You just used singular "they" and "s/he" in the same sentence. This fucking language is going to hell, and it is being driven there by people like you.
You mean like this:
There's not a man I meet but doth salute me, As if I were their well-acquainted friend.
? That's from Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors, Act IV Scene 3.
But I am thinking gateway will fall flat on thier face with this one.
When my parents got a computer a few years ago from Gateway, they got their ISP service from Gateway.net . It was truly awful. The folks at Gateway obviously didn't have a clue as to how to run an ISP, but were just trying to jump on the internet bandwagon. Now my father is on Earthlink, and my mother on AOL, and Gateway.net has apparently become part of CompuServe.
I have a feeling that this is another attempt by Gateway to experiment with the latest trendy thing. They should just stick with what they know.
In addition to the very famous peeps, the company also produces marshmallow bunnies. The bunnies are pretty much the same, but shaped like two-dimensional rabbits.
I _would_ also recommend writing senators, but that might be a bit more ambitious since they usually represent much larger numbers of people and thus would be harder to coerce.
That depends on the state, of course.
If your senator is on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, which is the committee that Fritz Hollings heads and is using to push the SSSCA, I would strongly urge you to write a (paper) letter, expressing your opposition to the SSSCA. Members of the committee include Senators Kerry, Wyden, Gordon Smith, Boxer, Nelson, McCain, Hutchison, and Allen, among others. Note that it includes both of Oregon's senators, so if you're from Oregon, you can write two letters.
It's a utopian point of view. "If only we can design the perfect X, then everyone can have the same X and we can get rid of the inefficiencies of having multiple types of X". This point of view regards the freedom to choose as unimportant or non-existent, and has more in common with old Soviet bureaucracies than with modern Western life.
Of particular annoyance was Jef's example of the red-on-red. There are sometimes reasons to deny people choice, but the fact that they might choose poorly is not one of those reasons.
Note that, at 1.5Mbps ("Basic" quality on a TiVo), 8 weeks of 30fps video (14 hours per day, 7 days per week), comes out to about 400GB, per camera. That's 3.2/6.4TB for 8/16 cameras, which is a lot more than the either the 480GB solution mentioned above, or the 1TB array mentioned here in other comments. Even at 3fps, 16 cameras together will require 640GB.
Oh boo hoo. Commercial broadcasting in this country gets access to the radio/TV airwaves at a fraction of their true market value. You get at least as much of a subsidy as public broadcasting. The only difference is that your subsidy doesn't come in the form of a check from the U.S. Treasury.
As far as I can see, the fact that you access the CCR or the SR for the condition codes do not affect the condition codes nor the state that the processor is in (supervisor or normal).
Writing was never a problem. Reading the condition codes was the problem.
In order to support virtualization, one must be able to trick a program that is running in user mode into thinking that it is running in supervisor mode. For example, a virtualized Linux kernel needs to run in user mode (so that, for example, you can trap any attempts it makes to change the MMU registers; you don't want it to change the _real_ MMU registers, just what it _thinks_ are the real MMU registers). On an M68000, this was not possible, because the opcode used to read the condition codes ("MOVE SR,<ea>") was a user-level opcode. Thus a program could always determine its true run level.
On the MC68010 and later, "MOVE SR,<ea>" was made supervisor-only. So what does this mean? On a non-virtualized OS, if supervisor-level code does a "MOVE SR,<ea>", it returns the true result. On a virtualized OS, the virtual OS is running in user mode, so the "MOVE SR,<ea>" traps. The virtual machine underneath gets the condition codes, sets the "Supervisor" bit to 1, stores it in the specified destination (the "effective address"), and returns from the trap. To the virtual OS, it looks like the "MOVE SR,<ea>" executed as expected.
The average weekly earnings of 80 per cent of Americans in gainful employment dropped by roughly 18 per cent between l973 and l995, he reports, from $315 to $258 a week. At the same time, the real income of top managers soared by 19 per cent in just ten years between 1979 and 1989.
And what, exactly, am I supposed to learn about the world of work in 2002 by looking at salary data from 1989 and 1995? The trend towards lower earnings for workers reversed in the latest economic boom (1995 onwards). Leaving out recent data that shows that workers' earnings are increasing, in order to "prove" that they are decreasing, is deceptive.
