- Did you pay with a credit/debit card? If so, that shit's logged. - Did you modify your appearance to foil the likely Internet-connected security camera watching the cashier? If not, evidence of your purchase is available there. - Did you take the car you normally use to the store? If not, it's possible parking lot security cameras have identifying information on you, including a license plate number. - Cell phone towers are at least capable of logging the towers and RSSI of MS's (i.e. cell phones) that communicate with them. It's possible if you've activated more than a couple phones that a pattern of movement, the correlation which could identify you, could be established against multiple IMSI's such as IMEI, ESN, etc. Especially if you use it a lot in single location like your house. - Certainly the cell phone companies keep logs of the numbers dialed from a particular device. It's possible if you are statistically similar to previous units it can be said that your current phone matches usage patterns and can identify you. - Sales records may indicate that an unusually large number of $15 cell phones have been bought at one location, revealing someone is trying to hide something.
In English, a way to express a verb emphatically is through adding the helper verb "to do" - as in "Yes, I did say that." Emphatic moods are usually used in English if the verb is being used interrogatively (i.e. "Did you say that?") or negatively (e.g., "I did not say that" - as opposed to "I not say that.")
Still, it's proper to say "I never said that" as opposed to "I never did not say that" or "I did not say that never." If you want to sound full-on uneduamacated you would say "I never not say that." Emphatically proper: "Never did I say that."
For +1 pomposity you can expand "never" to its original form "not ever": "Not ever did I say that." Though "I not ever say that" sounds weird to me, but "I not ever did say that" sounds OK. "I not never say that" is basically admitting you never passed 8th grade. "I did not never say that never" is actually a scientifically documented way of reducing the IQ of those surrounding you by 10 points just based on the utterance of those words. Add "ever" after "never" to double the impact.
Spanish considers double negatives valid though, as an example of a language where the construct is supported.
Running outdated software is bad thing. Debian's aptitude resolves dependencies and installs them automatically. There is also nothing stopping you from installing older libraries if needed. If you really want to run 8 year old software on Linux, you can keep your 8 year old operating system.iso you downloaded and run it from that.
But, with regard to Windows... maybe it's less about proper package management and more about componentizing Windows a bit better. Even without considering third party software, Windows itself could benefit from this.
Here's an example: In Windows Vista, they introduced DreamScene, which allows you to set a video file as your background. It's a useless feature to me, but hey, someone else may want to install it. I might even want to install it temporarily just to use it. To my knowledge this feature is unavailable in Windows 7. I mention this because it's something like an optional "package" that you can install after your Windows install is complete.
Now, go to Programs and Features, and then you'll see Turn Windows Features On and Off. So here, it looks like they have the beginnings of a repository. You can enable and disable things here. But to me, it would make sense for this to go out to a Windows repository online, look for available Windows packages, like the aforementioned DreamScene, find out the latest version, and let me install and remove from there. Also, maybe let me add certified Windows packages from a CD for those in extra secure or disconnected situations.
So why can't individual features be updated and upgraded when ready, independently of the Windows version, instead of forcing it upon users to jump to a next major Windows revision? I understand the necessity for such things with regard to basic OS architecture - for example, DirectX 10 needs the Windows Vista kernel. So it may be easier to say certain packages require a specific Windows version instead of the hundreds, if not thousands of files that it depends on. But there are numerous smaller features that I'd love it if I could install on demand.
We all know why this won't happen, which is because Microsoft wants to force things on the user. Microsoft wants to force Metro on you, to collect app revenue like Apple does. Microsoft wants you to upgrade to a new OS every two years. Microsoft cares about its relationship with antivirus vendors more than your security, etc.
about how a company is forcing a UI design on to you.
I guess you could go completely hardcore and use Uzbl (http://www.uzbl.org/) as your browser, where you can actually script the UI (or have the script be the UI) around the actual browser core. At least that's the impression I'm getting from it.
What keeps me using Firefox is the add-ons, though.
The problem with emulating the original Xbox is that there really isn't much to emulate.
It's basically a non-ACPI non-BIOS based PC with a well-known Nvidia GPU and chipset. It has all the standard idiosyncracies of a standard PC chipset like APIC registers, the PIT, etc. There's a custom PIC that handles power and the front LED light, that's been reversed engineered.
The games are compiled against Microsoft's XDK. If you look into the Cxbx project (don't know it's current status) the plan was to create a sort of "loader" that would merely load the code from the game. link it into DirectX, and play it directly.
I think there is just not much interest in emulating this system. Sort of like how N64 emulation has stagnated.
But it certainly is possible. Hell, for the NES they've even gone so far as to reverse engineer the protection chip in the cartridge, finding out how the custom microcontroller works and everything. With no documentation and an electron microscope image of the IC. And after reading how the Xbox's firmware was dumped and reversed, and how eventually they "gained entry" into the Xbox 360 and PS3, I think with enough time and resources anything is possible. It's just that the less popular a system is, the less possibility of hackers wanting to create an emulator for it. Also we are living in an ever rabidly post-DMCA litigious society which also affects resources and what people have the time to do.
