So what they'll do is disconnect the device from the television. Or duct tape the shoes to something that vacillates.
This kind of invention isn't really going to accomplish anything. If you're obese, stop eating at McDonald's and all those places. Instead, try making your own food. Get your family, friends, and neighbors involved. Go for a walk sometime. Maybe just get rid of your television and find other activities to do. There are a zillion things to be done in the world. (A zillion is a lot of things.) Instead of wasting away in front of the stupid tube, why not do one of those activities? That would be much better.
And if you truly believe that you won't bypass this shoe thing with your television, and that's what will get you motivated, then by all means, go for it. But I think this is a stupid idea.
I think the United States has the right, and more importantly, the responsibility to develop space weapons. There are all kinds of terrible things going on in the world. The United States has thus far demonstrated that it is the most responsible when it comes to protecting human rights, helping countries in need, providing aid to other countries when disaster strikes... In fact, the United States doesn't really owe any of these countries anything, but it still helps out because it's the right thing to do, and because the American people are the most generous throughout the world.
Say what you will about the United States and the American people. While Hollywood pop culture and defective ideas spread by the extreme left would have you believe otherwise, this nation has done the right thing time and time again.
It is perfectly fine for the United States to have space weapons. The same applies to nucular weapons (I voted for Bush, can you tell?) and every other type of weapon in existance. This is because the U.S. uses such weapons responsibly. It is not okay for most other nations to have access to such weapons. This is because they would use them irresponsibly. This is akin to a police officer carrying a gun (the United States) versus a bank robber carrying the same gun (parts of: Europe, Africa, Asia--these areas have demonstrated, within the last century, that they are not responsible).
The story provides a decent background on why it matters, and shows a surprisingly conciliatory attitude on both sides.
You mean to tell me that these aren't a bunch of zealot extremists who would rather fight over it and go to jail than risk sounding like someone with a balanced opinion?
Bah humbug! If you're not a zealot extremist RMS worshipper, then you don't deserve to use a computer!!!
Determining the firing order of the V6 engine in Acura models involves
sharing certain CPU resources between multiple threads, including
memory caches. FreeCAR supports intercylinder messaging when using a
kernel compiled with the ICM option.
II. Problem Description
When running on processors supporting bi-endian load and store operations,
it is possible for a malicious thread to modify the firing order of the
V6 engine in Acura models. This can cause serious motor damage and can
result in a vehicle collision.
III. Impact
Vehicles may crash into each other and injuries may be caused. For example,
on a highway when traveling at speeds in excess of 100 miles per hour, a
motor breakdown due to a firing order mishap may cause a serious collision.
IV. Workaround
Systems not using processors with bi-endian load and store operations are
not affected by this issue. On systems which are affected, the security
flaw can be avoided by refraining from driving.
V. Solution
Perform one of the following:
1) Upgrade your vulnerable system to the 7-STABLE branch dated after the
correction date.
VI. Correction details
The following list contains the revision numbers of each file that was
corrected in FreeCAR.
The results are obviously false. I would be willing to put money that Microsoft did the test as follows:
They put together the fastest computer possible with the most memory possible, the fastest hard drive possible, and all the fastest stuff possible. Then, they installed Windows 2003, and they had their programmers who know this thing inside and out remove all the parts of the OS that were not needed, along with configuring it for the maximum possible performance. Then they tested it and recorded the benchmark.
Then, they got an 8086 computer and compiled Bochs to run on it. In Bochs, they set up an environment that looks like the identical computer they used to run Windows 2003. Because this 8086 has only a few kilobytes of memory, they actually stored the information on tape, and used the serial port to access that data. Then, they ran the test. Sure enough, Red Hat / Apache running on the Bochs running on the 8086 with no memory and all information being accessed through tape through the serial port, the Windows 2003 installation ran 300% the speed of the Red Hat. This isn't quite such bad news, though, because it shows not how slow Red Hat is running in such a screwed up scenerio, but rather how slow Windows is running on ideal hardware.