Like it or not, a degree indicates that the person has at least some formal knowledge of material. Formal knowledge is no joke. It helps you recognize good form from bad form. Formal knowledge leads to understanding structures and architectures and other complex things.
When I was a kid, growing up in Silicon Valley (I'm 30 now), I heard a lot about how brilliant engineers at companies like Apple did really wonderful things without having a formal college education (nevertheless, I went to college)
Towards the end of grad school I bought some books on programming the Macintosh, as I had just gotten myself a Mac laptop. Having studied operating systems at both the undergrad and graduate level, and having programmed my Amiga and the school's Unix systems for years, I was shocked when I read what the internals of the Mac OS (then System 7) were like. They looked like what someone with a lot of Apple II experience would have designed: global system variables in known, fixed, publically-accessible locations (just like my old Commodore 64!), all user-level programs ran in supervisor mode, etc. The original Macintosh was a fine piece of work, with an innovative GUI. However, it would have been really nice if someone who had gone to college and studied operating systems (of which there were plenty in Berkeley, an hour's drive away) had been there to keep the OS team from making some really stupid design decisions.
You can find the Onstream ADR 30GB (firewire or ide) for about 200$US.
That's 30GB compressed. If you're backing up MP3s or images, then you're only going to get 15GB out of that tape.
For those of you following along at home, that is ~300$US for 120GB of backup.
That's ~300$US for 60GB of backup. Given that 60GB hard drives go for about $140, that's pretty bad. The tapes by themselves cost nearly as much per GB as hard drives, and then you add in an additional $200 for the tape drive on top of that.
Not bad, and it is a DAMN FAST drive...
It's a damn fast tape drive, but compared to a hard drive, it's achingly slow.
I'm currently backing up about 12GB under Win2K using an Onstream 15/30GB tape drive. They sell a 25/50 model as well, but neither they nor anyone else sells anything bigger than that, for a price that a home user would find reasonable. The IDE version of the 15/30 model goes for about $200, and tapes are about $30-$35 each (I have three and cycle between them). Add a couple of hundred dollars for the 25/50 model, or for a SCSI model.
Given those prices, I've got a different plan for when I outgrow my tape drive. I'm thinking about just buying 3 hard drives (whatever I can get for $100 each; right now that's 40GB), a copy of DriveImage, and a removable drive bay (with three drive enclosures, one for each hard drive). When I want to back up my system, I'll pop in a hard drive, use DriveImage to make an image of my system and store it on the removable hard drive. Like with my tapes now, I'll cycle through the three hard drives.
That strategy will probably cost me about $400, which is less expensive than an Onstream 25/50 (plus three tapes). It will also hold more data than the Onstream, and will be substantially faster as well.
Yes, even Commodore used a Z80. Specifically in the C-128, which could boot into a CP/M mode running on the Z80, or into regular C-128 mode on the 8502, or into C-64 emulation mode (also on the 8502). I don't think there was any way to run both CPUs at the same time.
No, you couldn't run them at the same time. However, a program could switch between them. I once wrote a program than ran in C-128 mode, but used the Z-80 to do a memory copy (using the Z-80's block-copy instruction, on the theory that it would be a lot faster; it wasn't). The program would start in 8502/C-128 mode, then switch to Z-80 mode and run a bit of Z-80 machine code that I had written. After the copy , the Z-80 code would switch back to 8502 mode, which would pick up where it left off.
So, do you have a better alternative? It's easy to say: oh, that's too complicated, we need something that stupid "Joe User" can use safely out-of-the-box. But designing that "something" seems to be the hard part.
Why?
The concepts behind securing communication via encryption have been well understood for years, yet I can't think of a single piece of consumer electronics that uses strong (>=128-bit) encryption. Cell phones, cordless phones, wireless networking, etc. should all use strong encryption, yet none of them do. Why not? Is it because of RSA/DES patent concerns? Concerns over the ability to export equipment with strong encryption? Nearly all on-line vendors use strong encryption to protect credit card information during transactions. So why isn't strong encryption used elsewhere?
If you want to do something really worthwhile, instead of waiting for MegaCorp XYZ to design the wireless card with technology that will protect dumb old "Joe" without requiring him to do any thinking at all, how about sitting down with him, explain the dangers of unsecure communications, make analogies that he can relate to, show him how using _Free,_Open_Source_ solutions can solve his problems, and teach him how to use the tools necesasary to take care of himself.
