Back in my last place, a dot-com that failed miserably, we used it as a poor mans IM. Not sure why, because we could download anything we wanted and get real IM clients, but it was a geek thing, so we did it anyway. He used the DOS "net send" stuff, and i used the samba equivalent. It was goofy, mostly we talked shit about management. I'm just surprised it took spammers this long to use it.
Now why would they bother doing this? Because every time someone posts any Mozilla related story to Slashdot they get, well, slashdotted. Considering it's a DB driven site, it doens't take all that much to drive the server to it's knees and make it unusable. So for a day or so, they can't use a basic productivity tool. Yeah, you can just copy n paste, but this minor increase in effort probably eliminates all the casual clickthroughs.
G4s are limited to 4 GB of RAM due to their 32 bit architecture.
Minor rant, the limitation is do to address bus size. Address bus side doesn't have to be tied to overall architecture size. Of processors I've known, the MOS6502 was an 8bit processor, but 16 bit address bus. The upgrade, the MOS6581602 was selectable 8/16 bit architecture and had a 24 bit bus, besides a fully compatible 650x mode. The original 68000 has only a 24 bit address line. The original MacOS stored some flags in there and folks played with those (even though Apple told you not to) and that played havoc when real 32 bit address-bus chips came out. The 68000 was almost a hybrid as well, it had 32 bit registers, but IIRC you could only branch with 16 bit signed offsets, and the 68020 had true 32 bit addressing. the original intel 8086s had essentially a 20 bit bus that was accessible with the evil segment/offset addressing.
I'm not a chip designer, but I don't think there's a technological reason why they can't put 64 bit addressing on a 32 bit chip. You'd have to have new addressing modes and opcodes (like the 68000 => 68020, or 8086 => 80286 => 80386)) and you'd probably just say with all that work it may be simpler to go to 64 bit across the board. In a deeply pipelined architecture, you probably wouldn't want it, not having standard sizes (32 bit opcodes and data vs. mized 32 bit and 64 bit chunks) it just makes it harder to see where the instructions boundaries are.
Mein Furher! Ve needen maken startup of system harrrrrder to administrrrrate. Ist too eazy now. Even girly non-blue eyed non-Aryans can administrate serrrrvers now.
SVR4 Nazi Furher:
Ja wohl!!! How can we skrrrrrrew de administrrrrators?
Nazi SYS5 init architect:
split ze starrrrtup scripts, makingkt dem more komplicated.
Umm, I don't think that happened. I find SVR4 style easier. Every service in it's own seperate file. Ever try to start a system server on BSD by hand? It's harder than you think. In SV$ land, I can take any server down by running a kill script and restart it by running its startup script. hell, even FreeBSD has a SVR4 style init directory (granted, only for a single run level now). And if it's all that hard, just make/etc/rc3.d/S99local and run your stuff form there. RedHat (and probably most other Linuxes) have runlevel editors that make administration pretty easy.
Hmm, Berkeleyness of Berkeley software, who knew?
FreeBSD (maybe all {Free,Net,Open}BSDs) uses SoftUpdates, which in some ways is better than journalling, depending on what you want.
I went to my bookshelf to dust off some of the old floppies from the old//e days. My office suite was called appleworks back in mid 80s. Am I missing something here?
Apple brought Claris back in house, I think about a year and a half ago. The current suite is named AppleWorks As an aside, wasn't it still brackets for the ][e (vs//e)(. I think The Apple//c and Apple//gs are where the slashy stuff started. Hmm, maybe they can sue Slasshdot for trademark infringement?
Faster motor means faster RPM at the driveshaft. This may or may not translate to faster car speed, depending on axel horsepower and a bunch of other stuff.
Not a troll, just out of date. The original Mini was built by Austin-Rover. BMW bought out Rover, eventually ditched pretty much everything except for the Mini. They made a new Range Rover, but actually never got a chance to sell it before Ford bought Land Rover from their hands.
Since the small nature of thse cars force a rather bulbous body type, maybe you should chose such a body from the beginning. Yes, the car we all love, the AMC Pacer.
Poor car, designed with a "futuristic" look for a motor that never came into existence, the GM Wankel rotary.
That's got to be a real fun one if you were, say, sitting on the seat and "something" made a backsplash that gave enough water to get the reaction going. That would be a fun trip to the ER.
Anyone besides me remember the MacGuyver episode where he used Sodium & water to explode himself out of a locked room. I forget what his trigger was.
Does anyone imagine that roaming in the US is anything other than a method to seriously soak the traveler?
Not just travellers (or in rural areas). If you get a cell phone dead spot and have to switch to analog mode, some carriers consider that "roaming" even if you're in your local area. You get hit.
