Homade Soda Fountain instructions + "Be aware that there may be mistakes or gross errors on my part, as well as omissions. IF you spot any errors of this sort, please contact me so I may correct them at once!" = A very bad idea.
That's more to cover my legal liability than anything else. If you use 60psi nylon hose to hook up your CO2 and it blows out, that's not my fault.
Texas has more oil than Iraq. Heck, we could have dropped the sanctions and bought Iraqi oil for FAR less than this war is gonna cost. I'm sure saddam would love to have sold all the oil they could drill at less than OPEC prices.
This war never has been about oil, and is not currently about oil. People who spout that are simply uneducated with regard to the facts.
He seems to be implying that the hyrdogen gas produced by the decomposition of water reacts with gasoline to produce a different type of hydrocarbon, which burns more efficiently.
However this seems like it would be easy to verify in a lab setting. Combine vaporized gasoline and hyrdogen gas under the pressures experienced in an average engine, and test how well it burns compared to normal gasoline.
Barton isn't enough to keep AMD going against Intel until Sept. Simply not gonna happen, and I think they have seen that coming and are trying to head it off by launching the Athlon64 closer to its originally planned release.
Once the Athlon64 is available and people are building systems using it, AMD just stole back the "King of PC processors" title and in a BIG way.
"underflow is when you're trying to represent a fractional number smaller than the smallest floating point number available. ie: you went too close to zero."
Not when talking about integers smarty. No one was talking about floating point.
Let me explain this because many people seem not to understand.
When a program installs a "shared" DLL, the assembly manager looks at the DLL version. One of three things will happen:
1. The DLL does not exist in the assembly cache - it is added.
2. The DLL exists, but all other instances of it are a different major/minor revision. (X.Y.0.0) In this case, the DLL is added to the assembly cache as a separate version.
3. The DLL exists in the cache, and the major/minor versions are the same. In this case, if the installing DLL has a newer revision (0.0.X.Y), then it will overwrite the old DLL. Otherwise, it is thrown away.
When a program executes, it's manifest specifys what major/minor version of the DLL it needs, and the assembly cache will fetch it. HOWEVER, bug fixes, etc are supposed to be changes to the revision numbers only, so if a bug fixed version of the DLL is installed, the app will use that version.
The assembly cache also keeps track of what set of DLLs go together. If version 1.2.7.X of FOO.DLL needs to also be run with 1.2.7.X of BAR.DLL, then the assembly cache can make sure a program never uses a mismatch, which has been a MAJOR cause of difficult to track instability over the years.
The "new".NET way of doing things is different though, and Microsoft won't logo or certify apps unless they follow these practices:
1. If you have a DLL only used by your application, install it in your application's folder.
2. If you have a suite or many apps that work together and use the same DLL, install it into program files\common\yourname.
3. ONLY install DLLs into the System folder if they are very very widely used, or are actual system objects or libraries. (I.E. your app needs a newer version of the microsoft common dialog runtime. In that case, you ship the MSM which has the latest version of common dialog and related libs that are all known to work together, for EACH version of windows. The Windows Installer knows how to read the MSM and pick the appropriate set of files for the current OS/service pack level you are on. That way, developers running Windows 2000 don't b0rk a Win9x user by shipping the w2k libraries.)
3a. An even easier way of handling things is to write your app for a specific service pack level on each OS (or possibly hotfix if a bug was fixed that is affecting your app.) In this way, you just tell your users "you need service pack X on OS Y, or service pack Z on OS A" to run the app.
Why doesn't a company like IBM or Microsoft or [insert name here] just buy SCO? They are pretty much a failure anyway. Make it a hostile takeover if you must. Then fire everyone and close them down.
quote: "But why must this be done on the server, and collected at Microsoft? Can't the client download a list of what MS has for updates, and decide what the local system has?"
Were you born stupid? The list of patches that Microsoft must have is HUGE. They have patches for Windows 98, ME, 2000, and XP. Thousands of pieces of hardware... tons of bug fixes, security patches, and hotfixes.
So you want everyone to sit there and wait 10 days while Windows Update downloads the ENTIRE list? Bzzzzzzt! Wrong answer... the most efficient method is to have it send a list of what you have to the server, which can then check it against the database and send only the relevant information.
Re:DVD-A and SACD aren't much better anyway
on
The Future of the CD
·
· Score: 1
I don't care what quality it is. I'm not willing to pay the price. No, not the $$$ price, I mean the freedom price. I am not willing to shove myself into a system whereby I cannot rip MP3/OGG tracks of my shiny new DVD-A disc.
