>A single core on a 3Ghz Core2 can match the performance of Padlock.
Which of course, is pathetic, all things considered. It's like hammering in a screw. Yeah sure, with a big enough hammer it'll go in...
>There is nothing magical about this
Who mentioned magic? I sure as hell didn't.
>The fact that the Core2 can keep up says volumes about the poor implementation of the C7.
Yes, an Intel 3.0GHz Core2 CPU at 100% load keeping up with a ~12W fanless CPU. I can see how you'd consider that a loss for the VIA implementation, if you're on drugs.
I don't know what the hell the point of your comment was, I seems to be argumentative just for the sake of it. The facts are simple: If Intel and AMD worked together on a cryptographic instruction set, we'd get FANTASTICALLY BETTER performance in these scenarios. We're talking 10-20x the performance of just bruteforcing it, spending CPU time that could be used for something better.
If you want to argue against that, I suggest you visit the local bar. I believe its name is/dev/null
The only thing disappointing is that we still don't have PadLock[esque] instructions in AMD's and Intel's mainstream CPUs. You need to max out a modern 2-core highly clocked CPU to match a fanless C7 1.2GHz CPU in SHA and AES performance. What the hell is the problem? NIHS?
Sweden has always been passing on intelligence to the US. We've lost people to get you the intelligence too. No doubt the laws which forbade FRA from snooping in cables have caused the stream of quality intelligence to the US to dry up, and I'm sure the US put pressure on our officials to get back on track.
That said, I believe this is mostly misdirection, but that's me.
Using that metric, neither are the C64 and the Amiga?
I think I just nailed you with that one sir.
As for the games, the first two were great! The rest seems to have sucked though. I played the demo of the third was almost bored to tears, and completely ignored the fourth due to that.
They've always been available in both XP and Linux versions. The difference is that the original 700 version was out using linux first, and XP came later, the newer versions are doing it the other way around. 901 are now becoming available in the west, and so far it's all Windows XP. The cynic in me wonders if Microsoft called Asus up and said "If you ship XP versions one month before the linux versions, we'll give you a nice little rebate on your XP licenses. giddigy"
No one has said that console games should REQUIRE keyboard and mouse, we're saying that they should SUPPORT it, as an option as favoured as the regular controller(s).
>no. to do that would be to alienate their core audience
What? Their greatest fans are going to go.. ''Oh, must hav... wait, there's a PS3 version too? Then I will not buy the PC version. Blizzard are traitors!''
I'm not talking about dumbing down (ha!) the PC version, I'm talking about doing console versions too.
I too have both a mouse and keyboard plugged into my PS3, but sadly console developers seems stuck in the 80s and, with a few exceptions, believe people actually PREFER the standard controller in games like FPSes.
In fact, I cancelled my Battlefield: Bad Company pre-order when no dev would commit to fixing this issue. B:BC is so backwards that you can't even flip the left and right analog controls. Apparently the 10% of the population that are left-handed and have better motor skills in their left hand (which controls movement, the right controls aiming), can just go suck it.
Sometimes I wonder what kind of idiots design these games. They have millions-of-dollar budgets, but can't get a basic thing like keyboard and mouse support, or even swapping left/right stick, into the game. They do have time to plaster the internet with weekly screenshots and videos though.
No matter how good a software sells, they'd still add DRM to it, so no, "supporting the big guy" doesn't help and never will. There'll never be so few that does not pay that you'll get to enjoy a DRM-free product (I'm talking now about the big boys, there'll be exceptions which will have nothing to do with amount of sales previously generated).
Destroying them by not buying, that'll help. For very destructive values of 'help'.
I think we'll try that one if they don't wisen up. We did the other one already, and it only got worse.
Developers without fail will publicly blame the publishers, neatly "forgetting" to mention that they, the developers, agree to the terms in the contract when they sign it, thereby validating it. If they really didn't want this DRM crap then they wouldn't leave control of it to the publishers, but they do, time and time again. Then they try to shift the blame.
Us gamers need to realize this and not accept the weak excuses of developers who support these braindead DRM schemes.
I don't know about the rest of the world, but I now do my PC game purchasing decisions based on DRM, moreso than price.
Note sure what your point is. It's all pretty irrelevant since I either didn't have access to, or used almost any of those. BBSes came way way later and the magazines were too expensive and too hard to get access to (not USian or UKian). TV programmes about computers? Yeah, like.. 10 years down the road.
DMZ was the dominating magazine, but even that wouldn't come along until 1986, about four years after the introduction of the C64.
I wasn't trying to come across as 'smart', I was trying to point out that children aren't idiots.
>and the applications are too complex for children to use.
That line makes me want to say 'fuck you'. The idiots here aren't the children nor the hackers, that much I'm sure of. If I could figure out the C64 [mostly] on my own in a world where there was no 'world wide web' at my fingertips, and adults would go 'compute-what?', I'm sure today's kids will do alright with these computers.
I guess the upside is that even if this guy stood up before 100 children and told them the machine is too hard for them to use, if 99 of them would be naive enough to believe him, there would be that one kid thinking 'oh yeah? This is so on'.