Minor quibble, but it mentions it's different than Linux because it's UCB BSD based. It's not (well, it is up to teh point that SVR4 took a lot of BSDisms) but it's SVR4 machine. Linux distros generally take a bit from classic BSD, a bit from SVR4, and a bit of whatevehell else they want, so they're all a bit different.
first posts of: Hot grits, Natalie Portman, goatse.cx
The great trolls: Ogg the caveman (or was it oog), Haiku guy. SOmeoen can make this list longer
Re:Another failed break from existing architecture
on
Itanium Problems
·
· Score: 2
My first desktop UNIX box at work was a DG/UX on 88K. Extremely slow (it was outdated by the time I got it). Basically used it for an XServer, and every once in a while used gcc on it just to check compiler warnings (because no one else used it, I could give it the latest gccc, 2.7.2 at the time, without disrupting anyone else).
ZipZap tools allow users to play with three different gear ratios to adjust the "horsepower"
To be pedantic, a different gear will give you different axel torque. Higher torque usually gives you quicker acceleration, at a possible (not always) lowering of top speed - you essentially run out of RPM before the motor is maxed out. Since this has no transmission so no way of playing with different RPM bands, I bet it does lower top speed a bit.
Horsepower is work per unit of time. A different gear ratio changes the work (effort) and the time in equal opposite amounts, horsepower remains constant.
OK, what's listed as "essential"? Remember, we can only list FSF stuff here, not general GPL stuff. Also, it can only be stuff essential for the day and day running of a machine, so gcc or other compiler tools (though desperately needed to make the machine) are also scotched. We're talking desktop here, not workstation.
glibc? definitely. score one essential, easy.
Bash? OK, I use it, but I can use pdksh. I can also get real ksh if I want. Some scripts may require a true Bourne shell, but I think most of these can use ash, which is BSD license. No bash.
Emacs? I never use it. For me this just takes up space. Besides, so many editor choices, to say one text editor is essential is kind of absurd.
Ghostscript? I think they got this wrong. Ghostview is FSF, ghostscript seems to be a University tool. No ghostview.
Gnome? No app I ever thought essential required it. Besides, there's Qt and thats a whole different flame war. No Gnome.
Command line tools, diffutils findutils and the like. Hmm, another tough call. These are essential to a UNIX-like system. But would Linux be dead without them? I think they'd port BSD equivalents. Tough call. I'll say "essential, but replaceable" here.
So I'll give you glibc, and I'll give you the command line tools with the reservation that they'd probably be ported. But many things that the FSF says are essential, aren't. They're just bundled so people don't try to get the other tools. And if you want to argue about gcc I say:
There are other free compilers, check out lcc.
gcc kind of got "taken away" from the FSF. It was stagnating at version 2.8, and a bunch of folks forked the code, and now the open source, non FSF controlled egcs became the mainline gcc because the FSF was too slow. yes they did the bulk of the work up to 2.8, but there were a lot of other folks helping as well.
Almost all PowerPC code in the beginning was from Metroworks compilers. They had as big a hand in saving apple as gcc does in compiling Linux code, they're not asking for a name change.
But I do find X11 essential. And even LessTif is more essential to me than gnome. So the percentage of "essential" FSF stuff is much smaller than I think the FSF would like to think.
I'm not trying to hang Stallman. In my opinion he does that better than I could anyway. It just seems petty at times. I see where he's coming from, tring to get people to remember that Free Software helps people get stuff done, I just think he's going about it the wrong way.
If I run a Mac With Office, and Internet Explorer, and swap out my Finder for a different shell, do I call it Microsoft/MacOS? Surely, if you get a bunch of Microsoft Code on say a System 6 era Mac (maybe less so with later larger MacOS kernels) Microsoft has the bulk of the code base on that machine. And the agreement with Microsoft and Apple a few years back to ensure Office on Mac surely shows how much Apple depended on it.
An MP3 player that can store and play CDs?
on
New MP3 Portables
·
· Score: 2
No, I don't mean a CD player that can play MP3 CDs. The player has to be able to Is there a player, with recordable storage that can play normal audio CDs?
I have a friend with an old stereo, a good one, that they want to add CD and MP3 support to. But they don't have a CD-R and are unlikely to get one, so the current crop of MP3 CD players don't help much. I saw one that actually lets you record on small CDs, but can't read or write standard CDs. That won't work.
Umm, PowerPC was the AIM group, Apple IBM Motorola. Anybody remember Taligent and Pink? No? Apple and IBM actually would probably prefer it that way. IBM also bought what is now StarOffice (and OpenOffice) as a MS Office competitor. Apple was one of the first ports after OS/2.