I'm testing Windows 8 for a company that is likely going to be wise enough to skip it. But I keep using it just to maintain familiarity with it.
Anyway, to sleep or shutdown, I've found it's easiest to just hit ctrl-alt-del and use the power button from there. It's what I've been telling people to do as well.
Of course, my old Windows key + R, "shutdown -r -t 0" habit is well entrenched and used a lot too, from rebooting machines over RDP.
Linux has been historically considered a good OS for servers, where uptime and stability are very important. Don't forget the Debian project goes back really far, 1993 or so if I'm not mistaken.
Once you have a server running that many people depend on, you become change-averse to it, because change = risk. So having mature, well-tested, stable software is more important than having the latest and greatest.
RISC also had a shitload of registers, far before amd64 architecture decided to tack some on to various registers all blessed for specific purposes by various instructions.
RISC has been about treating RAM as an I/O device instead of another set of registers, as much as it has been about simplifying the ISA. x86 goes back to that archaic time when RAM was as fast as storing things in a local register. With layer upon layer of cache, instruction reordering, register renaming, branch prediction, etc. quite an illusion is kept up. Interestingly, 6502 was built around that concept with its very limited number of general-purpose registers.
My theory is to avoid paying royalties to Microsoft for implementing the FAT32 format, which would be pretty much necessary as people would expect to be able to shove the SD card into their Windows system and access files.
Microsoft may be wanting to grind the OEMs into the ground to get rid of them by appearing as a stupid company instead of an evil monopolistic company. When that happens, it can produce hardware on its own, with any restrictions it wants, without fear a competitor will do the same.
Of course, the whole problem with "iPad"-izing the PC experience is that some software vendors are just too big to be browbeaten into doing everything through Microsoft's App Store. AutoDesk, Bentley, Adobe, and others. We just haphazardly rolled out Autodesk's Building Design Suite 2013 to various users in our firm. We had to ship flash drives because it's way faster than shipping 48GB over our WAN. I don't see things like that ever working through the App Store.
Slashdot Mirror
how much longer until I can install Debian on my SIM card?
SSH over PPP.
Because I like transmitting and receiving at .56kbits/sec.
Barcodes aren't that difficult to decode. If you can't get a barcode reader, a program could likely easily decode it from a scanned image.
+1 Paperbak
http://ollydbg.de/Paperbak/
> Tiled Resources
So basically 3D text mode?
I'll take my -1 Troll with cream and sugar, please.
Retrogression.
Here are some problems with that:
- Did you pay with a credit/debit card? If so, that shit's logged.
- Did you modify your appearance to foil the likely Internet-connected security camera watching the cashier? If not, evidence of your purchase is available there.
- Did you take the car you normally use to the store? If not, it's possible parking lot security cameras have identifying information on you, including a license plate number.
- Cell phone towers are at least capable of logging the towers and RSSI of MS's (i.e. cell phones) that communicate with them. It's possible if you've activated more than a couple phones that a pattern of movement, the correlation which could identify you, could be established against multiple IMSI's such as IMEI, ESN, etc. Especially if you use it a lot in single location like your house.
- Certainly the cell phone companies keep logs of the numbers dialed from a particular device. It's possible if you are statistically similar to previous units it can be said that your current phone matches usage patterns and can identify you.
- Sales records may indicate that an unusually large number of $15 cell phones have been bought at one location, revealing someone is trying to hide something.
Ahh yes, ain't. Forgot about that one.
"NSA officials have repeatedly denied under oath to Congress that even producing an estimate... ain't gonna happen no way no how.. "
Reminds me of my current company's data retention policies, which likely match the NSA's:
"Never delete nothing never."
Emphatic is the word you are looking for.
In English, a way to express a verb emphatically is through adding the helper verb "to do" - as in "Yes, I did say that." Emphatic moods are usually used in English if the verb is being used interrogatively (i.e. "Did you say that?") or negatively (e.g., "I did not say that" - as opposed to "I not say that.")
Still, it's proper to say "I never said that" as opposed to "I never did not say that" or "I did not say that never." If you want to sound full-on uneduamacated you would say "I never not say that." Emphatically proper: "Never did I say that."
For +1 pomposity you can expand "never" to its original form "not ever": "Not ever did I say that." Though "I not ever say that" sounds weird to me, but "I not ever did say that" sounds OK. "I not never say that" is basically admitting you never passed 8th grade. "I did not never say that never" is actually a scientifically documented way of reducing the IQ of those surrounding you by 10 points just based on the utterance of those words. Add "ever" after "never" to double the impact.
Spanish considers double negatives valid though, as an example of a language where the construct is supported.
Running outdated software is bad thing. Debian's aptitude resolves dependencies and installs them automatically. There is also nothing stopping you from installing older libraries if needed. If you really want to run 8 year old software on Linux, you can keep your 8 year old operating system .iso you downloaded and run it from that.
But, with regard to Windows ... maybe it's less about proper package management and more about componentizing Windows a bit better. Even without considering third party software, Windows itself could benefit from this.
Here's an example: In Windows Vista, they introduced DreamScene, which allows you to set a video file as your background. It's a useless feature to me, but hey, someone else may want to install it. I might even want to install it temporarily just to use it. To my knowledge this feature is unavailable in Windows 7. I mention this because it's something like an optional "package" that you can install after your Windows install is complete.