I never bought a single DVD until DeCSS was available. Now I own nearly a hundred. I won't buy a single DVD-A disc until I can rip it to my HDD with freely available tools. Period.
It is a well known effect in the audio world... for every surface that a subwoofer is in close proximity to, the effective level of sound from the subwoofer at that frequency is increased by 3db.
Placing a subwoofer in the corner of the room will result in a 6db increase, because it is in close proximity to two additional hard surfaces.
The math behind this is very complicated, and it is only effective for larger waves (hence bass frequencies).
It appears that they are claiming routers pick the fastest route to push packets down, which can in turn cause that route to become congested, thus slowing it down, and then the router picks a new route, causing it to become congested and slow down, and so on.
Supposedly, if the router picked the fastest AND least congested route, then some packets might take a little longer to get to their destination, but the overall latency of the internet would decrease.
In theory. In reality, I don't know how much peering arrangements change the equation. You see, if you are a network provider, you have two goals with peering: dump enough traffic onto your peer points so that you are exchanging about equal amounts with your peer AND get traffic that isn't bound for your network OFF your network as quickly as possible.
In practice, this means ISPs who peer have a large incentive to route packets coming from peer parter A directly to peer partner B, without regard for what that does to the latency of the packet, nor the congestion of the peering partners. The peered packets become more like the hot potato, bouncing around peer points until they actually arrive near the destination network. That lowers overall efficiency as well. (companies like Internap don't peer for this reason; they pay for all connection points even though they have enough traffic to get peering points for free. They cost more, but they have very low latency, packet loss, etc).
IF you will research the situation, the canadian courts have ruled that since the government charges a levy on blank media to cover piracy, citizens are justified in making copies. I'm sure google can return the relevant links for you.
If I had the money to burn, I'd hire lawyers and try to take a similar argument up to the supreme court regarding the current levies here in the United States on cassettes, music CDRs, etc.
It depends on who your phone company is, their equipment, and so forth.
Some local providers do this because they don't want the added expense of having two copper pairs (the local loop people because they have to allocate and maintain that many extra lines, and the CLECs because they have to pay the local loop people for every copper pair they use).
If you are getting business-class service, such as SDSL, then you automatically get a second copper pair for it and no voice line is required.
On a semi-related note:
We recently placed an order through Speakeast for SDSL service, 1.1M upload and download rate, static IP, etc. We are paying $200/mo, but it is business class service. Wanna host your own servers? go right ahead. Wanna run filesharing apps all day long? None of our business what you do with your own line.
The difference comes with having both a good, customer-friendly ISP (speakeasy) and business class service (aka NewEdge isn't going to take orders from the RIAA).
You seem to forget that Microsoft had the same thing when Windows 3.1 was out, and it was called Windows NT.
IBM and Microsoft co-developed OS2/WinNT, but disagreed on where the interface should go. Microsoft saw dramatic uptake of Windows 3.x and thought that would be a good road to plod down. IBM wanted to do their own thing. As a result, the groups split.
Microsoft won.
And here we sit today. Perhaps if IBM had done things Microsoft's way, the world would be a different place. For better or worse, I cannot say.
Actually that is quite incorrect. The Supreme Court has always held that the 2nd ammendment refers to individuals, as every able bodied male in colonial times was considered a part of the local militia, and that the founding father's personal documents show they supported individual firearms ownership.
The issue hasn't been brought up lately, and the 9th circuit court decision recently regarding some of California's laws on guns will go to SCOTUS and we'll get a fresh ruling.
1. Mounting a drive or folder as another drive/folder. This is done through junction points. You can find a good utility at http://www.sysinternals.com. This allows D:\ to be mounted as C:\Program Files (which is also a good way to expand a volume on a server without screwing up network users.)
2. a regular "hard link". Here is the API call from something like VB:
Private Declare Function CreateHardLink Lib "kernel32" Alias "CreateHardLinkA" (ByVal lpFileName As String, ByVal lpExistingFileName As String, lpSecurityAttributes As Any) As Long
There are several utilities available to accomplish this.
BOTH are completely transparent to ALL standard windows applications. In fact, Explorer won't be able to tell that anything is going on, nor will the standard Open/Save functions and dialog boxes. You have to use the specific junction/link APIs to do anything with them.
I assume that this rumor means that the new FS will be "more extensive" in its journaling capabilities, not features.