My impression is that early Apple saw IBM as too big and slow to hurt "cool" Apple. Later years they saw IBM as an ally, kind of the Big Elephant that can take the imcoming shots while Aplle scurries behind its protection. I can't recall any animosity between them
Slashdot Mirror
Back in my last place, a dot-com that failed miserably, we used it as a poor mans IM. Not sure why, because we could download anything we wanted and get real IM clients, but it was a geek thing, so we did it anyway. He used the DOS "net send" stuff, and i used the samba equivalent. It was goofy, mostly we talked shit about management. I'm just surprised it took spammers this long to use it.
Now why would they bother doing this?
Because every time someone posts any Mozilla related story to Slashdot they get, well, slashdotted. Considering it's a DB driven site, it doens't take all that much to drive the server to it's knees and make it unusable. So for a day or so, they can't use a basic productivity tool. Yeah, you can just copy n paste, but this minor increase in effort probably eliminates all the casual clickthroughs.
G4s are limited to 4 GB of RAM due to their 32 bit architecture.
Minor rant, the limitation is do to address bus size. Address bus side doesn't have to be tied to overall architecture size. Of processors I've known, the MOS6502 was an 8bit processor, but 16 bit address bus. The upgrade, the MOS6581602 was selectable 8/16 bit architecture and had a 24 bit bus, besides a fully compatible 650x mode. The original 68000 has only a 24 bit address line. The original MacOS stored some flags in there and folks played with those (even though Apple told you not to) and that played havoc when real 32 bit address-bus chips came out. The 68000 was almost a hybrid as well, it had 32 bit registers, but IIRC you could only branch with 16 bit signed offsets, and the 68020 had true 32 bit addressing. the original intel 8086s had essentially a 20 bit bus that was accessible with the evil segment/offset addressing.
I'm not a chip designer, but I don't think there's a technological reason why they can't put 64 bit addressing on a 32 bit chip. You'd have to have new addressing modes and opcodes (like the 68000 => 68020, or 8086 => 80286 => 80386)) and you'd probably just say with all that work it may be simpler to go to 64 bit across the board. In a deeply pipelined architecture, you probably wouldn't want it, not having standard sizes (32 bit opcodes and data vs. mized 32 bit and 64 bit chunks) it just makes it harder to see where the instructions boundaries are.
Nazi SYS5 init architect:
Mein Furher! Ve needen maken startup of system harrrrrder to administrrrrate. Ist too eazy now. Even girly non-blue eyed non-Aryans can administrate serrrrvers now.
SVR4 Nazi Furher:
Ja wohl!!! How can we skrrrrrrew de administrrrrators?
Nazi SYS5 init architect:
split ze starrrrtup scripts, makingkt dem more komplicated.
Umm, I don't think that happened. I find SVR4 style easier. Every service in it's own seperate file. Ever try to start a system server on BSD by hand? It's harder than you think. In SV$ land, I can take any server down by running a kill script and restart it by running its startup script. hell, even FreeBSD has a SVR4 style init directory (granted, only for a single run level now). And if it's all that hard, just make
Hmm, Berkeleyness of Berkeley software, who knew?
FreeBSD (maybe all {Free,Net,Open}BSDs) uses SoftUpdates, which in some ways is better than journalling, depending on what you want.
Apple hired acclaimed documentary filmmaker Errol Morris to direct these little 30-second spots.
So does that mean Bill Gates is Mr. Death or that MS PR hacks are Fast Cheap and out of Control?
I went to my bookshelf to dust off some of the old floppies from the old //e days. My office suite was called appleworks back in mid 80s. Am I missing something here?
//e)(. I think The Apple //c and Apple //gs are where the slashy stuff started. Hmm, maybe they can sue Slasshdot for trademark infringement?
Apple brought Claris back in house, I think about a year and a half ago. The current suite is named AppleWorks As an aside, wasn't it still brackets for the ][e (vs
Faster motor means faster RPM at the driveshaft. This may or may not translate to faster car speed, depending on axel horsepower and a bunch of other stuff.
Not a troll, just out of date. The original Mini was built by Austin-Rover. BMW bought out Rover, eventually ditched pretty much everything except for the Mini. They made a new Range Rover, but actually never got a chance to sell it before Ford bought Land Rover from their hands.
Since the small nature of thse cars force a rather bulbous body type, maybe you should chose such a body from the beginning. Yes, the car we all love, the AMC Pacer.
Poor car, designed with a "futuristic" look for a motor that never came into existence, the GM Wankel rotary.
He had a Wired Article about him a few issues back. Very good read.
That's got to be a real fun one if you were, say, sitting on the seat and "something" made a backsplash that gave enough water to get the reaction going. That would be a fun trip to the ER.
Anyone besides me remember the MacGuyver episode where he used Sodium & water to explode himself out of a locked room. I forget what his trigger was.
Does anyone imagine that roaming in the US is anything other than a method to seriously soak the traveler?
