A regular DNA test has about 1/10000 success rate, but I would think that one can run a more thorough test (for a cost) that is much more precise than that. DNA doesn't have that collision rate.
I don't think you understand DNA very well. Unless you have an identical twin, you're the only one with your DNA.
Now, when they do a "quick scan" like the one we're talking about here, they don't compare everything. But I would think that when they get a match (say 2 on 2M people) they run a full scan. Maybe I'm wrong. And maybe you don't need it because it is probable that when the match is done the suspect confess. End of story.
They were a poorly written graphical layer on top of DOS, which was just a "Disk Operating System".
This is popular revisionism. Starting with Windows 3.1 it was no longer a DOS program as it used its own drivers and did its own memory management.
In fact, starting at Windows 95, things get a little muddy, I agree. But there is still MS-DOS behind the scene as all old programs need it. So apps are given way too many privileges. And the scheduler is based on interruptions which can be meddled with from any MS-DOS app.
You see, the problem was that all apps had the full control over the entire machine, by design, since it was the way things were back in old DOS mode and backward compatibility was "paramount".
Nonsense. Windows 95 and its younger brethren are preemptive multi-tasking OSs.
Well, technically true. But given the fact that accessing a floppy disk drive halts the entire system, I'll say they missed the target by a wide margin. In fact, any interrupt call can freeze the OS to death. So my point stands: apps were given way too many privileges. Actually, the system will stop by itself after 49 days of uptime. That's whatever you do in the meantime (including letting the system idle). So how's that for an unstable OS: An os that stops after 49 days. You would see that in a SciFi movie you would not believe it.
So now, tell me, what was so great about Win9x that you have to jump at every slashdot post that tries to say anything bad about them?
I'm more a fan of Windows 95 than Win9x, really. I like how they are fast, don't swallow huge amounts of memory to operate, have zero DRM and great backwards compatibility.
I use Windows 95 OSR 2.5 regularly as my main desktop computer, and it's pretty stable and usable, even today. Microsoft did actual usability research when they made it, and it shows. Tales of it crashing every five minutes are pure hyperbole.
Microsoft has always had great ideas (in all software areas) but for some reason they always feel compelled to compromise and as a result they fall short of their target. Look at Windows 8. They felt compelled to reinvent the desktop UI, but not compelled to give the two advices that would make a user used to their old interface (hint: everyone) able to work its way around the system. So the start menu is gone and there is nothing helping users find what they're looking for.
I've used Windows 2, then 3, then 3.1 then 95, then 98, then ME. They are such monumental piece of crap that they - IMO - do not deserve the title of OS. They were a poorly written graphical layer on top of DOS, which was just a "Disk Operating System". It managed disks and barely anything else.
Granted, over the years, they added several things, such as printer drivers support, graphics drivers support etc and it made it look more and more like a full fledged operating system. However, trying to run a few things in parallel invariably resulted in a crash a few minutes down the line.
You see, the problem was that all apps had the full control over the entire machine, by design, since it was the way things were back in old DOS mode and backward compatibility was "paramount". One bad app (and there were plenty) and the whole system would go down in flames - or to a grinding halt.
So no, I was not "spreading bullshit" as you put it. Instead, I was depicting the sad truth of Microsoft's early GUI days.
So now, tell me, what was so great about Win9x that you have to jump at every slashdot post that tries to say anything bad about them?
Using a piece of GPL code in a proprietary software is not necessarily plagiarism. You may publicly announce the code is in there. It's still copyright ingringement in that it doesn't respect the terms and conditions set by the original author.
Its a patent for a symmetric key algorithm done in hardware.
Just tell them you'll see them in court.
That's if you can afford to go to court. They may be asking very reasonable fees to make the ROI of such a case overly in favor of settling. By going to court you would have to advance large amounts of money where settling might be cheaper. So even if you win the lawsuit, you might end up losing money in the end.
Of course, you'd have done "the right thing" (patent pending) but who cares in the 21st century?
Given the fact that Microsoft will probably sell no more than a few thousand of those tablets (to all tech review sites) I'd say Intel is probably safe.
I'd take Britain's system over here in the US where paramedics check to see if you have a valid insurance card before they check your pulse
Saying a thing doesn't make it true.