I have a much better idea. Instead of thinking about some stupid user, and in the process, end up with software that's so automatic that nothing works properly; that's designed so stupidly because stupid users think doing it the right way is "too confusing"; that has all kinds of stupid things like Clippy the talking paperclip because users are too dumb to read a dialog box; that's slow because all kinds of poorly written and totally unnecessary graphical crap takes up all the resources; that causes loss and destruction of data because it contains errors that allow malicious software and users to gain control over the system... instead of creating such trash, all in the name of "the user", programmers should strive for software perfection. As each piece of software is perfected, we can move on to the next piece. Maybe all the "features" won't be there right away, but the software will be reliable, won't crash, won't do all kinds of weird things... and yes, you'll have to learn how to use it, but once you do, it'll just work. None of this garbage that made Windows the complete and utter trash garbage shit that it is.
This little rover doesn't weigh more than some RC car. How come someone doesn't just pick it up and set it down somewhere more suitable?
All this bothering with trying to get it out by remote control is useless. I mean, yeah, it'd be cool to say, "Yeah man, I got that rover out by remote control!" But seriously. Just pick it up and set it down somewhere else.
What they could do is enlarge the superstring so they can observe it without a microscope and all that bother. Unfortunately, since the thing vibrates at incredibly high speeds and bounces around like crazy, they'll have to be careful or it'll snap their head off.
In other words, be careful, folks... you're playing in God's realm, and He might not like that.
What they should do is invent a power supply that runs on piss and shit. This way, you won't have to go to the bathroom anymore. The power could be used to run all kinds of body peripherals, such as mechanical muscles that will allow you to lift something 5,000 times your weight, or run 100 miles at 25 miles per hour without your heart rate going above 55 beats a minute, or brain implants that allow you to make complex computations that would normally take number-crunching software, in your head. Or better yet, imaging technology that can superimpose things on top of your vision, so that you can view a digitized copy of a textbook or a crib sheet during a test in school, or for other uses like that, or cameras built in to the eyes, so that if you see a hot chick you can record the image for later use, or to email to a friend. Also, excess power could be stored in batteries, for use during times when the requisite materials are not available to the power supply.
It doesn't take a great genius to discover that all Microsoft software is completely and utterly defective down to its very core, while software made under F/OSS methods is generally quite good, solid, and sound. Perhaps some features aren't implemented in F/OSS which exist in Microsoft's trash, but those features will eventually become available, and in the meantime, it is much safer to compute with F/OSS.
For years, Microsoft deliberately created defective software in order to continuously sell upgrade after upgrade. But today, people are waking up to Microsoft's defective business models and realizing that they have been the victim of Microsoft for many years. Therefore, Microsoft is going to lose. Day after day, more users switch away from Microsoft's garbage. And say what you will, but Microsoft will lose eventually, and they will go out of business. There is nothing they can do about this now. No matter how hard they try. No matter what Longtooth does when it comes out, if it ever comes out. And guess what, no matter what they do, Longtooth will still be a very extremely defective and insecure piece of trash software. And that makes me glad. Because I hate Microsoft.
You have to remember that a widespread viewership is not the goal of the RIAA, MPAA, and Microsoft. Nor do they care about increased profits. These organizations are under the control of a conspiracy that cares only about one thing: Reducing and eventually eliminating the rights of all people to information. Their goal is a world where all people are stupid; where only duckspeakers exist; where thoughtcrime is cause for a death penalty.
These people want to be in control over everybody. This is why they increasingly want to create laws limiting the rights of people to information. When their goal is reached, there will be no such thing as movies, music, books, software, etc. All people will be brainwashed from childhood into a state of near unconsciousness. Only the few elite will be learned and have access to information. They will control the masses to obtain their own goals. And we will all be slaves, in eternal bondage of the mind.
That, not profits, is the goal of the RIAA, MPAA, and Microsoft. Otherwise, they would wake up to the obviousness of piracy's advantages to their business. (For example, some businesses spend a ton of money for publicity. Piracy provides this for free.) That is why we must fight these evil organizations.