NTFS supports DACLs (Discretionary Access Control Lists. Grant rights specifically on files, folders, or both for any specific combination of rights. Yes, even includes things like execute, though most users don't get THAT granular.) It also supports Auditing via an ACL-like mechanism. Wanna see if user sally01 read file X? Add her with READ to the audit list. Who is renaming files in c:\docs? add Everyone with rename/modify to the Audit list.
NTFS does quotas, junction points (links), and reparse points. Reparse points allow things like EFS to work without the app being aware of it. If I wanted to replace the word "microsoft" with BORK BORK BORK on the disk, I could write a parsing driver and install it. Then, any file with my driver's signature in its reparse point list would be handed off to my driver for processing before being saved to disk or read from disk to an application.
There are plenty of other features as well, but the point is that to be a better filesystem than NTFS would take a huge amount of work on the filesystem itself, plus getting the OS to support it. However it is relatively easy to attack a specific point of NTFS (its journaling) and make your filesystem do that specific thing better.
:: I for one, doubt that it could be a hoax, but at the same time, would love some hard evidence to hush up the theorists.
Apparently you VASTLY underestimate those same conspiracy theorists.
That's what happens when you do it wrong
on
Shattering Windows
·
· Score: 2
One of the primary rules when designing a service is that a service does not provide ANY USER INTERFACE WHATSOEVER.
A service listens on a TCP/IP port, named pipe, etc. If the virusscan writers had written their stuff PROPERLY, it would run the virusscanning engine as a service, and the user interface would be a user-mode program, posting and receiving messages from the service via named pipes or an IP port or whatever.
Imagine that you had a daemon running as root on your linux box that somehow popped up a UI in your X-windows session. Would you be AT ALL surprised if there was a way to exploit that to get root? I thought not.
The proper way would be to have a user program running in X that could communicate with the service.
Slashdot Mirror
Homade Soda Fountain instructions
+
"Be aware that there may be mistakes or gross errors on my part, as well as omissions. IF you spot any errors of this sort, please contact me so I may correct them at once!"
=
A very bad idea.
That's more to cover my legal liability than anything else. If you use 60psi nylon hose to hook up your CO2 and it blows out, that's not my fault.
I didn't think this would really get posted, I just saw CmdrTaco say it was a slow news day.
If you can manage to grab http://www.boneville.net/soda/soda.zip, you will have the entire mirror.
I am working on getting this up elsewhere as well.
Texas has more oil than Iraq. Heck, we could have dropped the sanctions and bought Iraqi oil for FAR less than this war is gonna cost. I'm sure saddam would love to have sold all the oil they could drill at less than OPEC prices.
This war never has been about oil, and is not currently about oil. People who spout that are simply uneducated with regard to the facts.
He seems to be implying that the hyrdogen gas produced by the decomposition of water reacts with gasoline to produce a different type of hydrocarbon, which burns more efficiently.
However this seems like it would be easy to verify in a lab setting. Combine vaporized gasoline and hyrdogen gas under the pressures experienced in an average engine, and test how well it burns compared to normal gasoline.
Barton isn't enough to keep AMD going against Intel until Sept. Simply not gonna happen, and I think they have seen that coming and are trying to head it off by launching the Athlon64 closer to its originally planned release.
Once the Athlon64 is available and people are building systems using it, AMD just stole back the "King of PC processors" title and in a BIG way.
"underflow is when you're trying to represent a fractional number smaller than the smallest floating point number available. ie: you went too close to zero."
Not when talking about integers smarty. No one was talking about floating point.
Let me explain this because many people seem not to understand.
.NET way of doing things is different though, and Microsoft won't logo or certify apps unless they follow these practices:
When a program installs a "shared" DLL, the assembly manager looks at the DLL version. One of three things will happen:
1. The DLL does not exist in the assembly cache - it is added.
2. The DLL exists, but all other instances of it are a different major/minor revision. (X.Y.0.0) In this case, the DLL is added to the assembly cache as a separate version.
3. The DLL exists in the cache, and the major/minor versions are the same. In this case, if the installing DLL has a newer revision (0.0.X.Y), then it will overwrite the old DLL. Otherwise, it is thrown away.
When a program executes, it's manifest specifys what major/minor version of the DLL it needs, and the assembly cache will fetch it. HOWEVER, bug fixes, etc are supposed to be changes to the revision numbers only, so if a bug fixed version of the DLL is installed, the app will use that version.
The assembly cache also keeps track of what set of DLLs go together. If version 1.2.7.X of FOO.DLL needs to also be run with 1.2.7.X of BAR.DLL, then the assembly cache can make sure a program never uses a mismatch, which has been a
MAJOR cause of difficult to track instability over the years.