I've been in the Stanford Hospital ER when my wife delivered.
I say a mother and her son walk in, the boy was literally covered in blood and dripping blood rapidly. They were promptly taken to the secretary where the boy had to wait patiently for the mother to validate health insurance with the nice lady on the other side of the desk.
Then, the hospital lady looked somewhere behind her and made a sign. The paramedics rushed in with a stretcher, got the boy and took care of him. Some cleaning dude came in almost instantly after to mop the blood.
I'm still wondering to this day what would have happened if the mother would have forgotten her insurance papers or anything else. Would they have let the boy die in there? Probably not, but I suspect that it would have been because of the bad PR this could have generated, nothing else.
If you think this is a way forward, you should think again. Open a couple of history books, look for countries that tried it and look how and why it failed.
Do you actually think before giving these advices?
You are right, this is actually a win to centralized protocols. We need a standard encrypted p2p communication (im / voip / file sharing / etc) to be widely adopted asap. And then protest / revolt when they try to outlaw it.
If you encrypt the IP address of the dude you're trying to call, how do you expect Skype (or your voip provider of choice) to route the call properly?
If you give a loaded gun to a 5 year old and then he shoots you, whose fault is it? The 5 year old or your crazy self?
I'll let you figure out who are the Taliban and Yourself in this not-so-complex analogy.
If the US (and the USSR) didn't fuck up that country, maybe they would not resent Americans as they do now. Granted, the US wasn't alone at fault. But they did their good part.
Slashdot Mirror
Phones aren't about technology anymore. It's about fashion nowadays.
A regular DNA test has about 1/10000 success rate, but I would think that one can run a more thorough test (for a cost) that is much more precise than that. DNA doesn't have that collision rate.
I don't think you understand DNA very well. Unless you have an identical twin, you're the only one with your DNA.
Now, when they do a "quick scan" like the one we're talking about here, they don't compare everything. But I would think that when they get a match (say 2 on 2M people) they run a full scan. Maybe I'm wrong. And maybe you don't need it because it is probable that when the match is done the suspect confess. End of story.
This is popular revisionism. Starting with Windows 3.1 it was no longer a DOS program as it used its own drivers and did its own memory management.
In fact, starting at Windows 95, things get a little muddy, I agree. But there is still MS-DOS behind the scene as all old programs need it. So apps are given way too many privileges. And the scheduler is based on interruptions which can be meddled with from any MS-DOS app.
Nonsense. Windows 95 and its younger brethren are preemptive multi-tasking OSs.
Well, technically true. But given the fact that accessing a floppy disk drive halts the entire system, I'll say they missed the target by a wide margin. In fact, any interrupt call can freeze the OS to death. So my point stands: apps were given way too many privileges. Actually, the system will stop by itself after 49 days of uptime. That's whatever you do in the meantime (including letting the system idle). So how's that for an unstable OS: An os that stops after 49 days. You would see that in a SciFi movie you would not believe it.
I'm more a fan of Windows 95 than Win9x, really. I like how they are fast, don't swallow huge amounts of memory to operate, have zero DRM and great backwards compatibility.
I use Windows 95 OSR 2.5 regularly as my main desktop computer, and it's pretty stable and usable, even today. Microsoft did actual usability research when they made it, and it shows. Tales of it crashing every five minutes are pure hyperbole.
Microsoft has always had great ideas (in all software areas) but for some reason they always feel compelled to compromise and as a result they fall short of their target. Look at Windows 8. They felt compelled to reinvent the desktop UI, but not compelled to give the two advices that would make a user used to their old interface (hint: everyone) able to work its way around the system. So the start menu is gone and there is nothing helping users find what they're looking for.
Epic Fail.
I've used Windows 2, then 3, then 3.1 then 95, then 98, then ME. They are such monumental piece of crap that they - IMO - do not deserve the title of OS. They were a poorly written graphical layer on top of DOS, which was just a "Disk Operating System". It managed disks and barely anything else.
Granted, over the years, they added several things, such as printer drivers support, graphics drivers support etc and it made it look more and more like a full fledged operating system. However, trying to run a few things in parallel invariably resulted in a crash a few minutes down the line.