In other words... first Microsoft makes defective software. Then, they create some kludgy "fix" that works some of the time, maybe. And then, they charge you for the priviledge of using said "fix" to protect yourself.
Reminds me of several things:
The mafia. They threaten to burn down your home and business, rape your wife, and kill your children. However, for a nominal fee, payable in several convenient methods, you can buy protection, and then they won't do that to you, maybe.
The United States Immigration and Naturalization "Service" (INS). They screw up your paperwork as a result of problems inside their own bureaucracy, which is their fault. Then, as a result of their screwups, your petition is not handled in the timeframe prescribed by law. Furthermore, there is nobody inside this bureaucracy whom you can contact to find out the status of your petition or why it isn't being handled. Instead, there is a recording telling you something to the effect of, "Don't call us; we'll call you." Because your petition has now extended beyond the deadline prescribed by law, you (that's right, YOU) must pay a fine to the INS of approximately $1,000.00 USD. To recap: The INS screws up; You suffer; Then you pay the INS a fine for this priviledge.
The above examples are akin to:
Cause damage to someone.
???
Profit!!!
So we've finally discovered the secret to success.
The best would be if a battery that lasts years in a laptop-type application could also be rechargeable, with no "memory" that limits the future battery lifetime.
This would be the ideal situation because you could use the laptop for any practical amount of time, and the battery would recharge whenever the laptop is plugged in, as it could and should be when used in a desktop situation where power is easy to obtain.
Such a laptop might even provide power to external peripherals when used in a mobile situation.
Other applications for such a battery could include UPS power supplies, in addition to embedded batteries in wall outlets in homes, office buildings, and even industrial facilities, such that you won't even perceive a power loss situation in a blackout. Furthermore, in a blackout situation, the meter could run backwards, supplying power to the grid, so that a blackout will be a thing of the past.
Perhaps it would be wisest if the government would rule as follows: Any information broadcast in such a manner as to distribute it widely shall be deemed protected under copyright law, but only to the extent that you cannot sell copies of the information; that is, you may record it in any medium you want; you may display the information in any manner you want, even in a public performance; the only thing you cannot do is charge for it; only the copyright holder may do that. Therefore, you cannot charge others to watch a public performance of the same, nor can you charge for copies on, say, DVD.
This would solve a variety of problems: Fair use would not be destroyed. And because information broadcast is, to all practical extents, available for consumption by "the public", then there should be no restriction on time- or format-shifting of the same. This law would be much more fair to both sides of the issue, as the bottom line is that our country is meant to be free, not governed by the will of corporations, though corporations should still have a fair chance at profits, even big profits, because corporations are the ones that pay us, feed us, drive our economy, and give us a better standard of living through the channeling of funds and efforts that would otherwise not take place.
How many times do you intend to keep posting that Longhorn rant?
There was a large up-front cost (sometimes called NRE by PHBs), which I have to amortize over a long period of time by reusing the aforementioned rant.
Speaking of which, I was just thinking how Microsoft could reduce the complexity of the next version of Windows, Longtooth, due in 2009.
Longtooth will include a tremendous amount of new features implemented in completely new code. Many, but not all, existing features would be reimplemented in VisualBasic.NET just for the heck of it, even if mature versions are already implemented in C or C++. Programmers making...
Windows XP Starter Edition operating system specifically checks the result of the CPUID instruction on bootup and fails to continue if a Pentium 4 or Athlon processor is detected.
This is because all following versions of Windows XP are intended to run only on the G5 processor (the same one used in modern Macintosh computers). By checking the CPUID, Microsoft is making sure that you don't try to execute the G5 code on the incompatible and totally different x86 platform, which cannot execute G5 code.
It is a smart business decision to make sure that your customers don't try to run your binaries on the wrong hardware platform.
Why am I not surprised at this? First, they decide that a kilobyte = 1000 bytes, rather than the correct value of 1024. This leads the megabyte to be 1000 kilobytes, again, rather than 1024. The gig is likewise 1000 megabytes. You might think, ok, big deal, right?
