Hmm...I agree with all you said, but you don't say why I was wrong. Let's say my disk has 2 platters, and double sided. So 4 effective sides. Let's say it's a 1 gig disk (I don't know whether any drives actually exist with this configuration, but this example is to demonstrate a point, not be technically accurate).
Each effective side (ES, let's call it) has a beginning and an end. As you say, data is written from the outside in. But you have 4 different beginnings and endings with 4 ES's, each of 250 megs. So I can either put the swap at the first cylindar, or at the 250st megabyte boundary, or the 500th meg boundary, or at the 750th meg boundary. You'd have to do some calculations to figure out exactly which cylander this is at (since most disks aren't exactly 1 gig in size) but I think it'd be the same.
I have no technical background in this area, so forgive me if I'm missing something totally obvious. Let me know if I'm wrong.
As for why benchmarks show that reading/writing at the beginning of the disk is faster, it's because it *is*. But that's b/c we're comparing reading/writing at the beginning of the disk to anywhere else on the disk So of course, the second way is slower. However, I think that there exists more than one fast location on the disk--at the beginning of each ES.
...because there are many platters. It's been a long time since hard disks have been on a single disk. Not only that, but they're double sided. So you end up having 6 "beginnings" for a hard disk of 3 platters...it no longer seems like such a big deal where your swap partition is.
Ok, I've got to say "me too" to this one. Somebody should moderate this previous post up to 2, at least. The example makes perfect sense.
If they *really* wanted to expose Windows NT's security flaws, they shouldn't have made the released the program to the public--maybe to a news agency, or security council, or whatever is appropriate, but not the public.
I find it sort of humourous that most of the universe is dominated by humans, and almost all other species live in small pockets throughout the galaxy. Think about it--there is only one - Yoda (whatever species he is). - wookie. - of those creatures who owned Anakin and his mom - Greedo - I would add Jaba the Hut, but we actually see a mini Jaba in Epi. 1. - a lot of other one-timers.
Don't they need company? We don't even see any others of their species anywhere. Immigrants usually travel in groups, don't they? Star Trek is a little better, in this respect.
Also, I find it curious that English seems to be the universal language, despite the presense of many other races.
A few things I haven't noticed ANY sci fi shows address is that all the planets seem to have the same g-force as earth; all the atmospheres seem generally the same (comfortable enough for humans anyway to not get physiologically disturbed at it).
Ditto. I can proudly say I haven't pirated any software for a couple of years since linux came along. Unfortunately, I can't say the same thing about mp3's yet. Can't wait to find a GPL'd musician:)
Don't you guys ever try to look at things from the other side?
Emulators ARE providing a way for people to play games without buying the games. Nintendo, even though it is a mega-corp, IS losing revenue.
Now, emulators themselves shouldn't be illegal, because they are just another string of 1's and 0's. However, they are contributing to an amount of piracy.
"Hold on", I hear you saying. "I own the games, in cartridge form. Possessing and running the affiliated ROMs with an emulator shouldn't be illegal". Yup, you're right. In a way, this does infringe on your own personal freedoms. But let's just say that Nintendo wasn't such a big game vendor, but just a programmer somewhere who makes mighty good console games. Does he deserve to be protected? Does his protection exceed your right to run his games? (is this a bad analogy? Does size really make that big a difference? Before you say "yes", think about this: should big companies be attacked more fiercely just because they're big?)
This argument is identical to the MP3 debates...sure, you have a right to do whatever you want on your computer...but there are winners and losers in both battles. Who deserves to win, and who deserves to lose?
I think a there is the largest concentration of above average intelligent people on the internet here on slashdot. But every time I see a "screw the RIAA" or "screw Nintendo" without providing solutions that will appease both parties, I wonder where these people all disappeared to.
Before you flame, note that I'm playing devil's advocate more than defending the bad guys...the issues aren't as clear cut as you guys think it is. I think there's such thing as a possible win-win solution for these issues. If the solution is found, I'm sure it'll have something to do with/.
What will the vast majority of those current high school jocks and their empty headed cheerleader girlfriends be 20 years from now?
