When I was a kid my parents had a radio in every room of the house. I could never workout why. These things didn't even have stereo, or seperate speakers - just small cheap portable transistor radios (which were never "ported"). Whereas the sound system in my bedroom was a really "power-user" system. Worth more than all the other electrical equipment in the house combined. I always promised that when I could afford it I would build myself the ultimate sound system.
But now I could afford such a thing I find that all really I need is a radio in every room of the house.
Fairly soon I'll also have a computer for every room in the house - and I've got a BIG house. When my son grows-up he'll likely think I'm mad - as his PC will likely blow the pants off all of my computers - combined. Much in the same way you think anyone interested in these ITX boards must be mad. But I'm not mad, I've just integrated computers into my life in a slightly different manner than you.
So when you see hardware like this - which isn't designed for your lifestyle - don't knock it. It's mot made for you.
why even bother with Linux
Let's say you found a need for small lowish powered PCs in each room of your house. What would you rather run on it?
The seems to be two types of "user" out there. Those who what massive amounts of upgradeability, and those who don't.
I'm both.
I have a massively over powered box with masses of disks, multiple network adaptors, CD/DVD drive, CD burner, masses of memory, top-notch graphics, etc., etc. It's the computer I MUST HAVE to do what I do. It is truly "the canine's gonads".
It's also mostly an ornament. Owing to the excessive noise it generates, I only use it when I really need it. And I never need it as I've got boxes in my cellar that do everything I ever need - all running on yesterday's "must have" hardware.
So I find that now what I really need is small, quiet, unobtrissive, reasonably performing box - with a big screen. Don't need it to be upgradeable - just need one in every room in the house.
So, these mini-ITX boards look great. Small, quiet, and in all ways absolutely ideal.
Alas. I've spent so much on my techological ornament uber-beastie.... d'oh
From the TO DO section of the readme:
merge new features from OpenBSD 3.3 pf
- traffic shaping using ALTQ
- load balancing between multiple routes
- prevention up-link saturation for xDSL users
that is until you start talking subliminal messaging, which is a whole other issue.
Which issue are you referring to?
The issue that subliminal messaging is evil, will make you kill your cat, buy more popcorn, and do just about anything the evil advertisers care to tell you to do?
Or the isse that the subliminal effect has never been proven an is actaully an urban myth.
I would have said something like "If the discovery involves new laws of physics, the new laws should be shown to be equally good at explaining data that is currently understood via the theory it seeks to replace or extend, and it should also explain phenomena that the existing theory cannot". That describes both QM and Relativity perfectly:)
Indeed!
One of the cornerstones of the scientific method.
Very well put. Although I had to read it twice - and yes, my lips did move:)
Hmm, perhaps instead of 7 "rules" people should simply learn about the scientific method. Knowing that allows me to spot 99% of the bogus stuff whether or not I know much about the subject.
Which of the rules do you perceive QM as breaking?
I was referring to this one:
7. The discoverer must propose new laws of nature to explain an observation. A new law of nature, invoked to explain some extraordinary result, must not conflict with what is already known. If we must change existing laws of nature or propose new laws to account for an observation, it is almost certainly wrong.
I only know enough QM to realise I haven't got a clue. But the above rule would seem to apply to the problems reconciling Quantum Physics with Newtonian Physics.
I have identified seven indicators that a scientific claim lies well outside the bounds of rational scientific discourse. Of course, they are only warning signs -- even a claim with several of the signs could be legitimate.
I just know the above disclaimer will be ignored by most. Which makes the whole thing a bit dangerous. Afterall, according to the rules, Quantum Physics could be considered bogus.
Re:I've got no good jokes for this story...
on
Server In A Fly
·
· Score: 1
Stallman insists that man pages are obsolete and refuses to support them
So that explains the GNU fetish for "info" style documentation. No matter how stupid you are man pages work - up, down, search, etc., are all pager specific and therefore more likely remembered.
info? Never managed to get the knack. I can just about to drill down - but get back up? And why re-invent the wheel? what's wrong with HTML & lynx if you MUST have a tree based organisation?
There is a difference between "unix" and "UNIX(TM)". And possibly there is a case for claiming "UNIX(TM)" is dead.
Admining a "UNIX(TM)" system is always a pain and I for one wouldn't be sorry to see the back of Solaris.
But unix?
