if he's emotionally attached to the tapeworm because he needs a friend, then the parasite-parasite relationship might be considered symbiotic. me, i'm not one to judge::coughlosercough::
The definition of symbiosis is controversial among scientists. Some believe symbiosis should only refer to persistent mutualisms, while others believe it should apply to any types of persistent biological interactions (i.e. mutualistic, commensalistic, or parasitic).
or vagina. symbiotic vagina? been there, done that...
what's puny? revision 1 drives had at least 250GB capacity. and while there are some shops that will buy this kind of crap, it doesn't have to be shops buying used, cheap gear. i recently bought a used server from a company for about $100; it has 6 250GB drives. a lot of laptops have that much or less storage space on their drives. you could get a macbook pro 4 years ago with only 160GB storage (i sold mine or i could give you some specs). i think you zoomed in on the one case that satisfies your disagreement and failed to see the bigger picture.
you didn't bother to RTFA, good for you. it says quite plainly that (only part of) the problem is not drives that don't support ncq, but those drives that have it and disable it. and that was a relatively small portion of TFA. here's how the disks lie:
File systems need to be aware of the change to the underlying media and ensure that they adapt by always writing in multiples of the larger sector size. Historically, file systems were organized to store files smaller than 512 bytes in a single sector. With the change in disk technology, most file systems have avoided the slowdown of 512-byte writes by making 4,096 bytes the smallest allocation size. Thus, a file smaller than 512 bytes is now placed in a 4,096-byte block. The result of this change is that it takes up to eight times as much space to store a file system with predominantly small files. Since the average file size has been growing over the years, for a typical file system the switch to making 4,096 bytes the minimum allocation size has resulted in a 10- to 15-percent increase in required storage.
just to clarify what the author's point was:
The conclusion is that file systems need to be aware of the disk technology on which they are running to ensure that they can reliably deliver the semantics that they have promised. Users need to be aware of the constraints that different disk technology places on file systems and select a technology that will not result in poor performance for the type of file-system workload they will be using. Perhaps going forward they should just eschew those lying disks and switch to using flash-memory technology—unless, of course, the flash storage starts using the same cost-cutting tricks.
if you want to argue that, great, go nuts. nobody who actually RTFA thinks the argument is really about ncq. the ac you responded to said
the way I interpret TFA, the problem also applies to SATA drives which do not implement the NCQ specification.
well, here's what TFA actually said:
Luckily, SATA (serial ATA) has a new definition called NCQ (Native Command Queueing) that has a bit in the write command that tells the drive if it should report completion when media has been written or when cache has been hit. If the driver correctly sets this bit, then the disk will display the correct behavior.
In the real world, many of the drives targeted to the desktop market do not implement the NCQ specification. To ensure reliability, the system must either disable the write cache on the disk or issue a cache-flush request after every metadata update, log update (for journaling file systems), or fsync system call. Both of these techniques lead to noticeable performance degradation, so they are often disabled, putting file systems at risk if the power fails. Systems for which both speed and reliability are important should not use ATA disks. Rather, they should use drives that implement Fibre Channel, SCSI, or SATA with support for NCQ
i hope it's painfully obvious by now that the point about ncq is not that some drives don't have it; it's that some don't use it -- mostly so you don't go giving their drives bad reviews for being slow but unnoticeably reliable. if it's disabled, you can enable it. what sata drives don't have ncq? i asked wikipedia:
SATA revision 1.0 (SATA 1.5 Gbit/s).... During the initial period after SATA 1.5 Gbit/s finalization, adapter and drive manufacturers used a "bridge chip" to convert existing PATA designs for use with the SATA interface. Bridged drives have a SATA connector, may include either or both kinds of power connectors, and, in general, perform identically to their PATA equivalents. Most lack support for some SATA-specific features such as NCQ. Native SATA products quickly eclipsed bridged products with the introduction of the second generation of SATA drives.