You're doing exactly the same thing that the media is doing: shoving everybody from one, general category, into a description that really, nobody will fit (c'mon...Al Bundy?:) )
But like another poster said, many of the so-called bubbleheads *will* fit in and be incredibly businesspeople. Life is about relationships...even those killer kiddies out in kolorado had relationships (although they were a bit "different). Nerds have a sort of underground relationship with other nerds. Unfortunately, most people out there are not nerds. Most people *can* socialize. And those are the successful sales-people, upper level managers out there. Because they *can* deal with people.
In high school, I too was not in the *in* crowd. I went for sometimes days at a time without talking to people. I walked around at lunches by myself for lack of anything better to do and nobody to do it with. However, I never felt ill-will towards anybody. As long as you try to be "nice", helpful, and generally sociable when other people approach you, you won't be ostracized.
What I'm feeling is that the general trend here is that a lot of you nerds are feeling hatred towards those who oppressed you. This is natural. However, it probably isn't the best mentality to take, as it only contributes to the already profuse hatred out there.
You and I will never be understood fully by the real world (tm). Think of it more as "differences in philosophy of life", rather than as a competition, where one is necessarily better than another. That's the only way we can positively deal with our differences.
Yes, those were the days, sitting by my computer watching the bytes trickle by for some grainy.au files that hogged my precious disk space...now if I had a cable internet connection..:)
It's good that you've been trained to use them responsibly. Unfortunately, there is no way to ensure this responsibility is followed by all gun owners. Until we do (mandatory gun "lessons?"), we'll continue to have mass killings by kids in schools and adults during moments of road rage.
What you're arguing is that it's the parents faults, and guns aren't to blame.
I guess you'd have no problem if the education system provided guns for all your kids in their desks. And crack cocaine during recesses and lunches. Because if you were the good parent you say you are/would be, your kid would have the right mind to say "no, that's not for me".
Kids are experimenters. Too many people here claim that video games have no effect on kids. "If they had proper parents, they wouldn't be influenced to the point of killing people in real life". Guess what folks? Kids are much more easily influenced than you or me (providing that you or me have a stable moral base). When kids grow up, they need a stable moral base, which usually comes from parents. But until they get this established moral base, media sources, video games, and violent weapons are all contributing sources to the child's moral code, (if you can still call it a "moral" code after all the junk has been thrown in).
If you want to solve the problem, be a good parent and try to learn what is contributing to your child's moral code. It just might save some lives.
I'm guessing that the ISP doesn't really care, since it really isn't liable for any of the SK's actions. Plus, it's pretty much your word against theirs...The ISP might be unwilling to help because there isn't ample evidence that the user is doing illegal activity.
There are 9 planets in our own system. Only one has life. Now we've only conclusively found 3 planets in this new solar system...I'm amused that the scientists are shrieking, "eureka! We are not alone!". Just because there is a giant rock somewhere orbiting an energy source doesn't mean that life has a decent chance of existing there. Also, isn't there a reason the largest planets are gaseous? (I really don't know the answer). Because if these planets are truly gaseous, how will life exist there? I s'pose they could hover in the clouds, like in Empire Strikes Back...
If we didn't generalize, think how difficult it would be to get to know people.
"Hi, my name's Tim. And do you have a name?"
"Yes, I am Steve. I go to school."
"Oh, so what do you do at school? Do you learn?"
"Indeed. I learn lots of things. In course 1, I learn this. In course 2, I learn this..."yadda yadda yadda.
So as you can see, some conversations can get quite lengthy (and boring) by not generalizing.
What is the solution then? I've just accepted the fact that I'm a geek. If people draw certain conclusions about that, then fine. But I'll prove them wrong. I'll play sports. I'll compose music. I'll tell jokes. I won't screw up my vision. I'll wear clean clothes, and comb my hair. So then if they think of me as a geek, they won't conclude "messy, antisocial, and nerdy (which is different from geeky)." And don't get offended when people *do* make these assumptions about you. Because you are what you are.
Tim.
I wouldn't be using linux if it weren't for univ.
on
Do Geeks Need College?
·
· Score: 1
That's a good point brought up in the prev. post. Uni/college is a place to meet other people who are passionate about their education. Well, ok, that's a stretch, since I was just hanging on by a few threads at times...
