Whether it is safe to just yank your USB drive out at any random time, or equivalently, unexpectedly lose power, depends on whether the file system employs an accurate, reliable atomic commit, such that even if you pull the drive out in the middle of a DMA transfer, the data and metadata on the drive will always be consistent as at some recent point in time, even if incomplete.
You can rest assured that Microsoft has no such thing, but evidently that does not slow them down a bit.
A vanishingly small minority of Linux users refuse to ever pay for software. Contrast this with the mass hordes of Windows users who habitually steal their software, every last bit of it.
How about running native Debian/Ubuntu on your Pixelbook with access to all hardware capabilities and without scary nags? If you can't do that then it's not actually what computing should be, just the part of it that Google wants it to be.
Look folks, as long as Google has control of the browser engine source code, Google has you by the short hairs. Worse, control of the binaries as in Android. Open source or not. Not only is Firefox just an all round nicer browser to use (my opinion, if you disagree then please direct your fan mail to Larry Page) it is the only browser that gives a toss about your privacy.
I mean, we know what Opportunity said, right? So come on, tell us Humble Telescope's last words. Maybe "I was a good telescope guys, please don't leave me to freeze in the dark".
It is kind of buried but the mention in passing that they rely on green energy. Obviously, the chemistry must be endothermic. The proposal seems more or less credible at first blush, but I can't help thinking that that is its only real purpose: to appear credible. As in, being at heart a scheme to separate investors from their money.
If it replaces carbon that would otherwise be extracted from the ground the its a win. And if you can make fuel, you can also make feedstock for the chemical industry, so it doesn't necessarily need to be burnt. That said, plants also extract CO2 from the atmosphere using solar energy. Is this process clearly more cost effective than growing plants? I have my doubts about that.
All those schemes are based on nuclear but they just don't tell you that.
Maybe because it's not true and you are too much of an idiot to grasp that. These systems are about what you can do with non-fossil fuel energy, whether it be solar, wind or nuclear. You say solar and wind create C02 by moving or heating water or air? WTF? Are you serious? I'm not even going to debate that, your ignorance speaks for itself.
Why don't you just donate your brain to science right now and get it over with? It could sit there in a museum right next to Einstein's, as an example of the polar opposite of genius. Got to warn the kids.
Yes, I am sure about prone to stall. The issue with the 737 Max is that the engine cowling generates lift, which would not be a serious problem if the engine was mounted directly below the center of lift of the wing as with classic 737, but is a big problem with the 737 Max, where it has a large offset from the center of lift, therefore generates a large pitch up torque in a high angle of attack situation such as takeoff. When the wing stalls the engine cowling does not stall (because it is a much less efficient airfoil) so the stall increases. As compared to a normal wing, where the center of left moves backward in stall so that the plane naturally tends to pitch back down. So it is fair to call the 737 Max dynamically unstable in stall: the stall tends to increase instead of decrease. Not what anybody should want if they have a choice.
I hope that it is clear now, what a dangerous piece of crap this is, which Boeing tried to foist off on the public and only got caught because they killed more than 300 unsuspecting people with it.
So for you, the definition of a good language is that a browser runs it. And you follow up the genius deduction by concluding that if a browser runs a language, then data center servers should too. Yuck, now feel like I got some of your stupid slime on me.
Having multiple different package management systems on one system is just insane. For example, Javascript off doing its own thing, or Python. How many languages do we have now, that each want to invent their own completely separate universe? For one thing, they have no concept of interdependencies between each other, they try to promulgate the fiction that such do not exist. And sure, these languages may be so mutually incompatible that interdependencies are physically impossible, but that is not a reason to celebrate, rather it is just sad. I do appreciate that snaps provide a form of compartmentalization, but in many cases that does more harm than good.
I would like to see somebody get busy on a clean sheet reimplementation of the best aspects of Eclipse and Visual Studio in a non-insane language like Go or Rust. And remember Visual Age, the predecessor of Eclipse, which was written in Smalltalk? It could do some amazing things that its successor doesn't attempt, like recompile parts of a large program while it is running. Why can't Eclipse do that? When we changed out Smalltack for Java, did we get more stupid? And why is Eclipse so freaking slow, I thought Java was supposed to be fast? (No, actually, I was never fooled.) And Javascript... don't get me started.
