all the time and can scan/fax and print even, although it'll be ugly of course if it's missing ink it needs. I'm *really* happy with the MP530, actually. cheapish, good use of ink, acceptable cost of consumables, has ADF for scanner/fax and duplexer for printer. Wish it had a bigger paper tray and have to get around to making CUPS not "hog" the port so I can't scan without killing it, but overall an excellent, excellent device.
The real problem is Linux's lack of decent power management, as well as the hardware manufacturers' reluctance to support Linux in any way.
This may have been true in the past, but I'm telling you, I get 3.5h out of this shitty Toshiba U300, without wifi, 2.5h with. Powertop is a wonderful thing, but even without it, turning the screen down and making sure the CPU hits C3 leaves me with what I'd consider acceptable battery life. Windows doesn't far any better on this thing.
If it really was Linux at fault, wouldn't those people running XP on the eee get more battery life out of it?
I'm not sure which wireless issues you guys are complaining about... I had my Thinkpad T30 wireless (off-brand Atheros chipset), T60 (Intel 3495?) and Toshiba (Intel 4965) wireless work right out of the box with Kubuntu 7.04 and 7.10. WPA, WEP and open networks. I was actually expecting a fight, as I had to do with Slackware, but nope... it literally just worked.
Interesting. I came to Kubuntu from over 10 years on Slackware, and am thoroughly impressed. I am still trying to like the Debian way of doing things, but I have to say I do appreciate how most everything just works. Wireless, LVM, multiple displays, CD burning, printing, scanning... I'm impressed. I'm not sure what people are complaining about with Kubuntu, but then again I came late to the party. 7.04 -> 7.10.
I have a '99 Passat that uses this ridiculous blue light in the dash. It's difficult to focus on, and shifting between looking at the gauges and the road is FAR more difficult than my '99 Trans Sport, which uses red everywhere. Personally I don't like either; the orange/green lighting that my old Jeep had was best. It was very clear and easy to view at night.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand what you are saying, but this twitter guy is really starting to get annoying. So I think the anti-twitters are doing a service to us all.
I disagree. I do not even notice twitter's posts. There's a lot of bullshit posted to slashdot, and I guess over the years I've just learned to filter it out without even thinking about it.
Anti-twitters, however, seem unignoreable. They post not about the article nor about anything related to the article, they point their fingers and stomp their feet and whinge and carry on like a gradeschool tattle-tale. Why is it I notice them but not twitter? I can think of two reasons: first, twitter's particular brand of bullshit fits in and is easily dismissable. second: the anti-twitter posts are jarring and do nothing but promote themselves. I don't even think twitter's posts do that; they just spread BS.
Perhaps slashdot needs another filter category: twitter wankfest. That's really what it is: who can spot the twitter post fast enough and piss and moan about it the loudest. I'd happily filter it all out in an instant, and as I said I am starting to filter out the anti-twitter self-righteous asshats as I encounter them. Twitter's no friend of mine, but at least he isn't interrupting the thread.
I have to ask.
What do you get from posting about twitter's use of slashdot? Honestly, I can't tell if it's just you, or if there are a dozen people just like you who crap up the articles I read here. I don't even notice twitter's postings, but you guys, the twitter whingers, drive me insane. I'm about a half a minute away from foe-ing every single last one of you.
It's you people who are crapping up slashdot, not twitter.
Does Wall Street really need anything offered in the realtime kernel patchset? I mean standard preemptive linux has latency that I would think would be drowned by network, disk or human response time... Trades don't happen in millisecond time, do they?
I understand realtime requirements, and I have a half-assed notion of what goes on on the trading floor... what on earth do they have there that demands the realtime patchset?
I can't stand interruptions when I'm trying to figure something out. My email client does not notify me when new email comes in, my IM is fairly unnoticeable in the corner unless I look at it, and I thankfully don't get many phone calls, and often ignore it anyway when it does ring. Now I have IRC and IM open all the time, but I can manage those kinds of interruptions much easier because I hit them when I'm at a point where a brief interruption won't bug me or disrupt my thinking. I guess the easiest analogy is reading a particularly interesting book; at a paragraph break or chapter break I can look up, talk to someone for a moment, or get a drink. However if someone came up to me and broke the "spell" I was under because I was in the middle of a paragraph, it's frustrating, and can ruin the experience.