>The problem is, OpenSSL needed a buffer in which to XOR several sources of randomness
Doesn't make any sense. The output of/dev/random isn't going to become any more random by XORing other streams into it. The whole purpose of/dev/random is that software won't have to reinvent/ad-hoc a stream of randomness. If openssl needs entropy, it should just read from/dev/random, period. If they'd done that, there'd been no valgrind warning, and no asstastic patching.
IANAC, but I sometimes pretend to know some basic shit about security and cryptography.
This is what I want to know. I have a hardward-rng seeding/dev/random, so why the hell are openssl playing around with uninitialized memory instead of just drawing from the source?
May 13 20:14:22 xxxxxxxx rngd[2534]: stats: bits received from HRNG source: 60700064 May 13 20:14:22 xxxxxxxx rngd[2534]: stats: bits sent to kernel pool: 60601536 May 13 20:14:22 xxxxxxxx rngd[2534]: stats: entropy added to kernel pool: 60601536 May 13 20:14:22 xxxxxxxx rngd[2534]: stats: HRNG source speed: (min=363.948; avg=2004.798; max=2205.426)Kibits/s May 13 20:14:22 xxxxxxxx rngd[2534]: stats: Time spent starving for entropy: (min=0; avg=0.000; max=0)us
Well 'duh' you're never starved if the one package that should really use you, doesn't:-(
> SVN is currently integrated with our IDEs (all 3), one of the main selling points in choosing a VCS.
Where I work we all use the cmdline, so IDE integration is a complete non-issue in selecting a SCM for some teams.
> IT loves being able to simply tgz the SVN directory
Pretty sure that's not the correct way to backup a Subversion repo, unless by 'simply' you mean that you first hot-backup.py the repo and then tar it up.
Slashdot Mirror
>A single core on a 3Ghz Core2 can match the performance of Padlock.
Which of course, is pathetic, all things considered. It's like hammering in a screw. Yeah sure, with a big enough hammer it'll go in...
>There is nothing magical about this
Who mentioned magic? I sure as hell didn't.
>The fact that the Core2 can keep up says volumes about the poor implementation of the C7.
Yes, an Intel 3.0GHz Core2 CPU at 100% load keeping up with a ~12W fanless CPU. I can see how you'd consider that a loss for the VIA implementation, if you're on drugs.
I don't know what the hell the point of your comment was, I seems to be argumentative just for the sake of it. The facts are simple: If Intel and AMD worked together on a cryptographic instruction set, we'd get FANTASTICALLY BETTER performance in these scenarios. We're talking 10-20x the performance of just bruteforcing it, spending CPU time that could be used for something better.
If you want to argue against that, I suggest you visit the local bar. I believe its name is /dev/null
The only thing disappointing is that we still don't have PadLock[esque] instructions in AMD's and Intel's mainstream CPUs. You need to max out a modern 2-core highly clocked CPU to match a fanless C7 1.2GHz CPU in SHA and AES performance. What the hell is the problem? NIHS?
XSHA for teh wins already!
Yeah, the single line "Javascript supports C++-style line comments." can't possibly count as a book, can it?
I guess the rest is just 'this page intentionally left blank' filler!
Yeah, I would have liked Wendy Hoopes. I think she could do it.
Sweden has always been passing on intelligence to the US. We've lost people to get you the intelligence too. No doubt the laws which forbade FRA from snooping in cables have caused the stream of quality intelligence to the US to dry up, and I'm sure the US put pressure on our officials to get back on track.
That said, I believe this is mostly misdirection, but that's me.
Does politics bring in the idiots from the streets, or does politics create idiots from sane stock? Discuss!
I'll have to take your word for it. Possibly we have somewhat different ideas of what something being a legend means.
Using that metric, neither are the C64 and the Amiga?
I think I just nailed you with that one sir.
As for the games, the first two were great! The rest seems to have sucked though. I played the demo of the third was almost bored to tears, and completely ignored the fourth due to that.
They've always been available in both XP and Linux versions. The difference is that the original 700 version was out using linux first, and XP came later, the newer versions are doing it the other way around. 901 are now becoming available in the west, and so far it's all Windows XP. The cynic in me wonders if Microsoft called Asus up and said "If you ship XP versions one month before the linux versions, we'll give you a nice little rebate on your XP licenses. giddigy"
Hey, that's a pretty cool concept.
$ cat spanish.txt | http://google.com/language_tools/tr?ESEN | grep "terrorist"
I'm sure I'm years late to the party. <sigh>
I guess Pascal is truly dead then.
Dear Idiot child,
No one has said that console games should REQUIRE keyboard and mouse, we're saying that they should SUPPORT it, as an option as favoured as the regular controller(s).
Please stop being dumb.
>no. to do that would be to alienate their core audience
What? Their greatest fans are going to go.. ''Oh, must hav... wait, there's a PS3 version too? Then I will not buy the PC version. Blizzard are traitors!''
I'm not talking about dumbing down (ha!) the PC version, I'm talking about doing console versions too.
