Cool! What do you do? Would I have to get a doctorate in CS to be as big of a slackass as you?
Is this really relevant?
on
Atari 2600 Hacks
·
· Score: 0, Troll
I mean, I understand the need to support some people who refuse to give up on their legacy hardware, but is this really necessary?
Just because someone now found a way to hack into an Atari 2600 doesn't mean it belongs on the front page of Slashdot. Shit, they don't even use those for commercial applications. I doubt they can even run a webserver! So why would this guy spend so many years and man-hours trying to hack the 2600 when there are much more productive things to do, like audit Linux code for security holes that hackers could exploit? At least he'd be doing something constructive instead of purely malicious hacking.
Can anybody here summarize any important changes that went on between 2.4.18 and 2.4.19? This changelog is just a ton of bug fixes between prereleases. Did they do anything interesting with it?
In case you haven't noticed, with the state of today's optimizing compilers, your program is almost always faster if you write it in C or C++ and let the compiler take care of the assembly rather than if you were to hand-code the assembly yourself. Your point is irrelevant, anyway. People don't use shell scripts or perl for real databases, now do they?
Performance-critical applications like databases require that the people who write them know what they're doing, as opposed to hiring people from DeVry for cheap and churning out slow, sloppy crap.
If anyone, ANYONE can show me a OSS compliant document format that even approaches the usefull ness of the.doc format, then i swear ill do my best to switch the company i work for over to it.
My main system (in which three of the drives have died) has no case on it
That's your problem right there. Without the case on, you do not get any of the beneficial ducting effects normally provided by your high-flow fans. Leave the case on and, if it's decently designed, your system temperature will drop and you should get a correspondingly lower failure rate for your drives.
BEFORE you generalze this guy's statement to read that you can hot-swap any SCSI drive, please know this: Hot-swap is an electrical matter more than anything. Both ATA and SCSI support hot-swap, with the proper equipment. You will need to use 80-pin connector SCA SCSI drives (which combine power and data into one connector). These are intended to be mounted in hot swap chassis and plugged into a backplane, although adapters are also available to plug them into normal power and data cables.
There are also ATA drive chassis available that have some onboard electronics that allow the drive, mounted in the chassis, to be hotswapped into the appropriate recepticle, although I am not as familiar with these as I am with the SCSI drives (I have 3 of them in my desktop machine that I built and learned a great deal about SCSI in the process of getting everything working).
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD ANY DRIVE, ATA OR SCSI, BE "HOT SWAPPED" IF IT PLUGS DIRECTLY INTO THE BUS AND POWER SUPPLY. THIS WILL RESULT IN DAMAGE TO YOUR DRIVE AND QUITE POSSIBLY YOUR DRIVE CONTROLLER.
No, BSOD jokes are just another example of the "FUD" that Linux users profess to hate when it comes from Microsoft but love to spew from their own mouths. Windows 2000 and Windows XP even more so are pretty damn stable, so don't you think it's time to stop comparing the latest release of Linux with an OS that was released more than 4 years ago? Spout all the anecdotal evidence that you want, but I can tell you that my Windows 2000-based laptop and desktop have not crashed once since upgrading to Professional.
Why is it that everyone automatically assumes that when Windows is used, any of the OS will lead to plane crashes or car crashes, but when Linux is used, it is always on "non-critical" systems that wouldn't do such a thing. Do I sense an inferiority complex?
Oh, and for those of you wondering, the last time I checked, cars were still steered by the steering wheel, and handbrakes still stopped your wheels.
With their huge installed base and over 90% market share, Micro$oft can introduce technology (e.g. palladium) which can effectively shut linux out of the consumer sector.
WHO FUCKING CARES? Linux is not for profit, "sectors of the market" are completely irrelevant.
If people just ignored Windows entirely when thinking about Linux, don't you think we'd see more true innovation in the open source community? All the major open source applications that have been coming out these days have their eye on copying (ripping off, cloning, whatever) features of Windows, in some kind of irrational effort to steal users away from Microsoft. If we hate Windows so much in the first place, why does everyone copy it? Could we have that explained again?
Things would be so much better if people's attitudes reverted to those of the early days of Free software, where people wrote something to "scratch an itch" they had, rather than some kind of silly goal of copying the market leader's features. Let's wake up to the facts, people. Open source doesn't need to aggressively recruit more users because their developers don't have profits that rely on a userbase. It's all being given away for free, right?
But why would the shareholders oppose such a thing? Aren't shareholders, for all practical purposes, motivated by the same desire for profit alone? I haven't heard about any shareholder decisions that were not in some way the result of the motivation for greater profit represented by the majority of the shares in the company.
But wouldn't it be a bit arrogant of a company to impose its values (i.e., information wants to be free, no filters = good filters) on other cultures that may see things differently?
Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the individual, rather than any other entity such as the state, to decide what information they wish to view and what information they don't? Is arrogance so wrong when your beliefs include the aforementioned? That the people of China aren't truly free ought to concern the citizens of a (much less restrictive) state such as the US, as they see that others in the world are subject to a supreme (mortal) leader's rule moreso than they are to their own moral values.