Yeah. In the days when the biggest hard drive you could get was 2 gigs, you would get 147,483,648 bytes less storage than advertised, unless you read the fine print located somewhere. This is only about 140 megs less than advertised. Today, when you can get 200 gig hard drives, the difference is much larger: 14,748,364,800 bytes less storage than advertised. This means that now, you get almost FOURTEEN GIGABYTES less storage than advertised. That's bigger than any hard drive that existed in 1995. That is a big deal.
I'm bringing up the size issue in a thread on fsync() because it is only one more area where hard drive manufacturers are cheating to get "better" performance numbers, instead of being honest and producing a good product. As a result, journaling filesystems and the like cannot be guaranteed to work properly.
If the hard drive mfgs really want good performance numbers, this is what they should do: Hard drives already have a small amount of memory (cache) in the drive electronics. Unfortunately, when the power goes away, the data therein becomes incoherent within nanoseconds. So, embed a flash chip on the hard drive electronics, along with a small rechargeable battery. If the battery is dead or the flash is fscked up, both of which can easily be tested today, the hard drive obeys all fsync() more religiously than the pope and works slightly more slowly. If the battery is alive and the flash works, the hard drive will, in the event of power-off with data remaining in the cache (now backed by battery), that data would be written to the flash chip. Upon the next powerup, the hard drive will initialize as normal, but before it accepts any incoming read or write commands, it will first record the information from flash to the platter. This is a good enough guarantee that data will not be lost, as the reliability of flash memory exceeds that of the magnetic platter, provided the flash is not written too many times, which it won't be under this kind of design; and as I said, nothing will be written to flash if the flash doesn't work anymore.
Remind me again how a system where no-one gives a damn about doing a good job is good again?
Perfect example: Microsoft. From the complete lack of quality in Microsoft code, as demonstrated by the unreliability and inefficiency thereof, you can tell that a company consisting entirely of people who do not give half a rat's behind about doing even a mediocre job, let alone a good one, can become one of the richest companies in the world.
Actually, speaking of Microsoft, I was just thinking how Microsoft could reduce the complexity of the next version of Windows, Longtooth, due in 2009.
Longtooth will include a tremendous amount of new features implemented in completely new code. Many, but not all, existing features would be reimplemented in VisualBasic.NET just for the heck of it, even if mature versions are already implemented in C or C++. Programmers making the new VisualBasic.NET code would not be allowed to look at the code that already exists, so that new ideas might be better implemented. The features will be chosen by random for reimplementation.
All Microsoft code would assume that any Microsoft code (the OS and any Microsoft applications) is secure. This code will always execute with no checks to make it run faster. All other code will be subject to Longtooth's new security system, dubbed Microsoft Longtooth Security Center 2003. This feature will give users more control over processes that execute in their computers. I will explain some of its features here:
To maximize security, Microsoft Longtooth Security Center 2003 will make certain assumptions about the user. For example, users who use Microsoft products are assumed to know what they are doing. However, users of 3rd party applications not made by Microsoft are always assumed to be complete idiots. Therefore, all user interface events occurring outside of Microsoft applications will trigger a safety mechanism.
For example, each time the user moves the mouse in an area not controlled by a Microsoft application, the user will see crosshairs moving across the screen to indicate where the mouse will be located. When the user stops moving the mouse, an authentication window will appear and state: "The user has requested that the mouse be moved to the location on the screen indicated by the crosshairs. This area of the screen is controlled by untrusted code that may cause damage to your computer, your documents, or your network. Do you wish to allow the mouse to move to this location?" Buttons for "yes", "no", "details", and "help" will be displayed.
Selecting "no" will cause the mouse cursor to remain at its previous location. Selecting "yes" will bring up another window, requesting the user's password to authenticate the movement of the mouse. If the user enters the correct password, the mouse cursor movement will be authenticated to that user and the cursor will be placed at the new location. Selecting "details" will display the X and Y coordinates of the new position, followed by warnings against using untrusted rogue code such as Linux.