Feh. It is possible to have secure communications for even the most ignorant of users. Web browsers prove that. Your argument boils down to "ignorant users don't deserve security". That's nothing more than a load of arrogant techno-snobbery.
do extensive background checks on visa applications before they are allowed in.
How extensive of a background check should we do on a foreign tourist coming to the US for a two-week vacation in New York? There's been a lot of talk about closing loopholes in the student visa process, including tracking down people who overstay them. But as any potential terrorist can come in on a tourist visa, I don't really see the point.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean like this:
? That's from Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors, Act IV Scene 3.
Ban gelatin.
Wow. So, not only is Tron 2.0 (aka Tron Killer App) going to be in out in the fall of 2003, but The Matrix Reloaded (aka The Matrix 2) and perhaps The Matrix Revolutions (aka The Matrix 3) will be as well.
2003 is going to be a kick-ass year for geek movies.
When my parents got a computer a few years ago from Gateway, they got their ISP service from Gateway.net . It was truly awful. The folks at Gateway obviously didn't have a clue as to how to run an ISP, but were just trying to jump on the internet bandwagon. Now my father is on Earthlink, and my mother on AOL, and Gateway.net has apparently become part of CompuServe.
I have a feeling that this is another attempt by Gateway to experiment with the latest trendy thing. They should just stick with what they know.
In other words, marshmallow road kill.
Being so thin, it can be easily shredded, so there's no further need to keep your financial documents on paper.
That depends on the state, of course.
If your senator is on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, which is the committee that Fritz Hollings heads and is using to push the SSSCA, I would strongly urge you to write a (paper) letter, expressing your opposition to the SSSCA. Members of the committee include Senators Kerry, Wyden, Gordon Smith, Boxer, Nelson, McCain, Hutchison, and Allen, among others. Note that it includes both of Oregon's senators, so if you're from Oregon, you can write two letters.
So I guess a nanotube used as a battery would be an AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA-sized battery?
Note that, the article claims that the next star in that cluster expected to go supernova is 500,000 light years away.
Of course, it also claims that that star is Antares, which is actually about 600 light years away.
when, a couple of months from now, the interior of the case is covered in dust.
It's a utopian point of view. "If only we can design the perfect X, then everyone can have the same X and we can get rid of the inefficiencies of having multiple types of X". This point of view regards the freedom to choose as unimportant or non-existent, and has more in common with old Soviet bureaucracies than with modern Western life.
Of particular annoyance was Jef's example of the red-on-red. There are sometimes reasons to deny people choice, but the fact that they might choose poorly is not one of those reasons.
Emacs? Go back five years and tell them that vi comes pre-loaded on a Mac.
Note that, for the Super Bowl, one uses TiVo to skip the football and watch the commercials.
Uh, yeah, we wouldn't want to have anyone who uses "intoxicating beverages to excess" to be on a space station with a bunch of Russians.
Note that, at 1.5Mbps ("Basic" quality on a TiVo), 8 weeks of 30fps video (14 hours per day, 7 days per week), comes out to about 400GB, per camera. That's 3.2/6.4TB for 8/16 cameras, which is a lot more than the either the 480GB solution mentioned above, or the 1TB array mentioned here in other comments. Even at 3fps, 16 cameras together will require 640GB.
.
Oh boo hoo. Commercial broadcasting in this country gets access to the radio/TV airwaves at a fraction of their true market value. You get at least as much of a subsidy as public broadcasting. The only difference is that your subsidy doesn't come in the form of a check from the U.S. Treasury.
Writing was never a problem. Reading the condition codes was the problem.
In order to support virtualization, one must be able to trick a program that is running in user mode into thinking that it is running in supervisor mode. For example, a virtualized Linux kernel needs to run in user mode (so that, for example, you can trap any attempts it makes to change the MMU registers; you don't want it to change the _real_ MMU registers, just what it _thinks_ are the real MMU registers). On an M68000, this was not possible, because the opcode used to read the condition codes ("MOVE SR,<ea>") was a user-level opcode. Thus a program could always determine its true run level.