Simple answer: business is amoral. Unlike most metaethical theories relating to humans, businesses are, by their very nature, driven by motivation alone. In this case, the sole motivation is to profit.
If your UPS fails, it helps a lot. Besides, a lot of machines run software that isn't a transaction-capable database (for example, Slashdot's servers). It just makes more sense to have this kind of transaction-like functionality at a lower level so it is available to all applications, instead of stuffing it into all your user-level applications seperately.
Slashdot Mirror
Cool! What do you do? Would I have to get a doctorate in CS to be as big of a slackass as you?
Just because someone now found a way to hack into an Atari 2600 doesn't mean it belongs on the front page of Slashdot. Shit, they don't even use those for commercial applications. I doubt they can even run a webserver! So why would this guy spend so many years and man-hours trying to hack the 2600 when there are much more productive things to do, like audit Linux code for security holes that hackers could exploit? At least he'd be doing something constructive instead of purely malicious hacking.
Can anybody here summarize any important changes that went on between 2.4.18 and 2.4.19? This changelog is just a ton of bug fixes between prereleases. Did they do anything interesting with it?
First post, bitches!
This post for all logged-in ACs! Yeah!
Performance-critical applications like databases require that the people who write them know what they're doing, as opposed to hiring people from DeVry for cheap and churning out slow, sloppy crap.
How much are they paying VA to advertise their product in articles? I didn't see that option when I was browsing OSDN's advertising page...
XML?
Yeah, that wasn't just a desperate cry for attention, now was it?
That's your problem right there. Without the case on, you do not get any of the beneficial ducting effects normally provided by your high-flow fans. Leave the case on and, if it's decently designed, your system temperature will drop and you should get a correspondingly lower failure rate for your drives.
I'm only able to use some of my Photoshop work as a reference; I once made an image something like 2400x1800 and it was about 60MB.
Can't you people think of something other than porn?
There are also ATA drive chassis available that have some onboard electronics that allow the drive, mounted in the chassis, to be hotswapped into the appropriate recepticle, although I am not as familiar with these as I am with the SCSI drives (I have 3 of them in my desktop machine that I built and learned a great deal about SCSI in the process of getting everything working).
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD ANY DRIVE, ATA OR SCSI, BE "HOT SWAPPED" IF IT PLUGS DIRECTLY INTO THE BUS AND POWER SUPPLY. THIS WILL RESULT IN DAMAGE TO YOUR DRIVE AND QUITE POSSIBLY YOUR DRIVE CONTROLLER.
Yeah, if you're a dumbass. Seriously, if you can't drive because you get too distracted by the computer in your car you either
- Shouldn't be driving that car.
- Shouldn't be driving, period.
Actually, forget I said "either"...I'm the head development manager for NTFS. What do you do at RedHat? Oh wait, that's right, you're unemployed!
No, BSOD jokes are just another example of the "FUD" that Linux users profess to hate when it comes from Microsoft but love to spew from their own mouths. Windows 2000 and Windows XP even more so are pretty damn stable, so don't you think it's time to stop comparing the latest release of Linux with an OS that was released more than 4 years ago? Spout all the anecdotal evidence that you want, but I can tell you that my Windows 2000-based laptop and desktop have not crashed once since upgrading to Professional.
Oh, and for those of you wondering, the last time I checked, cars were still steered by the steering wheel, and handbrakes still stopped your wheels.
Just posting early to pre-empt the inevitable flood of said jokes...
WHO FUCKING CARES? Linux is not for profit, "sectors of the market" are completely irrelevant.
Things would be so much better if people's attitudes reverted to those of the early days of Free software, where people wrote something to "scratch an itch" they had, rather than some kind of silly goal of copying the market leader's features. Let's wake up to the facts, people. Open source doesn't need to aggressively recruit more users because their developers don't have profits that rely on a userbase. It's all being given away for free, right?
Um, yes, actually. Did you miss the part about how they killed him because he was black?
Many shareholders are not individuals.
But why would the shareholders oppose such a thing? Aren't shareholders, for all practical purposes, motivated by the same desire for profit alone? I haven't heard about any shareholder decisions that were not in some way the result of the motivation for greater profit represented by the majority of the shares in the company.
Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the individual, rather than any other entity such as the state, to decide what information they wish to view and what information they don't? Is arrogance so wrong when your beliefs include the aforementioned? That the people of China aren't truly free ought to concern the citizens of a (much less restrictive) state such as the US, as they see that others in the world are subject to a supreme (mortal) leader's rule moreso than they are to their own moral values.
Simple answer: business is amoral. Unlike most metaethical theories relating to humans, businesses are, by their very nature, driven by motivation alone. In this case, the sole motivation is to profit.
If your UPS fails, it helps a lot. Besides, a lot of machines run software that isn't a transaction-capable database (for example, Slashdot's servers). It just makes more sense to have this kind of transaction-like functionality at a lower level so it is available to all applications, instead of stuffing it into all your user-level applications seperately.