Darwin *BSD Linux
Seem alive and kicking to me. It also seems to me that as they are better supported and easier to maintain SysAdmins are going to fight to ensure they are around for a long time to come.
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS DRIVE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE ROAD
We do drive on the right side - the left side. Left is right and right is wrong. Could it be simpler?
Besides, globally are more miles of left-hand drive roads that there are right-hand drive. But there are more right-hand driver cars in the world. So driving on the left means less congestion. Try it sometime.;-)
He bought 17 of the cheapest IDE drives available and used Linux' LVM to get them together. The result? Almost two terabytes of disk space in regular x86 PC.
The combined MTBF is the MTBF of one drive divided by the number of units.
17 Cheap drives....
Look like Fujitsu drives to me... Haven't they had problems recently?
The only space opera that escaped network executives' meddling to any degree was Babylon 5.
I always got the impresion that the network execs bought the B5 idea because it was around the same time DS9 got under way and they were looking to compete.
Okay, so other than a space-station there is very little in common. And IIRC the pilot was made before DS9 was born - but I also remember there was a long delay between making the pilot and the show going into production.
But on the subject of TV Execs not having a clue
They almost cancelled B5 Season 5
And the cancelled the very promising sequal Excalibur part way through season 1 after mucking it about something rotten
Farscape got cancelled
As did Dark Angel
And Enterprise is in trouble.
Advertising revenue be damned, I'd cough up $2 a pop to get to see some of this stuff on a good-ish quality VCD download.
My feeling is that the 'currency' needs to be changed.
Ever seen any of those alternative currency schemes? Very simple.
I do 2 hours re-grouting your bathroom tiles, and you come round spend 2 hours fixing my PC. You can "bank" hours - so I can do my regrouting for A.N.Other - and still get you to fix my PC.
Okay, so such schemes are usually local in scope, and look poorly organised. And I fail to see how such a thing could ever be made to work with R&D. But it does highlight the fact that currency is not limited to what capitalism has given on us.
I read a while back that the antibiotic approach to dealing with bacteria will always result in resistant strains of that bacteria. You can mitigate the problem by ensuring people take the full course of antibiotics, but eventually resistant strains will emerge.
The article went on to note that a diferent approach seemed to be 100% effective in killing bacteria.
Bacteriophages.
Very simply if you take sample from the places that a particular strain of a bacteria is known to be present - an then alalyse these samples - you will eventually find a virus that simply eats the bacteria. Cultivate large amounts of the virus, and you can use it to kill the bacteria.
The article highlighted the Russians who, during the cold war, became quite good with Bateriophages. But that problems with patents and financing prevented the commercial exploitation of their knowlegebase.
From what I could understand bacteriophage development is so simple, it would be impossible to make any money out of it.
I think the term "security through obscurity" is perfectly valid, and not at all absurd. It indicates a mindset that suggests being shady is all it takes to make you secure.
For instance not putting signs on the NOC so it can't be found. Then letting any fool wander in. That's security through obscurity.
Whereas not putting signs on the NOC so it can't be found. Then making people jump through hoops before you'll open the door. That would be security WITH obscurity.
Far too often the suits (and, indeed, some techies I work with) seem to think being obscure is sufficient. The slogan "security through obscurity is no security" helps make the job of convincing such fools marginally easier.
Slashdot Mirror
if all you use your computer for
When I was a kid my parents had a radio in every room of the house. I could never workout why. These things didn't even have stereo, or seperate speakers - just small cheap portable transistor radios (which were never "ported"). Whereas the sound system in my bedroom was a really "power-user" system. Worth more than all the other electrical equipment in the house combined. I always promised that when I could afford it I would build myself the ultimate sound system.
But now I could afford such a thing I find that all really I need is a radio in every room of the house.
Fairly soon I'll also have a computer for every room in the house - and I've got a BIG house. When my son grows-up he'll likely think I'm mad - as his PC will likely blow the pants off all of my computers - combined. Much in the same way you think anyone interested in these ITX boards must be mad. But I'm not mad, I've just integrated computers into my life in a slightly different manner than you.
So when you see hardware like this - which isn't designed for your lifestyle - don't knock it. It's mot made for you.
why even bother with Linux
Let's say you found a need for small lowish powered PCs in each room of your house. What would you rather run on it?
Me? I'm sticking to the OS I know and love.