It's quite common for me to forget to eat or put off washroom breaks for several hours when I'm in the middle of something. Someone poking their head in my office during one of those moments would probably cause me to lose all concentration for a good 15 to 30 minutes afterward, but if they were to send me an IM and I could get at it a minute (or even 15 seconds) later than they would have poked their head in, it wouldn't cause any issue at all.
There's no "might want to try that" to it -- some people just think and work differently than others. I'm not special or anything like that, but just because you have managed to organize your thoughts on paper and can handle interruptions doesn't mean that that method works particularly well for me. I generally recover from interruptions just fine, but people tend to interrupt me at points where it's not a good time to be interrupted, and that causes particular frustration, especially when it has happened for the third or fourth time that day.
I read volumes of email in an 80 character terminal. If I need to see code (something that should never be wrapped), I expand my screen. I sure as hell don't need the entire email adjusting so I get paragraphs as wide as my screen.
There's lots of reason why line length is traditionally set at around 72 characters. Unless, of course, you're one of those that believe emails are written for your benefit, and not the benefit of the reader.
I can't tell if you're a proponent or opponent of hard-wrapping email at about 72 characters. I agree with you that most of my email is read in a smaller-than-screen-width window, but that would suggest to me that you want soft returns, so you can size your window any way you like to read it. That also solves the problem for mobile users.
Your next paragraph, however, suggests that you prefer fixed-width (hard returns) email lines, especially since you suggest that mobile users are a problem. Which side of the fence are you on? I can't tell whether I'm in agreement or not. :-)
How on earth do you transport these photons to two separate locations without their container affecting them?
You're mixing up technologies. CDMA, TDMA, FDMA, OFDMA are all ways of getting the data in and out of the air. CDMA the cellular technology isn't just the air interface. GSM 3G uses W-CDMA as an air interface. That says nothing about which frequency bands, authentication or other interoperability barriers you'll encounter. It's just the way they utilize the bandwidth. LTE is based on OFDMA, which is kind of like CDMA crossed with TDMA and FDMA (your data is not only XORed with a chipping code like CDMA, but you also have timeslots to transmit them in and a number of subcarriers you're allowed to use.) I don't think you'll see a grand unified mobile network anytime soon. :-)
Do you not agree that "last mile" carriers for both DSL and cable actively throttling and using DPI to shape the traffic of their wholesale customers creates a situation where I cannot get unfucked-with bandwidth at a reasonable cost? Now I don't quite agree that unfucked-with bandwidth is necessarily a right, but when the government-sanctioned monopolies of the last mile are also a supplier to the end-user, I think that is an unfair market, and *that* is something the government is in control of.
I'm genuinely curious if Bell believes that DPI and throttling of their commercial customers (not just their wholesale providers) is acceptable, too. I.e. if I get my own 10 meg LAN extension to a server at 151 Front, and my provider there is cross-connected with Bell... would Bell feel justified in throttling traffic to/from my IP into their network?
The problem is that the ISPs know that there are no choices. They know their competitors are also throttled. Leave Rogers for Bell, someone is leaving Bell for Rogers. Threaten Teksavvy and they know, like the banks, people rotate providers every few years.
I'm not saying I'm defeated; Of course threatening the provider is what I do. However, you also must rattle the cages of the MPs and MPPs to get something done.
I too am in Canada, and at least in Waterloo (the country (or world?)'s "most intelligent" community) -- there ain't no choice. Rogers or nothing. There is no resold cable. 3Web used to do it but not anymore. DSL? I am on DSL through a third party, but as you are well aware, Bell is throttling the wholesalers. Wireless? Wimax is not here (yet, but will be throttled and capped). 3G is capped and expensive. 802.11b/g is expensive and capped, and possibly throttled. Satellite? Don't make me laugh. Registering a complaint's all we have, and the government isn't interested in listening.
Interested in seeing your script to compare to my own... akohlsmith.mixdown@ca please.
I think he was trying to verify past the "it powers on" stage and eliminate the "most likely" part of your statement. :-) Also, just because it powers on at no-load (what you and gp are doing) doesn't ensure that it is still capable of delivering regulated power under rated load. You need a good resistor bank or active load to test that.
I thought a tri-state cat would be alive, dead and high-impedance.