You see, the problem was that all apps had the full control over the entire machine, by design, since it was the way things were back in old DOS mode and backward compatibility was "paramount". One bad app (and there were plenty) and the whole system would go down in flames - or to a grinding halt.
So no, I was not "spreading bullshit" as you put it. Instead, I was depicting the sad truth of Microsoft's early GUI days.
So now, tell me, what was so great about Win9x that you have to jump at every slashdot post that tries to say anything bad about them?
Using a piece of GPL code in a proprietary software is not necessarily plagiarism. You may publicly announce the code is in there. It's still copyright ingringement in that it doesn't respect the terms and conditions set by the original author.
Much like the latest Rihanna's song.
Giving Win9x a run for its money in terms of stability is almost an insult. The thing barely booted up !
XP is another matter.
What's the point?
Its a patent for a symmetric key algorithm done in hardware.
Just tell them you'll see them in court.
That's if you can afford to go to court. They may be asking very reasonable fees to make the ROI of such a case overly in favor of settling. By going to court you would have to advance large amounts of money where settling might be cheaper. So even if you win the lawsuit, you might end up losing money in the end.
Of course, you'd have done "the right thing" (patent pending) but who cares in the 21st century?
Because everyone watch American TV and everyone goes to Americans BKs and McDs.
Great. You just forgot 96% of the population on our nice planet. I guess they don't count, right?
The GIFs are usually from shit everyone has seen
Good luck with that. Can you cite me ONE thing everyone has seen?
Hint: No such thing exists.
Really? You just used VMware? The predecessor for all of these? Well...OK then but please do not pretend to offer an informed opinion on VM software.
And why would that be? Only people having had experience with at least 6 different VM software are eligible for the discussion?
VMWare works right out of the box with no user manual even needed. That's already more than can be said for any of the competition.
Given the fact that Microsoft will probably sell no more than a few thousand of those tablets (to all tech review sites) I'd say Intel is probably safe.
Your point stands though.
As I said, I'm just relating something I saw firsthand. I didn't even heard what they were talking about.
Yes, but how would she know about that?
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm not pointing fingers. I'm just relating something I saw first hand.
I'd take Britain's system over here in the US where paramedics check to see if you have a valid insurance card before they check your pulse
Saying a thing doesn't make it true.
I've been in the Stanford Hospital ER when my wife delivered.
I say a mother and her son walk in, the boy was literally covered in blood and dripping blood rapidly. They were promptly taken to the secretary where the boy had to wait patiently for the mother to validate health insurance with the nice lady on the other side of the desk.
Then, the hospital lady looked somewhere behind her and made a sign. The paramedics rushed in with a stretcher, got the boy and took care of him. Some cleaning dude came in almost instantly after to mop the blood.
I'm still wondering to this day what would have happened if the mother would have forgotten her insurance papers or anything else. Would they have let the boy die in there? Probably not, but I suspect that it would have been because of the bad PR this could have generated, nothing else.
So you're complaining because Safari has an option to remove the address bar?
At the heart of the Constitution is the notion that
What the fuck does that means? Have you read the constitution? Where does is say anything closely related to what you're saying?
Proportional representation in Congress.
If you think this is a way forward, you should think again. Open a couple of history books, look for countries that tried it and look how and why it failed.
Do you actually think before giving these advices?
That's ridiculous nobody lives in Canada!
I've seen a couple of people there once.
You are right, this is actually a win to centralized protocols. We need a standard encrypted p2p communication (im / voip / file sharing / etc) to be widely adopted asap. And then protest / revolt when they try to outlaw it.
If you encrypt the IP address of the dude you're trying to call, how do you expect Skype (or your voip provider of choice) to route the call properly?
Right. It's impossible, by design.
The website linked in your sig needs spell-checking.
Sure does.
Yeah, I really like it too.
If you give a loaded gun to a 5 year old and then he shoots you, whose fault is it? The 5 year old or your crazy self?
I'll let you figure out who are the Taliban and Yourself in this not-so-complex analogy.
If the US (and the USSR) didn't fuck up that country, maybe they would not resent Americans as they do now. Granted, the US wasn't alone at fault. But they did their good part.
If you don't understand the obvious ways in which that won't work ...
Care to point out any other option that would work any better?
Do you mean to say that a representative sampling of XBox gamers would give a meaningful answer?