The seems to be two types of "user" out there. Those who what massive amounts of upgradeability, and those who don't.
I'm both.
I have a massively over powered box with masses of disks, multiple network adaptors, CD/DVD drive, CD burner, masses of memory, top-notch graphics, etc., etc. It's the computer I MUST HAVE to do what I do. It is truly "the canine's gonads".
It's also mostly an ornament. Owing to the excessive noise it generates, I only use it when I really need it. And I never need it as I've got boxes in my cellar that do everything I ever need - all running on yesterday's "must have" hardware.
So I find that now what I really need is small, quiet, unobtrissive, reasonably performing box - with a big screen. Don't need it to be upgradeable - just need one in every room in the house.
So, these mini-ITX boards look great. Small, quiet, and in all ways absolutely ideal.
Alas. I've spent so much on my techological ornament uber-beastie.... d'oh
I've been waiting for this for sooo long.
Alas, it's lagging behind OpenBSD's PF
From the TO DO section of the readme:
merge new features from OpenBSD 3.3 pf
- traffic shaping using ALTQ
- load balancing between multiple routes
- prevention up-link saturation for xDSL users
that is until you start talking subliminal messaging, which is a whole other issue.
Which issue are you referring to?
The issue that subliminal messaging is evil, will make you kill your cat, buy more popcorn, and do just about anything the evil advertisers care to tell you to do?
Or the isse that the subliminal effect has never been proven an is actaully an urban myth.
with something like "My Documents".
~username (tilde username) works for me.
I like using Linux, but even as a seasoned IT pro, the directory structure and "what goes where" of a *nix system still bugs me.
You could aways port the hier(7) manpage from a FreeBSD system - then insist that Linux (solaris, irix, etc., etc.) crowd follow the standard.
I would have said something like "If the discovery involves new laws of physics, the new laws should be shown to be equally good at explaining data that is currently understood via the theory it seeks to replace or extend, and it should also explain phenomena that the existing theory cannot". That describes both QM and Relativity perfectly :)
:)
Indeed!
One of the cornerstones of the scientific method.
Very well put. Although I had to read it twice - and yes, my lips did move
Hmm, perhaps instead of 7 "rules" people should simply learn about the scientific method. Knowing that allows me to spot 99% of the bogus stuff whether or not I know much about the subject.
Which of the rules do you perceive QM as breaking?
I was referring to this one:
7. The discoverer must propose new laws of nature to explain an observation. A new law of nature, invoked to explain some extraordinary result, must not conflict with what is already known. If we must change existing laws of nature or propose new laws to account for an observation, it is almost certainly wrong.
I only know enough QM to realise I haven't got a clue. But the above rule would seem to apply to the problems reconciling Quantum Physics with Newtonian Physics.
I have identified seven indicators that a scientific claim lies well outside the bounds of rational scientific discourse. Of course, they are only warning signs -- even a claim with several of the signs could be legitimate.
I just know the above disclaimer will be ignored by most. Which makes the whole thing a bit dangerous. Afterall, according to the rules, Quantum Physics could be considered bogus.
I just can't think of any good ones.
Best I could come up with was...
Now with 802.11a - WiFly.
Oh damn-it.
;-)
Next time I'll just keep my big mouth shut.
Stallman insists that man pages are obsolete and refuses to support them
So that explains the GNU fetish for "info" style documentation. No matter how stupid you are man pages work - up, down, search, etc., are all pager specific and therefore more likely remembered.
info? Never managed to get the knack. I can just about to drill down - but get back up? And why re-invent the wheel? what's wrong with HTML & lynx if you MUST have a tree based organisation?
which is incredibly wrongheaded
Indeed.
There is a difference between "unix" and "UNIX(TM)". And possibly there is a case for claiming "UNIX(TM)" is dead.
Admining a "UNIX(TM)" system is always a pain and I for one wouldn't be sorry to see the back of Solaris.
But unix?
Darwin
*BSD
Linux
Seem alive and kicking to me. It also seems to me that as they are better supported and easier to maintain SysAdmins are going to fight to ensure they are around for a long time to come.
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS DRIVE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE ROAD
;-)
We do drive on the right side - the left side. Left is right and right is wrong. Could it be simpler?
Besides, globally are more miles of left-hand drive roads that there are right-hand drive. But there are more right-hand driver cars in the world. So driving on the left means less congestion. Try it sometime.