LVM does work exactly as advertised - It just shouldn't have anywhere near the popularity it currently enjoys. For example, several Linux distros (Fedora comes to mind) set up an LVM by default. Ouch.
What the heck's wrong with that? I've been doing that manually on my cheap slackware systems for ages. I don't want hard partitions, and those who do are generally too young to remember the hell of C: D: E: F: G: H: drives in the old DOS days. Take a 250G drive, put a 5G / on it and LVM the rest for /usr, /home and most importantly, /var. I don't want all that shit together, and nobody is increasing the failure rate with a single drive.
Hell, I'm running LVM on my laptop, for christ's sake. It's just good sense.
I don't know about the rest of y'all, but my filesystems are generally RAID arrays running LVM on top of them. i.e. my home fileserver has a pair of 300G drives, four 250G drives and a pair of 200G drives. I have it configured into two RAID1s and a RAID5, and the three /dev/mdx nodes are PVs which go into my VG.
I can survive any single drive failure without losing the VG, and I can grow it as I want, without having to worry about my older "big" drives getting waylaid. It's perhaps not an ideal setup, but unless you're a business with the budget to just toss old but good hardware, this works just fine for me.
According to their description, it's a memory cell that retains information without needing power. In other words, non-volatile RAM. It actually (according to their description) looks pretty darn similar to FeRAM.
That's great and all, but how does this make the memristor a fourth basic element of electricity, after the resistor, inductor and capacitor? It sounds like something far more high level than that, along the lines of a transistor. I know I certainly don't regard a DRAM or SRAM cell as a basic element of electricity.
My Canon Pixma MP530 will print until the tank is bone-dry, although quality will obviously suffer near the end. These tanks are chipped, but I haven't had any trouble yet, much like your Epson. I was nervous when I saw the little chip carrier on the tank, but after it warned me that it was low, then alarm that it was empty, and still dutifully printed I wasn't so uneasy. I don't plan on ever updating the firmware of this thing, so until something breaks, I'm good. :-)
My pixma mp530 does not have this problem. I run with the cartridges low/empty all the time and can scan/fax and print even, although it'll be ugly of course if it's missing ink it needs. I'm *really* happy with the MP530, actually. cheapish, good use of ink, acceptable cost of consumables, has ADF for scanner/fax and duplexer for printer. Wish it had a bigger paper tray and have to get around to making CUPS not "hog" the port so I can't scan without killing it, but overall an excellent, excellent device.
I don't know of any kernel "security" fixes that have happened in the last 6 weeks, let alone 6 days... wow they're really screwin' you. :-(
Every few days? Which distro are you running that a) has security fixes every few days, and b) requires you to reboot after them?
The real problem is Linux's lack of decent power management, as well as the hardware manufacturers' reluctance to support Linux in any way.
This may have been true in the past, but I'm telling you, I get 3.5h out of this shitty Toshiba U300, without wifi, 2.5h with. Powertop is a wonderful thing, but even without it, turning the screen down and making sure the CPU hits C3 leaves me with what I'd consider acceptable battery life. Windows doesn't far any better on this thing.
If it really was Linux at fault, wouldn't those people running XP on the eee get more battery life out of it?
Weird, I have had *no* issues with knetworkmanager and wireless networks. Cafes, airports, friend's houses, hotels... all just worked.
I'm not sure which wireless issues you guys are complaining about... I had my Thinkpad T30 wireless (off-brand Atheros chipset), T60 (Intel 3495?) and Toshiba (Intel 4965) wireless work right out of the box with Kubuntu 7.04 and 7.10. WPA, WEP and open networks. I was actually expecting a fight, as I had to do with Slackware, but nope... it literally just worked.
Interesting. I came to Kubuntu from over 10 years on Slackware, and am thoroughly impressed. I am still trying to like the Debian way of doing things, but I have to say I do appreciate how most everything just works. Wireless, LVM, multiple displays, CD burning, printing, scanning... I'm impressed. I'm not sure what people are complaining about with Kubuntu, but then again I came late to the party. 7.04 -> 7.10.
I have a '99 Passat that uses this ridiculous blue light in the dash. It's difficult to focus on, and shifting between looking at the gauges and the road is FAR more difficult than my '99 Trans Sport, which uses red everywhere. Personally I don't like either; the orange/green lighting that my old Jeep had was best. It was very clear and easy to view at night.