so yeah, probably not a whole lot of these drives being sold new, but there are lots of shops that buy used gear because it's cheap. these older sata drives haven't all just disappeared when revision 2.0 came out.
news flash! you're an idiot!
you haven't bought the music from a streaming service. you've bought access privileges to listen to what they serve, like sirius or xm radio. you don't own anything you listen to on satellite radio, which is essentially just a streaming music service locked to some proprietary hardware. you don't own what pandora decides to play for you, even if you pay for a subscription. and you know i hate apple as much as the next guy but the itunes store does allow you to redownload music and movies that you've purchased from them. it might have some shitty drm in it, but at least if you delete it from your computer or get a new one, you can get your purchases back. i believe zune offers the same.
you're that guy! god, i hate you! you're the motherfucker who leaves comments in the code i inherit that says shit like, "this should never happen." i could strangle you! please tell me you're just trolling.
what i see the most is there's no separate set of eyes looking at a bit of code about to be released to production. the developer is left to test his own work (usually without test suites, because if you have those then you are probably not the only one looking at the code either), and there are so many ways he can get it to work on his own machine while it breaks for everyone else. bigger companies/bigger projects will have a qa/qc/uat/whatever process before release, but it seems like the majority of programmers are cowboys who trust themselves way too much.
there are so many code editors that offer this feature (and good ones too, not just that steamy pile eclipse), i can't believe you don't use one yet. even vim has a plugin to collapse comments. notepad++ can do it too. in fact, what are you using that doesn't offer this feature? it's easier for me to find one that does than not.
no argument here. i was responding to the comment about swabbing stuff you've touched. i didn't think i had to explain that connecting semen dna to a rape is pretty easy.
i think EA publishes a lot of great games, but quite a few of them were doing just fine without multiplayer. mass effect and dead space are two titles i think are amazing game series, but the multiplayer tacked onto both was just superfluous. i tried to find a multiplayer game of dead space recently, and couldn't find more than 3 other people -- lobby couldn't fill, game couldn't start. what's the point of having multiplayer if you won't even keep people interested in it? the new co-op in the upcoming dead space 3 looks interesting, but if it were mandatory i'd have to write my first letter to a company ever. those two games, in their single-player only incarnations, are perfect the way they are.
conversely, look at another EA title meant to be played multiplayer, army of two. even this game allows you to play solo with a computer partner. how can they possibly miss the value in that? did they really think a bromance shooter didn't sell so well because you allowed them to play alone? fuck me running. the developer of the new army of two game pointed out "high fives during shooting" was the angle they were looking to tear down and replace. yes, it's the corny jokes and violence made cute that's a turnoff, but those mechanics were put there to make a co-op experience more... co-op-y (that's not a word, trust me). mandatory multiplayer is stupid. stupid stupid stupid.
Homeopathic care is enormously valued by thousands of people and in an NHS that the Government repeatedly tells us is "patient-led" it ought to be available where a doctor and patient believe that a homeopathic treatment may be of benefit to the patient.
it's my understanding there are no "doctors" that believe in homeopathic treatment -- such a person is known as a homeopath. you know, like a psychopath or sociopath. except this one attacks with ignorance, neglect, placebos, and good intentions.
until you discover some new maths that get around the failings of the other maths. a thousand years ago it was mathematically impossible to do any quantum teleportation. it's mathematically impossible for me to push a piano through a doorway until i magically change the width of the piano by turning it lengthwise. it's mathematically impossible for a 4 year old to push the same piano at all until they age to a point where they are strong enough. our maths just aren't strong enough for this.
maybe one day we learn to manipulate higher dimensions, sort of how i manipulated the 3rd dimension to push a piano through a doorway. where there's a will, there's a way. if no one wants to spend any time finding a way, then you're right, it can't be done.
are we talking starcraft gauss rifle? fallout 3/new vegas gauss rifle? it looks like it belongs in dead space. it also looks like a glorified version of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPciBQnZw3c
and usually they have to get the track info from gracenote or a similiar program.