Honestly. Hands up if anyone here would accept something too good to be true on face value.
Okay, those of you with your hands up... have I got a great deal for you. For just 9.99....
He bought 17 of the cheapest IDE drives available and used Linux' LVM to get them together. The result? Almost two terabytes of disk space in regular x86 PC.
The combined MTBF is the MTBF of one drive divided by the number of units.
17 Cheap drives....
Look like Fujitsu drives to me... Haven't they had problems recently?
Don't hold out much hope for reliability.
So not exactly useful, but 10/10 for style.
The only space opera that escaped network executives' meddling to any degree was Babylon 5.
I always got the impresion that the network execs bought the B5 idea because it was around the same time DS9 got under way and they were looking to compete.
Okay, so other than a space-station there is very little in common. And IIRC the pilot was made before DS9 was born - but I also remember there was a long delay between making the pilot and the show going into production.
But on the subject of TV Execs not having a clue
They almost cancelled B5 Season 5
And the cancelled the very promising sequal Excalibur part way through season 1 after mucking it about something rotten
Farscape got cancelled
As did Dark Angel
And Enterprise is in trouble.
Advertising revenue be damned, I'd cough up $2 a pop to get to see some of this stuff on a good-ish quality VCD download.
no-one dies
IIRC, there was one death in the A-Team. An African Game Warden shot by poachers.
The FBI recently had some poor guy banged-up in South Africa for three weeks becasue his name was the same as a possible alias once used by a conman.
"When travelers check in, their names will be punched into the system..."
I wonder is this system will be equally inept. hope so, I could do with a decent laugh.
Imagine...
Mr Brian Sladen, I'm arresting you on the grounds that the computer thinks you must be a terrorist specialising in encryption...
It makes me wonder why people would imply such simple solutions to a complex problem without understanding it first.
Precicely because I don't understand it. And I was mentioning a half remembered article.
My feeling is that the 'currency' needs to be changed.
Ever seen any of those alternative currency schemes? Very simple.
I do 2 hours re-grouting your bathroom tiles, and you come round spend 2 hours fixing my PC. You can "bank" hours - so I can do my regrouting for A.N.Other - and still get you to fix my PC.
Okay, so such schemes are usually local in scope, and look poorly organised. And I fail to see how such a thing could ever be made to work with R&D. But it does highlight the fact that currency is not limited to what capitalism has given on us.
I read a while back that the antibiotic approach to dealing with bacteria will always result in resistant strains of that bacteria. You can mitigate the problem by ensuring people take the full course of antibiotics, but eventually resistant strains will emerge.
The article went on to note that a diferent approach seemed to be 100% effective in killing bacteria.
Bacteriophages.
Very simply if you take sample from the places that a particular strain of a bacteria is known to be present - an then alalyse these samples - you will eventually find a virus that simply eats the bacteria. Cultivate large amounts of the virus, and you can use it to kill the bacteria.
The article highlighted the Russians who, during the cold war, became quite good with Bateriophages. But that problems with patents and financing prevented the commercial exploitation
of their knowlegebase.
From what I could understand bacteriophage development is so simple, it would be impossible to make any money out of it.
Can't make any money out of it?!!?
Makes you think.
Another silly patent.
/. could be prior art...
A method and system for conducting an electronic discussion relating to a topic
I'm wondering if
I think the term "security through obscurity" is perfectly valid, and not at all absurd. It indicates a mindset that suggests being shady is all it takes to make you secure.
For instance not putting signs on the NOC so it can't be found. Then letting any fool wander in. That's security through obscurity.
Whereas not putting signs on the NOC so it can't be found. Then making people jump through hoops before you'll open the door. That would be security WITH obscurity.
Far too often the suits (and, indeed, some techies I work with) seem to think being obscure is sufficient. The slogan "security through obscurity is no security" helps make the job of convincing such fools marginally easier.
Just two systems? I've got 6 systems in one box. A 386sx, 386dx, 486sx2, 486dx4, CYRIX 686,and a Pentium. It's got a big label on the front too:
Obsolete Hardware
Hmm, I wonder if I could get on the front page if I posted some photos on the web?
to a portable drive
Last time I saw a portable Firewire drive, the performance sucked big time. Turns out the actual drive was IDE.