AFAIK, I'd still be a Microserf, seeing these CNN stories about linux, and wondering, "what a fad." I wouldn't be reading slashdot. Because I wouldn't have met a friend who was one of two linux users I knew at the time.
Ok, this is an off-topic post, but related to the previous post.
I used to post in plain text, and the less than sign wouldn't show up unless I put <. Now, after the latest round of changes that Rob's implemented, < gets put down instead of the less than sign so I try posting as html. That doesn't work either. Anybody else know how to do it?
What I've found is that the & character doesn't get translated properly, but the less-than character does, regardless of whether I post in html or plain text. According to the list of Allowed HTML, this is valid. However, I'd still like to use the &blah characters.
I'd send this off to Rob, except he's probably fairly busy playing his role as CmdrTaco.
When I first clicked on the link, I thought it would pertain to writing virii (or viruses or virus'), backdoors, or other controversal software, since that's another "original" use of code I could think of that could be protected (not necessarily should, just could. <tim><
As long as you have your oxford or websters dictionary open, why don't you look up words like gopher, proxy, masquerade (as in IP masquerading). Guess what, you won't find the meanings that cs "nerds" use in those books. But check out the jargon file for definitions that are a little closer to what the community here goes on. <tim><
1) You're pretty good at making people respond to things, no matter what the topic is 2) People here are good at making good and bad comments 3) Given the amount of participation, I think we could get one in 7 hours. That's when the more popular topics exceed a couple hundred posts.
The only problem is getting rid of the first comment posts, the "me too" posts, and all the dupes from people who don't read what other people wrote.
This is vaguely on topic--I called that 1-800 number a few months ago, leaving my contact information. I haven't gotten anything yet though. Has anybody else?
Slashdot Mirror
Strange that Rob posted the european site, when a north american mirror was available (and most people here are in NA).
<tim><
Hmm...I agree with all you said, but you don't say why I was wrong. Let's say my disk has 2 platters, and double sided. So 4 effective sides. Let's say it's a 1 gig disk (I don't know whether any drives actually exist with this configuration, but this example is to demonstrate a point, not be technically accurate).
Each effective side (ES, let's call it) has a beginning and an end. As you say, data is written from the outside in. But you have 4 different beginnings and endings with 4 ES's, each of 250 megs. So I can either put the swap at the first cylindar, or at the 250st megabyte boundary, or the 500th meg boundary, or at the 750th meg boundary. You'd have to do some calculations to figure out exactly which cylander this is at (since most disks aren't exactly 1 gig in size) but I think it'd be the same.
I have no technical background in this area, so forgive me if I'm missing something totally obvious. Let me know if I'm wrong.
As for why benchmarks show that reading/writing at the beginning of the disk is faster, it's because it *is*. But that's b/c we're comparing reading/writing at the beginning of the disk to anywhere else on the disk So of course, the second way is slower. However, I think that there exists more than one fast location on the disk--at the beginning of each ES.
<tim><
...because there are many platters. It's been a long time since hard disks have been on a single disk. Not only that, but they're double sided. So you end up having 6 "beginnings" for a hard disk of 3 platters...it no longer seems like such a big deal where your swap partition is.
<tim><
Ok, I've got to say "me too" to this one. Somebody should moderate this previous post up to 2, at least. The example makes perfect sense.
If they *really* wanted to expose Windows NT's security flaws, they shouldn't have made the released the program to the public--maybe to a news agency, or security council, or whatever is appropriate, but not the public.
<tim><
Nope, sorry, the link doesn't work...real networks redirects you to a different page.
<tim><
I find it sort of humourous that most of the universe is dominated by humans, and almost all other species live in small pockets throughout the galaxy. Think about it--there is only one
- Yoda (whatever species he is).
- wookie.
- of those creatures who owned Anakin and his mom
- Greedo
- I would add Jaba the Hut, but we actually see a mini Jaba in Epi. 1.
- a lot of other one-timers.
Don't they need company? We don't even see any others of their species anywhere. Immigrants usually travel in groups, don't they? Star Trek is a little better, in this respect.
Also, I find it curious that English seems to be the universal language, despite the presense of many other races.
A few things I haven't noticed ANY sci fi shows address is that all the planets seem to have the same g-force as earth; all the atmospheres seem generally the same (comfortable enough for humans anyway to not get physiologically disturbed at it).