any decent ipod backup program will use itunes' track info metadata to construct the filename. i have about a dozen friends who produce original hip hop and electronic music. i put their music on my ipod and backed it up without gracenote's help. wav files don't have id3 data, but when you import a wav file into itunes it lets you associate the same kind of data to the file. this allows itunes to have metadata about the file regardless of whether it supports id3. if your ipod backup program can't do this then it sucks and you probably haven't looked around for one in the last 5-8 years. copypod/copytrans does this, ipodmax does this, ipod rip does this -- i can't find an ipod backup program that doesn't.
on the other hand, when the same programs are used to import music files into itunes they will usually attempt to use cddb's data. but we're not talking about importing.
you're the fucking retard. look up what version of the castle doctrine your area has and get back to me. better yet, look up what version of the castle doctrine your area has and then go fuck yourself. there are quite a few states with laws that disagree with your naive opinion. you obviously don't know any gun laws. btw, a criminal intruding in your home does not have the right to defend themselves. they can retreat or get shot. attacking the homeowner only justifies the homeowner even more. if a criminal kills a homeowner "in self defense" of their burglary, it's not self defense, it's murder. you're a moron.
In order to transfer music back you need a 3rd party program and what you get is music files with not song info attached so you have to hope that gracenote can find what song it is or you're stuck manually entering all the data on it.
i believe you may have heard of such third party programs, but i'm not convinced you've ever used one. copypod renames all those 4-letter files to the track number-artist name-album name-song title, and that's just one program. and it's had that feature for years and years now.
being the type that needs micromanagement and being the type that doesn't care to run their own business are not the same thing. thanks for coming out.
Slashdot Mirror
(wikipedia gets him off the hook http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbiote)
The definition of symbiosis is controversial among scientists. Some believe symbiosis should only refer to persistent mutualisms, while others believe it should apply to any types of persistent biological interactions (i.e. mutualistic, commensalistic, or parasitic).
or vagina. symbiotic vagina? been there, done that...
what's puny? revision 1 drives had at least 250GB capacity. and while there are some shops that will buy this kind of crap, it doesn't have to be shops buying used, cheap gear. i recently bought a used server from a company for about $100; it has 6 250GB drives. a lot of laptops have that much or less storage space on their drives. you could get a macbook pro 4 years ago with only 160GB storage (i sold mine or i could give you some specs). i think you zoomed in on the one case that satisfies your disagreement and failed to see the bigger picture.
File systems need to be aware of the change to the underlying media and ensure that they adapt by always writing in multiples of the larger sector size. Historically, file systems were organized to store files smaller than 512 bytes in a single sector. With the change in disk technology, most file systems have avoided the slowdown of 512-byte writes by making 4,096 bytes the smallest allocation size. Thus, a file smaller than 512 bytes is now placed in a 4,096-byte block. The result of this change is that it takes up to eight times as much space to store a file system with predominantly small files. Since the average file size has been growing over the years, for a typical file system the switch to making 4,096 bytes the minimum allocation size has resulted in a 10- to 15-percent increase in required storage.
just to clarify what the author's point was:
The conclusion is that file systems need to be aware of the disk technology on which they are running to ensure that they can reliably deliver the semantics that they have promised. Users need to be aware of the constraints that different disk technology places on file systems and select a technology that will not result in poor performance for the type of file-system workload they will be using. Perhaps going forward they should just eschew those lying disks and switch to using flash-memory technology—unless, of course, the flash storage starts using the same cost-cutting tricks.
if you want to argue that, great, go nuts. nobody who actually RTFA thinks the argument is really about ncq. the ac you responded to said
the way I interpret TFA, the problem also applies to SATA drives which do not implement the NCQ specification.
well, here's what TFA actually said:
Luckily, SATA (serial ATA) has a new definition called NCQ (Native Command Queueing) that has a bit in the write command that tells the drive if it should report completion when media has been written or when cache has been hit. If the driver correctly sets this bit, then the disk will display the correct behavior.