The "new"
1. If you have a DLL only used by your application, install it in your application's folder.
2. If you have a suite or many apps that work together and use the same DLL, install it into program files\common\yourname.
3. ONLY install DLLs into the System folder if they are very very widely used, or are actual system objects or libraries. (I.E. your app needs a newer version of the microsoft common dialog runtime. In that case, you ship the MSM which has the latest version of common dialog and related libs that are all known to work together, for EACH version of windows. The Windows Installer knows how to read the MSM and pick the appropriate set of files for the current OS/service pack level you are on. That way, developers running Windows 2000 don't b0rk a Win9x user by shipping the w2k libraries.)
3a. An even easier way of handling things is to write your app for a specific service pack level on each OS (or possibly hotfix if a bug was fixed that is affecting your app.) In this way, you just tell your users "you need service pack X on OS Y, or service pack Z on OS A" to run the app.
Originally by me: "Why doesn't a company like IBM or Microsoft or [insert name here] just buy SCO? They are pretty much a failure anyway."
Your comment: "Your second sentence answers the first."
Perhaps, but I think of it more like swatting a buzzing fly.
Why doesn't a company like IBM or Microsoft or [insert name here] just buy SCO? They are pretty much a failure anyway. Make it a hostile takeover if you must. Then fire everyone and close them down.
You can order a development kit, complete with a working OLED screen at this link:
j ht ml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/display/AM550L.
quote: "But why must this be done on the server, and collected at Microsoft? Can't the client download a list of what MS has for updates, and decide what the local system has?"
Were you born stupid? The list of patches that Microsoft must have is HUGE. They have patches for Windows 98, ME, 2000, and XP. Thousands of pieces of hardware... tons of bug fixes, security patches, and hotfixes.
So you want everyone to sit there and wait 10 days while Windows Update downloads the ENTIRE list? Bzzzzzzt! Wrong answer... the most efficient method is to have it send a list of what you have to the server, which can then check it against the database and send only the relevant information.
I don't care what quality it is. I'm not willing to pay the price. No, not the $$$ price, I mean the freedom price. I am not willing to shove myself into a system whereby I cannot rip MP3/OGG tracks of my shiny new DVD-A disc.
I never bought a single DVD until DeCSS was available. Now I own nearly a hundred. I won't buy a single DVD-A disc until I can rip it to my HDD with freely available tools. Period.
It is a well known effect in the audio world... for every surface that a subwoofer is in close proximity to, the effective level of sound from the subwoofer at that frequency is increased by 3db.
Placing a subwoofer in the corner of the room will result in a 6db increase, because it is in close proximity to two additional hard surfaces.
The math behind this is very complicated, and it is only effective for larger waves (hence bass frequencies).
It appears that they are claiming routers pick the fastest route to push packets down, which can in turn cause that route to become congested, thus slowing it down, and then the router picks a new route, causing it to become congested and slow down, and so on.
Supposedly, if the router picked the fastest AND least congested route, then some packets might take a little longer to get to their destination, but the overall latency of the internet would decrease.
In theory. In reality, I don't know how much peering arrangements change the equation. You see, if you are a network provider, you have two goals with peering: dump enough traffic onto your peer points so that you are exchanging about equal amounts with your peer AND get traffic that isn't bound for your network OFF your network as quickly as possible.
In practice, this means ISPs who peer have a large incentive to route packets coming from peer parter A directly to peer partner B, without regard for what that does to the latency of the packet, nor the congestion of the peering partners. The peered packets become more like the hot potato, bouncing around peer points until they actually arrive near the destination network. That lowers overall efficiency as well. (companies like Internap don't peer for this reason; they pay for all connection points even though they have enough traffic to get peering points for free. They cost more, but they have very low latency, packet loss, etc).
If she stepped down only because she wanted to spend more time with her kids, then I've never traded songs on Kazaa.
IF you will research the situation, the canadian courts have ruled that since the government charges a levy on blank media to cover piracy, citizens are justified in making copies. I'm sure google can return the relevant links for you.
If I had the money to burn, I'd hire lawyers and try to take a similar argument up to the supreme court regarding the current levies here in the United States on cassettes, music CDRs, etc.
It depends on who your phone company is, their equipment, and so forth.
Some local providers do this because they don't want the added expense of having two copper pairs (the local loop people because they have to allocate and maintain that many extra lines, and the CLECs because they have to pay the local loop people for every copper pair they use).