Just to be clear, Visual Studio Code is a massive monument to Javascript. There are people out there who would view that as a positive feature. In fact, there are massive hordes of people thinking exactly that, because all they really know in their technophile life is Javascript. Some other view this with horror, something like going around the corner and coming face to face with an endless sea of shuffling Zombies. Please don't bite me!
I installed "Code" as they like to call it, on my system a few months back, and I agree, it's a pretty sensible editor. It does a lot of things right. But it is Javascript, and that inevitably shows through from time to time. (Like a body part sometimes falls off a zombie?) What ultimately lead me to purge it off my system is its habit of leaving processes running even after exiting. I can't view that kind of behavior as anything other than a warning.
Then, this is from Microsoft. Say what you will, Microsoft is still the same Microsoft. Still controlled by self serving puppeteer Gates. Somewhat humbled by the ascent of Google, Apple and Facebook perhaps, but never forget that this is Microsoft. Not chastened at all for past misdeeds, but rather seething with resentment and cunning, determined to rise up and defeat its old foes. Which very much includes Linux.
Look, if you are an open source developer and you like this thing, then get busy and clone it, preferably in some nontoxic language like Go. That is the way we have always done things, why should now be different? Otherwise you are just asking for it.
Slashdot Mirror
The proposition was "Linux users want free". Which is bullshit. Linux users want freedom, there's a slight difference.
You Windows chuds will never accomplish anything in life. Meanwhile, Linux runs the world, except for the PC desktop. Get off your high horse.
BTW, clean-shaven here. But I assume that you have a smooth spot where balls should be.
What happens when you maximize the browser window?
Whether it is safe to just yank your USB drive out at any random time, or equivalently, unexpectedly lose power, depends on whether the file system employs an accurate, reliable atomic commit, such that even if you pull the drive out in the middle of a DMA transfer, the data and metadata on the drive will always be consistent as at some recent point in time, even if incomplete.
You can rest assured that Microsoft has no such thing, but evidently that does not slow them down a bit.
That is you, pissing your water away as if it were not valuable. Fix your fucking faucet.
Right, ask selfless Eric Schmidt, he'll tell you.
A myth. It is well known that Linux users are generally willing to pay more than average for game titles. I do not doubt that Linux users also earn more on average.
A vanishingly small minority of Linux users refuse to ever pay for software. Contrast this with the mass hordes of Windows users who habitually steal their software, every last bit of it.
How about running native Debian/Ubuntu on your Pixelbook with access to all hardware capabilities and without scary nags? If you can't do that then it's not actually what computing should be, just the part of it that Google wants it to be.
Right, so expect Google to step up its campaign to block the adblockers.
Plus, they are stealing your bandwidth and likely as not, adding latency.
Look folks, as long as Google has control of the browser engine source code, Google has you by the short hairs. Worse, control of the binaries as in Android. Open source or not. Not only is Firefox just an all round nicer browser to use (my opinion, if you disagree then please direct your fan mail to Larry Page) it is the only browser that gives a toss about your privacy.
I mean, we know what Opportunity said, right? So come on, tell us Humble Telescope's last words. Maybe "I was a good telescope guys, please don't leave me to freeze in the dark".
It is kind of buried but the mention in passing that they rely on green energy. Obviously, the chemistry must be endothermic. The proposal seems more or less credible at first blush, but I can't help thinking that that is its only real purpose: to appear credible. As in, being at heart a scheme to separate investors from their money.
Right, and on top of that he pull his numbers out of his butt.
If it replaces carbon that would otherwise be extracted from the ground the its a win. And if you can make fuel, you can also make feedstock for the chemical industry, so it doesn't necessarily need to be burnt. That said, plants also extract CO2 from the atmosphere using solar energy. Is this process clearly more cost effective than growing plants? I have my doubts about that.