Not just travellers (or in rural areas). If you get a cell phone dead spot and have to switch to analog mode, some carriers consider that "roaming" even if you're in your local area. You get hit.
Is it possible to use them both, do they use the same configuration data?
Minor quibble, but it mentions it's different than Linux because it's UCB BSD based. It's not (well, it is up to teh point that SVR4 took a lot of BSDisms) but it's SVR4 machine. Linux distros generally take a bit from classic BSD, a bit from SVR4, and a bit of whatevehell else they want, so they're all a bit different.
first posts of:
Hot grits, Natalie Portman, goatse.cx
The great trolls:
Ogg the caveman (or was it oog), Haiku guy. SOmeoen can make this list longer
My first desktop UNIX box at work was a DG/UX on 88K. Extremely slow (it was outdated by the time I got it). Basically used it for an XServer, and every once in a while used gcc on it just to check compiler warnings (because no one else used it, I could give it the latest gccc, 2.7.2 at the time, without disrupting anyone else).
(bastard onion doens't have it in their archives, and neither google nor the wayback machine have caches of it0
ZipZap tools allow users to play with three different gear ratios to adjust the "horsepower"
To be pedantic, a different gear will give you different axel torque. Higher torque usually gives you quicker acceleration, at a possible (not always) lowering of top speed - you essentially run out of RPM before the motor is maxed out. Since this has no transmission so no way of playing with different RPM bands, I bet it does lower top speed a bit.
Horsepower is work per unit of time. A different gear ratio changes the work (effort) and the time in equal opposite amounts, horsepower remains constant.
OK, what's listed as "essential"? Remember, we can only list FSF stuff here, not general GPL stuff. Also, it can only be stuff essential for the day and day running of a machine, so gcc or other compiler tools (though desperately needed to make the machine) are also scotched. We're talking desktop here, not workstation.
glibc? definitely. score one essential, easy.
Bash? OK, I use it, but I can use pdksh. I can also get real ksh if I want. Some scripts may require a true Bourne shell, but I think most of these can use ash, which is BSD license. No bash.
Emacs? I never use it. For me this just takes up space. Besides, so many editor choices, to say one text editor is essential is kind of absurd.
Ghostscript? I think they got this wrong. Ghostview is FSF, ghostscript seems to be a University tool. No ghostview.
Gnome? No app I ever thought essential required it. Besides, there's Qt and thats a whole different flame war. No Gnome.
Command line tools, diffutils findutils and the like. Hmm, another tough call. These are essential to a UNIX-like system. But would Linux be dead without them? I think they'd port BSD equivalents. Tough call. I'll say "essential, but replaceable" here.
So I'll give you glibc, and I'll give you the command line tools with the reservation that they'd probably be ported. But many things that the FSF says are essential, aren't. They're just bundled so people don't try to get the other tools. And if you want to argue about gcc I say:
But I do find X11 essential. And even LessTif is more essential to me than gnome. So the percentage of "essential" FSF stuff is much smaller than I think the FSF would like to think.
I'm not trying to hang Stallman. In my opinion he does that better than I could anyway. It just seems petty at times. I see where he's coming from, tring to get people to remember that Free Software helps people get stuff done, I just think he's going about it the wrong way.
They want to enforce the GNU/Linux issue, but hate BSD's advertising clause. This is not a troll: how do they say you can do one but not the other?
If I run a Mac With Office, and Internet Explorer, and swap out my Finder for a different shell, do I call it Microsoft/MacOS? Surely, if you get a bunch of Microsoft Code on say a System 6 era Mac (maybe less so with later larger MacOS kernels) Microsoft has the bulk of the code base on that machine. And the agreement with Microsoft and Apple a few years back to ensure Office on Mac surely shows how much Apple depended on it.
Me typing this from my Cygwin/Microsoft system.
We will call it the Alan Parson's Project
So you get the shells from Demolition Man...
No, I don't mean a CD player that can play MP3 CDs. The player has to be able to Is there a player, with recordable storage that can play normal audio CDs?
I have a friend with an old stereo, a good one, that they want to add CD and MP3 support to. But they don't have a CD-R and are unlikely to get one, so the current crop of MP3 CD players don't help much. I saw one that actually lets you record on small CDs, but can't read or write standard CDs. That won't work.
Umm, PowerPC was the AIM group, Apple IBM Motorola. Anybody remember Taligent and Pink? No? Apple and IBM actually would probably prefer it that way. IBM also bought what is now StarOffice (and OpenOffice) as a MS Office competitor. Apple was one of the first ports after OS/2.
My impression is that early Apple saw IBM as too big and slow to hurt "cool" Apple. Later years they saw IBM as an ally, kind of the Big Elephant that can take the imcoming shots while Aplle scurries behind its protection. I can't recall any animosity between them