That's all for now.
<tim><
I know...off topic...but how did this anonymous post get a score?
I personally think this post deserved a score...but I didn't think anon posts were even allowed to get a score.
<tim<
Ditto. I can proudly say I haven't pirated any software for a couple of years since linux came along. Unfortunately, I can't say the same thing about mp3's yet. Can't wait to find a GPL'd musician :)
Don't you guys ever try to look at things from the other side?
/.
Emulators ARE providing a way for people to play games without buying the games. Nintendo, even though it is a mega-corp, IS losing revenue.
Now, emulators themselves shouldn't be illegal, because they are just another string of 1's and 0's. However, they are contributing to an amount of piracy.
"Hold on", I hear you saying. "I own the games, in cartridge form. Possessing and running the affiliated ROMs with an emulator shouldn't be illegal". Yup, you're right. In a way, this does infringe on your own personal freedoms. But let's just say that Nintendo wasn't such a big game vendor, but just a programmer somewhere who makes mighty good console games. Does he deserve to be protected? Does his protection exceed your right to run his games? (is this a bad analogy? Does size really make that big a difference? Before you say "yes", think about this: should big companies be attacked more fiercely just because they're big?)
This argument is identical to the MP3 debates...sure, you have a right to do whatever you want on your computer...but there are winners and losers in both battles. Who deserves to win, and who deserves to lose?
I think a there is the largest concentration of above average intelligent people on the internet here on slashdot. But every time I see a "screw the RIAA" or "screw Nintendo" without providing solutions that will appease both parties, I wonder where these people all disappeared to.
Before you flame, note that I'm playing devil's advocate more than defending the bad guys...the issues aren't as clear cut as you guys think it is. I think there's such thing as a possible win-win solution for these issues. If the solution is found, I'm sure it'll have something to do with
<tim><
What will the vast majority of those current high school jocks and their empty headed
:) )
cheerleader girlfriends be 20 years from now?
You're doing exactly the same thing that the media is doing: shoving everybody from one, general category, into a description that really, nobody will fit (c'mon...Al Bundy?
But like another poster said, many of the so-called bubbleheads *will* fit in and be incredibly businesspeople. Life is about relationships...even those killer kiddies out in kolorado had relationships (although they were a bit "different). Nerds have a sort of underground relationship with other nerds. Unfortunately, most people out there are not nerds. Most people *can* socialize. And those are the successful sales-people, upper level managers out there. Because they *can* deal with people.
In high school, I too was not in the *in* crowd. I went for sometimes days at a time without talking to people. I walked around at lunches by myself for lack of anything better to do and nobody to do it with. However, I never felt ill-will towards anybody. As long as you try to be "nice", helpful, and generally sociable when other people approach you, you won't be ostracized.
What I'm feeling is that the general trend here is that a lot of you nerds are feeling hatred towards those who oppressed you. This is natural. However, it probably isn't the best mentality to take, as it only contributes to the already profuse hatred out there.
You and I will never be understood fully by the real world (tm). Think of it more as "differences in philosophy of life", rather than as a competition, where one is necessarily better than another. That's the only way we can positively deal with our differences.
<tim><
Yes, those were the days, sitting by my computer watching the bytes trickle by for some grainy .au files that hogged my precious disk space...now if I had a cable internet connection.. :)
It's good that you've been trained to use them responsibly. Unfortunately, there is no way to ensure this responsibility is followed by all gun owners. Until we do (mandatory gun "lessons?"), we'll continue to have mass killings by kids in schools and adults during moments of road rage.
<tim><
What you're arguing is that it's the parents faults, and guns aren't to blame.
I guess you'd have no problem if the education system provided guns for all your kids in their desks. And crack cocaine during recesses and lunches. Because if you were the good parent you say you are/would be, your kid would have the right mind to say "no, that's not for me".
Kids are experimenters. Too many people here claim that video games have no effect on kids. "If they had proper parents, they wouldn't be influenced to the point of killing people in real life". Guess what folks? Kids are much more easily influenced than you or me (providing that you or me have a stable moral base). When kids grow up, they need a stable moral base, which usually comes from parents. But until they get this established moral base, media sources, video games, and violent weapons are all contributing sources to the child's moral code, (if you can still call it a "moral" code after all the junk has been thrown in).