If you are getting business-class service, such as SDSL, then you automatically get a second copper pair for it and no voice line is required.
On a semi-related note:
We recently placed an order through Speakeast for SDSL service, 1.1M upload and download rate, static IP, etc. We are paying $200/mo, but it is business class service. Wanna host your own servers? go right ahead. Wanna run filesharing apps all day long? None of our business what you do with your own line.
The difference comes with having both a good, customer-friendly ISP (speakeasy) and business class service (aka NewEdge isn't going to take orders from the RIAA).
You seem to forget that Microsoft had the same thing when Windows 3.1 was out, and it was called Windows NT.
IBM and Microsoft co-developed OS2/WinNT, but disagreed on where the interface should go. Microsoft saw dramatic uptake of Windows 3.x and thought that would be a good road to plod down. IBM wanted to do their own thing. As a result, the groups split.
Microsoft won.
And here we sit today. Perhaps if IBM had done things Microsoft's way, the world would be a different place. For better or worse, I cannot say.
Actually that is quite incorrect. The Supreme Court has always held that the 2nd ammendment refers to individuals, as every able bodied male in colonial times was considered a part of the local militia, and that the founding father's personal documents show they supported individual firearms ownership.
The issue hasn't been brought up lately, and the 9th circuit court decision recently regarding some of California's laws on guns will go to SCOTUS and we'll get a fresh ruling.
Since when do armed agents of the law sieze private property without the owner having been convicted of any crime?
What a sad state of affairs.
TWo things:
1. Mounting a drive or folder as another drive/folder. This is done through junction points. You can find a good utility at http://www.sysinternals.com. This allows D:\ to be mounted as C:\Program Files (which is also a good way to expand a volume on a server without screwing up network users.)
2. a regular "hard link". Here is the API call from something like VB:
Private Declare Function CreateHardLink Lib "kernel32" Alias "CreateHardLinkA"
(ByVal lpFileName As String, ByVal lpExistingFileName As String, lpSecurityAttributes As Any) As Long
p_lngRtn = CreateHardLink(p_strFileName, _
p_strExistingFileName, ByVal 0&)
There are several utilities available to accomplish this.
BOTH are completely transparent to ALL standard windows applications. In fact, Explorer won't be able to tell that anything is going on, nor will the standard Open/Save functions and dialog boxes. You have to use the specific junction/link APIs to do anything with them.
I assume that this rumor means that the new FS will be "more extensive" in its journaling capabilities, not features.
NTFS supports DACLs (Discretionary Access Control Lists. Grant rights specifically on files, folders, or both for any specific combination of rights. Yes, even includes things like execute, though most users don't get THAT granular.) It also supports Auditing via an ACL-like mechanism. Wanna see if user sally01 read file X? Add her with READ to the audit list. Who is renaming files in c:\docs? add Everyone with rename/modify to the Audit list.
NTFS does quotas, junction points (links), and reparse points. Reparse points allow things like EFS to work without the app being aware of it. If I wanted to replace the word "microsoft" with BORK BORK BORK on the disk, I could write a parsing driver and install it. Then, any file with my driver's signature in its reparse point list would be handed off to my driver for processing before being saved to disk or read from disk to an application.
There are plenty of other features as well, but the point is that to be a better filesystem than NTFS would take a huge amount of work on the filesystem itself, plus getting the OS to support it. However it is relatively easy to attack a specific point of NTFS (its journaling) and make your filesystem do that specific thing better.
:: I for one, doubt that it could be a hoax, but at the same time, would love some hard evidence to hush up the theorists.
Apparently you VASTLY underestimate those same conspiracy theorists.
One of the primary rules when designing a service is that a service does not provide ANY USER INTERFACE WHATSOEVER.
A service listens on a TCP/IP port, named pipe, etc. If the virusscan writers had written their stuff PROPERLY, it would run the virusscanning engine as a service, and the user interface would be a user-mode program, posting and receiving messages from the service via named pipes or an IP port or whatever.
Imagine that you had a daemon running as root on your linux box that somehow popped up a UI in your X-windows session. Would you be AT ALL surprised if there was a way to exploit that to get root? I thought not.
The proper way would be to have a user program running in X that could communicate with the service.
I have dealt with PWC's "consulting" before and IBM just paid a lot of money for a really crappy business and a gaggle of STUPID people.
Out of the six or so PWC-run projects I've been involved with at various places of work, every single one has been:
a) a massive failure
b) over budget
c) not at all what the customer wanted in the first place
d) way over on scheduled time