In the real world, many of the drives targeted to the desktop market do not implement the NCQ specification. To ensure reliability, the system must either disable the write cache on the disk or issue a cache-flush request after every metadata update, log update (for journaling file systems), or fsync system call. Both of these techniques lead to noticeable performance degradation, so they are often disabled, putting file systems at risk if the power fails. Systems for which both speed and reliability are important should not use ATA disks. Rather, they should use drives that implement Fibre Channel, SCSI, or SATA with support for NCQ
i hope it's painfully obvious by now that the point about ncq is not that some drives don't have it; it's that some don't use it -- mostly so you don't go giving their drives bad reviews for being slow but unnoticeably reliable. if it's disabled, you can enable it. what sata drives don't have ncq? i asked wikipedia:
SATA revision 1.0 (SATA 1.5 Gbit/s) .... During the initial period after SATA 1.5 Gbit/s finalization, adapter and drive manufacturers used a "bridge chip" to convert existing PATA designs for use with the SATA interface. Bridged drives have a SATA connector, may include either or both kinds of power connectors, and, in general, perform identically to their PATA equivalents. Most lack support for some SATA-specific features such as NCQ. Native SATA products quickly eclipsed bridged products with the introduction of the second generation of SATA drives.
so yeah, probably not a whole lot of these drives being sold new, but there are lots of shops that buy used gear because it's cheap. these older sata drives haven't all just disappeared when revision 2.0 came out.
news flash! you're an idiot!
you haven't bought the music from a streaming service. you've bought access privileges to listen to what they serve, like sirius or xm radio. you don't own anything you listen to on satellite radio, which is essentially just a streaming music service locked to some proprietary hardware. you don't own what pandora decides to play for you, even if you pay for a subscription. and you know i hate apple as much as the next guy but the itunes store does allow you to redownload music and movies that you've purchased from them. it might have some shitty drm in it, but at least if you delete it from your computer or get a new one, you can get your purchases back. i believe zune offers the same.
you're that guy! god, i hate you! you're the motherfucker who leaves comments in the code i inherit that says shit like, "this should never happen." i could strangle you! please tell me you're just trolling.
what i see the most is there's no separate set of eyes looking at a bit of code about to be released to production. the developer is left to test his own work (usually without test suites, because if you have those then you are probably not the only one looking at the code either), and there are so many ways he can get it to work on his own machine while it breaks for everyone else. bigger companies/bigger projects will have a qa/qc/uat/whatever process before release, but it seems like the majority of programmers are cowboys who trust themselves way too much.
there are so many code editors that offer this feature (and good ones too, not just that steamy pile eclipse), i can't believe you don't use one yet. even vim has a plugin to collapse comments. notepad++ can do it too. in fact, what are you using that doesn't offer this feature? it's easier for me to find one that does than not.
you're at +5 Funny, but you should be at +100 Sad But True
after she was murdered? at that point it's not her having the sex anymore, is it?
no argument here. i was responding to the comment about swabbing stuff you've touched. i didn't think i had to explain that connecting semen dna to a rape is pretty easy.
Terrorists Searching America
i think EA publishes a lot of great games, but quite a few of them were doing just fine without multiplayer. mass effect and dead space are two titles i think are amazing game series, but the multiplayer tacked onto both was just superfluous. i tried to find a multiplayer game of dead space recently, and couldn't find more than 3 other people -- lobby couldn't fill, game couldn't start. what's the point of having multiplayer if you won't even keep people interested in it? the new co-op in the upcoming dead space 3 looks interesting, but if it were mandatory i'd have to write my first letter to a company ever. those two games, in their single-player only incarnations, are perfect the way they are.