All those schemes are based on nuclear but they just don't tell you that.
Maybe because it's not true and you are too much of an idiot to grasp that. These systems are about what you can do with non-fossil fuel energy, whether it be solar, wind or nuclear. You say solar and wind create C02 by moving or heating water or air? WTF? Are you serious? I'm not even going to debate that, your ignorance speaks for itself.
Why don't you just donate your brain to science right now and get it over with? It could sit there in a museum right next to Einstein's, as an example of the polar opposite of genius. Got to warn the kids.
Then there was autotune.
Just what we needed, a clear, scientific explanation of why pop sucks so much.
are you sure about the "prone to stall"
Yes, I am sure about prone to stall. The issue with the 737 Max is that the engine cowling generates lift, which would not be a serious problem if the engine was mounted directly below the center of lift of the wing as with classic 737, but is a big problem with the 737 Max, where it has a large offset from the center of lift, therefore generates a large pitch up torque in a high angle of attack situation such as takeoff. When the wing stalls the engine cowling does not stall (because it is a much less efficient airfoil) so the stall increases. As compared to a normal wing, where the center of left moves backward in stall so that the plane naturally tends to pitch back down. So it is fair to call the 737 Max dynamically unstable in stall: the stall tends to increase instead of decrease. Not what anybody should want if they have a choice.
I hope that it is clear now, what a dangerous piece of crap this is, which Boeing tried to foist off on the public and only got caught because they killed more than 300 unsuspecting people with it.
So for you, the definition of a good language is that a browser runs it. And you follow up the genius deduction by concluding that if a browser runs a language, then data center servers should too. Yuck, now feel like I got some of your stupid slime on me.
So idiocracy is inevitable?
You wrote: "your opinion is noted and dully ignored." That is all anybody needs to know about you, fucking asshole.
Having multiple different package management systems on one system is just insane. For example, Javascript off doing its own thing, or Python. How many languages do we have now, that each want to invent their own completely separate universe? For one thing, they have no concept of interdependencies between each other, they try to promulgate the fiction that such do not exist. And sure, these languages may be so mutually incompatible that interdependencies are physically impossible, but that is not a reason to celebrate, rather it is just sad. I do appreciate that snaps provide a form of compartmentalization, but in many cases that does more harm than good.
I would like to see somebody get busy on a clean sheet reimplementation of the best aspects of Eclipse and Visual Studio in a non-insane language like Go or Rust. And remember Visual Age, the predecessor of Eclipse, which was written in Smalltalk? It could do some amazing things that its successor doesn't attempt, like recompile parts of a large program while it is running. Why can't Eclipse do that? When we changed out Smalltack for Java, did we get more stupid? And why is Eclipse so freaking slow, I thought Java was supposed to be fast? (No, actually, I was never fooled.) And Javascript... don't get me started.
Just to be clear, Visual Studio Code is a massive monument to Javascript. There are people out there who would view that as a positive feature. In fact, there are massive hordes of people thinking exactly that, because all they really know in their technophile life is Javascript. Some other view this with horror, something like going around the corner and coming face to face with an endless sea of shuffling Zombies. Please don't bite me!
I installed "Code" as they like to call it, on my system a few months back, and I agree, it's a pretty sensible editor. It does a lot of things right. But it is Javascript, and that inevitably shows through from time to time. (Like a body part sometimes falls off a zombie?) What ultimately lead me to purge it off my system is its habit of leaving processes running even after exiting. I can't view that kind of behavior as anything other than a warning.
Then, this is from Microsoft. Say what you will, Microsoft is still the same Microsoft. Still controlled by self serving puppeteer Gates. Somewhat humbled by the ascent of Google, Apple and Facebook perhaps, but never forget that this is Microsoft. Not chastened at all for past misdeeds, but rather seething with resentment and cunning, determined to rise up and defeat its old foes. Which very much includes Linux.
Look, if you are an open source developer and you like this thing, then get busy and clone it, preferably in some nontoxic language like Go. That is the way we have always done things, why should now be different? Otherwise you are just asking for it.