I too have both a mouse and keyboard plugged into my PS3, but sadly console developers seems stuck in the 80s and, with a few exceptions, believe people actually PREFER the standard controller in games like FPSes.
In fact, I cancelled my Battlefield: Bad Company pre-order when no dev would commit to fixing this issue. B:BC is so backwards that you can't even flip the left and right analog controls. Apparently the 10% of the population that are left-handed and have better motor skills in their left hand (which controls movement, the right controls aiming), can just go suck it.
Sometimes I wonder what kind of idiots design these games. They have millions-of-dollar budgets, but can't get a basic thing like keyboard and mouse support, or even swapping left/right stick, into the game. They do have time to plaster the internet with weekly screenshots and videos though.
Surely The Wither was released in 2007? Though we're still waiting for the 'enhanced edition'
He and Floppy should mate.
No matter how good a software sells, they'd still add DRM to it, so no, "supporting the big guy" doesn't help and never will. There'll never be so few that does not pay that you'll get to enjoy a DRM-free product (I'm talking now about the big boys, there'll be exceptions which will have nothing to do with amount of sales previously generated).
Destroying them by not buying, that'll help. For very destructive values of 'help'.
I think we'll try that one if they don't wisen up. We did the other one already, and it only got worse.
Developers without fail will publicly blame the publishers, neatly "forgetting" to mention that they, the developers, agree to the terms in the contract when they sign it, thereby validating it. If they really didn't want this DRM crap then they wouldn't leave control of it to the publishers, but they do, time and time again. Then they try to shift the blame.
Us gamers need to realize this and not accept the weak excuses of developers who support these braindead DRM schemes.
I don't know about the rest of the world, but I now do my PC game purchasing decisions based on DRM, moreso than price.
>That's the downside from copy protection. If you make it [...] it is easily cracked.
HTH. HAND.
And who do you think, in the end, gets to pay for all those support calls?
Hint: It's doesn't come out of the bonus system of the company's principals.
Note sure what your point is. It's all pretty irrelevant since I either didn't have access to, or used almost any of those. BBSes came way way later and the magazines were too expensive and too hard to get access to (not USian or UKian). TV programmes about computers? Yeah, like.. 10 years down the road.
DMZ was the dominating magazine, but even that wouldn't come along until 1986, about four years after the introduction of the C64.
I wasn't trying to come across as 'smart', I was trying to point out that children aren't idiots.
>and the applications are too complex for children to use.
That line makes me want to say 'fuck you'. The idiots here aren't the children nor the hackers, that much I'm sure of. If I could figure out the C64 [mostly] on my own in a world where there was no 'world wide web' at my fingertips, and adults would go 'compute-what?', I'm sure today's kids will do alright with these computers.
I guess the upside is that even if this guy stood up before 100 children and told them the machine is too hard for them to use, if 99 of them would be naive enough to believe him, there would be that one kid thinking 'oh yeah? This is so on'.
>The problem is, OpenSSL needed a buffer in which to XOR several sources of randomness
Doesn't make any sense. The output of /dev/random isn't going to become any more random by XORing other streams into it. The whole purpose of /dev/random is that software won't have to reinvent/ad-hoc a stream of randomness. If openssl needs entropy, it should just read from /dev/random, period. If they'd done that, there'd been no valgrind warning, and no asstastic patching.
IANAC, but I sometimes pretend to know some basic shit about security and cryptography.
This is what I want to know. I have a hardward-rng seeding /dev/random, so why the hell are openssl playing around with uninitialized memory instead of just drawing from the source?
May 13 20:14:22 xxxxxxxx rngd[2534]: stats: bits received from HRNG source: 60700064
May 13 20:14:22 xxxxxxxx rngd[2534]: stats: bits sent to kernel pool: 60601536
May 13 20:14:22 xxxxxxxx rngd[2534]: stats: entropy added to kernel pool: 60601536
May 13 20:14:22 xxxxxxxx rngd[2534]: stats: HRNG source speed: (min=363.948; avg=2004.798; max=2205.426)Kibits/s
May 13 20:14:22 xxxxxxxx rngd[2534]: stats: Time spent starving for entropy: (min=0; avg=0.000; max=0)us
Well 'duh' you're never starved if the one package that should really use you, doesn't :-(
> SVN is currently integrated with our IDEs (all 3), one of the main selling points in choosing a VCS.
Where I work we all use the cmdline, so IDE integration is a complete non-issue in selecting a SCM for some teams.
> IT loves being able to simply tgz the SVN directory
Pretty sure that's not the correct way to backup a Subversion repo, unless by 'simply' you mean that you first hot-backup.py the repo and then tar it up.
Ought to be a minor change. I just had to rebase the main URL for the archive since it changed on the 16th:
#baseurl="http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive"
baseurl="http://www.unitedmedia.com/comics/dilbert/archive"
I grab the filename and extension with this regular expression:
/\/comics\/dilbert\/archive(\/images\/dilbert.*?)\.(gif|jpg|jpeg)/i
Of course this gives you the non-colored strip (which is fine by me)