Now, go to Programs and Features, and then you'll see Turn Windows Features On and Off. So here, it looks like they have the beginnings of a repository. You can enable and disable things here. But to me, it would make sense for this to go out to a Windows repository online, look for available Windows packages, like the aforementioned DreamScene, find out the latest version, and let me install and remove from there. Also, maybe let me add certified Windows packages from a CD for those in extra secure or disconnected situations.
So why can't individual features be updated and upgraded when ready, independently of the Windows version, instead of forcing it upon users to jump to a next major Windows revision? I understand the necessity for such things with regard to basic OS architecture - for example, DirectX 10 needs the Windows Vista kernel. So it may be easier to say certain packages require a specific Windows version instead of the hundreds, if not thousands of files that it depends on. But there are numerous smaller features that I'd love it if I could install on demand.
We all know why this won't happen, which is because Microsoft wants to force things on the user. Microsoft wants to force Metro on you, to collect app revenue like Apple does. Microsoft wants you to upgrade to a new OS every two years. Microsoft cares about its relationship with antivirus vendors more than your security, etc.
You forgot your preamble. Some soothing 80's music would give your number station the perfect edge it needs in today's modern spyscape.
Don't forget the Kin debacle.
about how a company is forcing a UI design on to you.
I guess you could go completely hardcore and use Uzbl (http://www.uzbl.org/) as your browser, where you can actually script the UI (or have the script be the UI) around the actual browser core. At least that's the impression I'm getting from it.
What keeps me using Firefox is the add-ons, though.
The problem with emulating the original Xbox is that there really isn't much to emulate.
It's basically a non-ACPI non-BIOS based PC with a well-known Nvidia GPU and chipset. It has all the standard idiosyncracies of a standard PC chipset like APIC registers, the PIT, etc. There's a custom PIC that handles power and the front LED light, that's been reversed engineered.
The games are compiled against Microsoft's XDK. If you look into the Cxbx project (don't know it's current status) the plan was to create a sort of "loader" that would merely load the code from the game. link it into DirectX, and play it directly.
I think there is just not much interest in emulating this system. Sort of like how N64 emulation has stagnated.
But it certainly is possible. Hell, for the NES they've even gone so far as to reverse engineer the protection chip in the cartridge, finding out how the custom microcontroller works and everything. With no documentation and an electron microscope image of the IC. And after reading how the Xbox's firmware was dumped and reversed, and how eventually they "gained entry" into the Xbox 360 and PS3, I think with enough time and resources anything is possible. It's just that the less popular a system is, the less possibility of hackers wanting to create an emulator for it. Also we are living in an ever rabidly post-DMCA litigious society which also affects resources and what people have the time to do.
Especially if it includes the bootleg 1,000,000 in 1 pirate carts and prototypes.
Networking.
I'm testing Windows 8 for a company that is likely going to be wise enough to skip it. But I keep using it just to maintain familiarity with it.
Anyway, to sleep or shutdown, I've found it's easiest to just hit ctrl-alt-del and use the power button from there. It's what I've been telling people to do as well.
Of course, my old Windows key + R, "shutdown -r -t 0" habit is well entrenched and used a lot too, from rebooting machines over RDP.
Remember bubble memory?
I wonder if that would have kept up with Moore's Law a lot better.
Here at McDonalds we run Power PC machines and enforce the in order execution of I/O.
I like the way you thunk.
Linux has been historically considered a good OS for servers, where uptime and stability are very important. Don't forget the Debian project goes back really far, 1993 or so if I'm not mistaken.
Once you have a server running that many people depend on, you become change-averse to it, because change = risk. So having mature, well-tested, stable software is more important than having the latest and greatest.
That judge is going to find himself in hot water pretty soon ...
RISC also had a shitload of registers, far before amd64 architecture decided to tack some on to various registers all blessed for specific purposes by various instructions.
RISC has been about treating RAM as an I/O device instead of another set of registers, as much as it has been about simplifying the ISA. x86 goes back to that archaic time when RAM was as fast as storing things in a local register. With layer upon layer of cache, instruction reordering, register renaming, branch prediction, etc. quite an illusion is kept up. Interestingly, 6502 was built around that concept with its very limited number of general-purpose registers.
My theory is to avoid paying royalties to Microsoft for implementing the FAT32 format, which would be pretty much necessary as people would expect to be able to shove the SD card into their Windows system and access files.
Microsoft may be wanting to grind the OEMs into the ground to get rid of them by appearing as a stupid company instead of an evil monopolistic company. When that happens, it can produce hardware on its own, with any restrictions it wants, without fear a competitor will do the same.
Of course, the whole problem with "iPad"-izing the PC experience is that some software vendors are just too big to be browbeaten into doing everything through Microsoft's App Store. AutoDesk, Bentley, Adobe, and others. We just haphazardly rolled out Autodesk's Building Design Suite 2013 to various users in our firm. We had to ship flash drives because it's way faster than shipping 48GB over our WAN. I don't see things like that ever working through the App Store.