If you want to solve the problem, be a good parent and try to learn what is contributing to your child's moral code. It just might save some lives.
Nobody says that taking away guns will take away violence. But the ease of obtaining a gun certainly contributes to guns being used.
So you say that we'll still have violence, and that's a problem with society. Agreed. But at least we'd have less fatal violent attacks.
<tim><
I'm guessing that the ISP doesn't really care, since it really isn't liable for any of the SK's actions. Plus, it's pretty much your word against theirs...The ISP might be unwilling to help because there isn't ample evidence that the user is doing illegal activity.
Just curious...not being judgemental...
Tim
There are 9 planets in our own system. Only one has life. Now we've only conclusively found 3 planets in this new solar system...I'm amused that the scientists are shrieking, "eureka! We are not alone!". Just because there is a giant rock somewhere orbiting an energy source doesn't mean that life has a decent chance of existing there. Also, isn't there a reason the largest planets are gaseous? (I really don't know the answer). Because if these planets are truly gaseous, how will life exist there? I s'pose they could hover in the clouds, like in Empire Strikes Back...
tim
If we didn't generalize, think how difficult it would be to get to know people.
"Hi, my name's Tim. And do you have a name?"
"Yes, I am Steve. I go to school."
"Oh, so what do you do at school? Do you learn?"
"Indeed. I learn lots of things. In course 1, I learn this. In course 2, I learn this..."yadda yadda yadda.
So as you can see, some conversations can get quite lengthy (and boring) by not generalizing.
What is the solution then? I've just accepted the fact that I'm a geek. If people draw certain conclusions about that, then fine. But I'll prove them wrong. I'll play sports. I'll compose music. I'll tell jokes. I won't screw up my vision. I'll wear clean clothes, and comb my hair. So then if they think of me as a geek, they won't conclude "messy, antisocial, and nerdy (which is different from geeky)." And don't get offended when people *do* make these assumptions about you. Because you are what you are.
Tim.
AFAIK, I'd still be a Microserf, seeing these CNN stories about linux, and wondering, "what a fad." I wouldn't be reading slashdot. Because I wouldn't have met a friend who was one of two linux users I knew at the time.
tim
Remember, even with real speech, there are certain limits. So even if free speech extended to code, destructive behaviour is not protected.
Also keep in mind that the debate is more about whether programming languages are "devices just like circuitry, not a form of speech".
tim
I used to post in plain text, and the less than sign wouldn't show up unless I put <. Now, after the latest round of changes that Rob's implemented, < gets put down instead of the less than sign so I try posting as html. That doesn't work either. Anybody else know how to do it?
What I've found is that the & character doesn't get translated properly, but the less-than character does, regardless of whether I post in html or plain text. According to the list of Allowed HTML, this is valid. However, I'd still like to use the &blah characters.
I'd send this off to Rob, except he's probably fairly busy playing his role as CmdrTaco.
less-thantim>less-than
When I first clicked on the link, I thought it would pertain to writing virii (or viruses or virus'), backdoors, or other controversal software, since that's another "original" use of code I could think of that could be protected (not necessarily should, just could. <tim><
As long as you have your oxford or websters dictionary open, why don't you look up words like gopher, proxy, masquerade (as in IP masquerading). Guess what, you won't find the meanings that cs "nerds" use in those books. But check out the jargon file for definitions that are a little closer to what the community here goes on. <tim><
1) You're pretty good at making people respond to things, no matter what the topic is
2) People here are good at making good and bad comments
3) Given the amount of participation, I think we could get one in 7 hours. That's when the more popular topics exceed a couple hundred posts.
The only problem is getting rid of the first comment posts, the "me too" posts, and all the dupes from people who don't read what other people wrote.
<tim><
4. Beings born in other galaxies wouldn't have birthdates from the earth's calendar upon which the astrological signs are based.
:)
Yes, I know, it was all in fun. But since other people were poking at it....
<tim><
This is vaguely on topic--I called that 1-800 number a few months ago, leaving my contact information. I haven't gotten anything yet though. Has anybody else?