For additional protection, clicks, keys pressed on the keyboard, items selected in a menu, or other input events will trigger similar security mechanisms. Since Microsoft code is considered secure, these checks will not occur in windows owned by Microsoft code. Also, the mouse may be used to click on the above buttons and fields during mouse movement authentication. If any such movement of the mouse takes place during the authentication process, the mouse will still be moved to the location indicated by the crosshairs, but a bug in Windows will cause the cursor to immediately "bounce" back to the location where it was last used during authentication. Microsoft will refuse to fix the bug unless Linux is outlawed in all countries, even those countries that have no computers.
Many other authentication checks will be made by Windows. I'll return to this topic in a moment. First, let me mention that Clippy, the talking paperclip, along with other Micros
The best way to improve the economy is to get rid of social security. By removing social security theres less burden on the economy, we can reduce taxes.
Why don't we just do like that episode from Star Trek, where as soon as you turn 60 you have to be put to death. (It was an episode about a 59 y/o scientist from that planet who was on the verge of a great discovery and there was an argument whether to invoke the prime directive or not to save this guy's life.)
In my opinion, companies shouldn't have to hire anymore. The hiring and firing process creates a lot of overhead costs that most companies should avoid.
We know from the study of basic economics that specialization creates synergies between global organizations and that by leveraging innovative technologies, content providers streamline compelling enterprise solutions. Therefore, there should be one big huge company that always employs everybody in the labor force, and those employees would be rented on an hourly basis to other companies for their use. This would have the following advantages: First, this big huge company would have its payroll system totally dialed in, so that it would happen with minimal overhead. Secondly, everybody would have benefits. Third, you could never get fired. Fourth, when a company decides not to "use" you anymore, the big huge company will automatically place you in a job by the next day. This would maximize the amount of employment throughout the country, reduce the amount corporations are spending on the hiring and firing process, reduce litigation, and give everyone a good, stable job.
I think that's what Graham means when he says that hiring is obsolete.
Someone should make up an office suite that uses every language in existance. C, C++, C#, Java, Perl, Python, Smalltalk, COBOL, Ruby, FORTRAN, Rexx, BASIC, Pascal, and bash are a few that come to mind.
Also, instead of just using one widget library, I think this office suite should use QT, GTK+ (1 and 2), Motif, OLIT, Athena, CDK, Java Swing, XView, AWT, JFC, XTC, OpenStep, and Tk are a few that come to mind.
Also, I think this office suite should use every open source shared library there is. In other words, in order to install and use this office suite, you would need to download about 100 gigs of dependency sources and compile them for about a year. When running, it would only require about two gigs of RAM. Every window and every part of the user interface would look and behave completely differently from the other parts. Some operations (like saving a file) would require opening a shell and invoking strange and obscure commands. It would take a lifetime to learn how to operate this office suite before a user could write a note to his grandma.
And then, we can tell everyone that this office suite, call it FreeAwfis for professionalism, is better than anything else out there.
In my shop (I fix cars for a living), I have two of my own cars with the engine dismantled, just sitting on jackstands and waiting to be fixed. I'll probably never get around to it; by the time I finish working on other peoples' cars at the end of the day, the last thing I want to do is fix my own cars.
Incidentally, one car was there first, so when I realized it was going to be a while before I fix it, I bought a second car (used). After driving that for some 25,000 miles, it broke, too. When I finished dismantling it and realized that it would be a while, I bought a third car. This is getting ridiculous.
The point of the above is this: Instead of reassembling these cars, maybe what I ought to do is sell the motor, trans, and anything else that will fetch some dough, and then convert them into a video game! That would be so freaking down!
In fact, I could set it up like a race, so you've got two people in two separate cars playing against each other!