... co-op-y (that's not a word, trust me). mandatory multiplayer is stupid. stupid stupid stupid.
conversely, look at another EA title meant to be played multiplayer, army of two. even this game allows you to play solo with a computer partner. how can they possibly miss the value in that? did they really think a bromance shooter didn't sell so well because you allowed them to play alone? fuck me running. the developer of the new army of two game pointed out "high fives during shooting" was the angle they were looking to tear down and replace. yes, it's the corny jokes and violence made cute that's a turnoff, but those mechanics were put there to make a co-op experience more
Homeopathic care is enormously valued by thousands of people and in an NHS that the Government repeatedly tells us is "patient-led" it ought to be available where a doctor and patient believe that a homeopathic treatment may be of benefit to the patient.
it's my understanding there are no "doctors" that believe in homeopathic treatment -- such a person is known as a homeopath. you know, like a psychopath or sociopath. except this one attacks with ignorance, neglect, placebos, and good intentions.
until you discover some new maths that get around the failings of the other maths. a thousand years ago it was mathematically impossible to do any quantum teleportation. it's mathematically impossible for me to push a piano through a doorway until i magically change the width of the piano by turning it lengthwise. it's mathematically impossible for a 4 year old to push the same piano at all until they age to a point where they are strong enough. our maths just aren't strong enough for this.
maybe one day we learn to manipulate higher dimensions, sort of how i manipulated the 3rd dimension to push a piano through a doorway. where there's a will, there's a way. if no one wants to spend any time finding a way, then you're right, it can't be done.
i think we're talking about legal precedents. so no, it won't apply to the us.
which is exactly why dna evidence doesn't mean shit unless you can connect how it got there. right? http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/08/31/1534253/the-case-against-dna
are we talking starcraft gauss rifle? fallout 3/new vegas gauss rifle? it looks like it belongs in dead space. it also looks like a glorified version of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPciBQnZw3c
the blink feature is key, since facial recognition software will usually let you get by with showing a picture of the subject's face.
I've used numerous programs,
i doubt this very much.
and usually they have to get the track info from gracenote or a similiar program.
any decent ipod backup program will use itunes' track info metadata to construct the filename. i have about a dozen friends who produce original hip hop and electronic music. i put their music on my ipod and backed it up without gracenote's help. wav files don't have id3 data, but when you import a wav file into itunes it lets you associate the same kind of data to the file. this allows itunes to have metadata about the file regardless of whether it supports id3. if your ipod backup program can't do this then it sucks and you probably haven't looked around for one in the last 5-8 years. copypod/copytrans does this, ipodmax does this, ipod rip does this -- i can't find an ipod backup program that doesn't.
on the other hand, when the same programs are used to import music files into itunes they will usually attempt to use cddb's data. but we're not talking about importing.
you're the fucking retard. look up what version of the castle doctrine your area has and get back to me. better yet, look up what version of the castle doctrine your area has and then go fuck yourself. there are quite a few states with laws that disagree with your naive opinion. you obviously don't know any gun laws. btw, a criminal intruding in your home does not have the right to defend themselves. they can retreat or get shot. attacking the homeowner only justifies the homeowner even more. if a criminal kills a homeowner "in self defense" of their burglary, it's not self defense, it's murder. you're a moron.
don't forget about the burglars who fought for their right to burgle homes without being injured by the victim or the victim's property.
In order to transfer music back you need a 3rd party program and what you get is music files with not song info attached so you have to hope that gracenote can find what song it is or you're stuck manually entering all the data on it.
i believe you may have heard of such third party programs, but i'm not convinced you've ever used one. copypod renames all those 4-letter files to the track number-artist name-album name-song title, and that's just one program. and it's had that feature for years and years now.
being the type that needs micromanagement and being the type that doesn't care to run their own business are not the same thing. thanks for coming out.
winners never quit and quitters never win. but those who never win and never quit are just idiots.
i can't tell if you're insulting ken or praising him.