On the MC68010 and later, "MOVE SR,<ea>" was made supervisor-only. So what does this mean? On a non-virtualized OS, if supervisor-level code does a "MOVE SR,<ea>", it returns the true result. On a virtualized OS, the virtual OS is running in user mode, so the "MOVE SR,<ea>" traps. The virtual machine underneath gets the condition codes, sets the "Supervisor" bit to 1, stores it in the specified destination (the "effective address"), and returns from the trap. To the virtual OS, it looks like the "MOVE SR,<ea>" executed as expected.
And what, exactly, am I supposed to learn about the world of work in 2002 by looking at salary data from 1989 and 1995? The trend towards lower earnings for workers reversed in the latest economic boom (1995 onwards). Leaving out recent data that shows that workers' earnings are increasing, in order to "prove" that they are decreasing, is deceptive.
When I was a kid, growing up in Silicon Valley (I'm 30 now), I heard a lot about how brilliant engineers at companies like Apple did really wonderful things without having a formal college education (nevertheless, I went to college)
Towards the end of grad school I bought some books on programming the Macintosh, as I had just gotten myself a Mac laptop. Having studied operating systems at both the undergrad and graduate level, and having programmed my Amiga and the school's Unix systems for years, I was shocked when I read what the internals of the Mac OS (then System 7) were like. They looked like what someone with a lot of Apple II experience would have designed: global system variables in known, fixed, publically-accessible locations (just like my old Commodore 64!), all user-level programs ran in supervisor mode, etc. The original Macintosh was a fine piece of work, with an innovative GUI. However, it would have been really nice if someone who had gone to college and studied operating systems (of which there were plenty in Berkeley, an hour's drive away) had been there to keep the OS team from making some really stupid design decisions.
That's 30GB compressed. If you're backing up MP3s or images, then you're only going to get 15GB out of that tape.
That's ~300$US for 60GB of backup. Given that 60GB hard drives go for about $140, that's pretty bad. The tapes by themselves cost nearly as much per GB as hard drives, and then you add in an additional $200 for the tape drive on top of that.
It's a damn fast tape drive, but compared to a hard drive, it's achingly slow.
I'm currently backing up about 12GB under Win2K using an Onstream 15/30GB tape drive. They sell a 25/50 model as well, but neither they nor anyone else sells anything bigger than that, for a price that a home user would find reasonable. The IDE version of the 15/30 model goes for about $200, and tapes are about $30-$35 each (I have three and cycle between them). Add a couple of hundred dollars for the 25/50 model, or for a SCSI model.
Given those prices, I've got a different plan for when I outgrow my tape drive. I'm thinking about just buying 3 hard drives (whatever I can get for $100 each; right now that's 40GB), a copy of DriveImage, and a removable drive bay (with three drive enclosures, one for each hard drive). When I want to back up my system, I'll pop in a hard drive, use DriveImage to make an image of my system and store it on the removable hard drive. Like with my tapes now, I'll cycle through the three hard drives.
That strategy will probably cost me about $400, which is less expensive than an Onstream 25/50 (plus three tapes). It will also hold more data than the Onstream, and will be substantially faster as well.
No, you couldn't run them at the same time. However, a program could switch between them. I once wrote a program than ran in C-128 mode, but used the Z-80 to do a memory copy (using the Z-80's block-copy instruction, on the theory that it would be a lot faster; it wasn't). The program would start in 8502/C-128 mode, then switch to Z-80 mode and run a bit of Z-80 machine code that I had written. After the copy , the Z-80 code would switch back to 8502 mode, which would pick up where it left off.
Why?
The concepts behind securing communication via encryption have been well understood for years, yet I can't think of a single piece of consumer electronics that uses strong (>=128-bit) encryption. Cell phones, cordless phones, wireless networking, etc. should all use strong encryption, yet none of them do. Why not? Is it because of RSA/DES patent concerns? Concerns over the ability to export equipment with strong encryption? Nearly all on-line vendors use strong encryption to protect credit card information during transactions. So why isn't strong encryption used elsewhere?
Feh. It is possible to have secure communications for even the most ignorant of users. Web browsers prove that. Your argument boils down to "ignorant users don't deserve security". That's nothing more than a load of arrogant techno-snobbery.
How extensive of a background check should we do on a foreign tourist coming to the US for a two-week vacation in New York? There's been a lot of talk about closing loopholes in the student visa process, including tracking down people who overstay them. But as any potential terrorist can come in on a tourist visa, I don't really see the point.