Slashdot Mirror
This kind of invention isn't really going to accomplish anything. If you're obese, stop eating at McDonald's and all those places. Instead, try making your own food. Get your family, friends, and neighbors involved. Go for a walk sometime. Maybe just get rid of your television and find other activities to do. There are a zillion things to be done in the world. (A zillion is a lot of things.) Instead of wasting away in front of the stupid tube, why not do one of those activities? That would be much better.
And if you truly believe that you won't bypass this shoe thing with your television, and that's what will get you motivated, then by all means, go for it. But I think this is a stupid idea.
Say what you will about the United States and the American people. While Hollywood pop culture and defective ideas spread by the extreme left would have you believe otherwise, this nation has done the right thing time and time again.
It is perfectly fine for the United States to have space weapons. The same applies to nucular weapons (I voted for Bush, can you tell?) and every other type of weapon in existance. This is because the U.S. uses such weapons responsibly. It is not okay for most other nations to have access to such weapons. This is because they would use them irresponsibly. This is akin to a police officer carrying a gun (the United States) versus a bank robber carrying the same gun (parts of: Europe, Africa, Asia--these areas have demonstrated, within the last century, that they are not responsible).
You mean to tell me that these aren't a bunch of zealot extremists who would rather fight over it and go to jail than risk sounding like someone with a balanced opinion?
Bah humbug! If you're not a zealot extremist RMS worshipper, then you don't deserve to use a computer!!!
Just kidding.
(snip)
From: FreeCAR Security Advisories
To: FreeCAR Security Advisories
Subject: [FreeCAR-Announce]
Date: Fri, 13 May 2009 15:25:00 GMT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
FreeCAR-SA-55:9.hpp Security Advisory
The FreeCAR Project
Topic: firing order disclosure when using 87 octane in acura models
Category: engine
Module: fire
Announced: 2009-05-13
Revised: 2009-05-13
Affects: All FreeCAR releases.
Corrected: 2009-05-13 00:13:00 UTC (RELENG_7, 7.4-STABLE)
0. Revision History
v1.0 2009-05-13 Initial release.
v1.1 2009-05-13 Additional details.
I. Background
Determining the firing order of the V6 engine in Acura models involves sharing certain CPU resources between multiple threads, including memory caches. FreeCAR supports intercylinder messaging when using a kernel compiled with the ICM option.
II. Problem Description
When running on processors supporting bi-endian load and store operations, it is possible for a malicious thread to modify the firing order of the V6 engine in Acura models. This can cause serious motor damage and can result in a vehicle collision.
III. Impact
Vehicles may crash into each other and injuries may be caused. For example, on a highway when traveling at speeds in excess of 100 miles per hour, a motor breakdown due to a firing order mishap may cause a serious collision. IV. Workaround
Systems not using processors with bi-endian load and store operations are not affected by this issue. On systems which are affected, the security flaw can be avoided by refraining from driving.
V. Solution
Perform one of the following:
1) Upgrade your vulnerable system to the 7-STABLE branch dated after the correction date.
VI. Correction details
The following list contains the revision numbers of each file that was corrected in FreeCAR.
. . . (snip)
They put together the fastest computer possible with the most memory possible, the fastest hard drive possible, and all the fastest stuff possible. Then, they installed Windows 2003, and they had their programmers who know this thing inside and out remove all the parts of the OS that were not needed, along with configuring it for the maximum possible performance. Then they tested it and recorded the benchmark.
Then, they got an 8086 computer and compiled Bochs to run on it. In Bochs, they set up an environment that looks like the identical computer they used to run Windows 2003. Because this 8086 has only a few kilobytes of memory, they actually stored the information on tape, and used the serial port to access that data. Then, they ran the test. Sure enough, Red Hat / Apache running on the Bochs running on the 8086 with no memory and all information being accessed through tape through the serial port, the Windows 2003 installation ran 300% the speed of the Red Hat. This isn't quite such bad news, though, because it shows not how slow Red Hat is running in such a screwed up scenerio, but rather how slow Windows is running on ideal hardware.
I have a much better idea. Instead of thinking about some stupid user, and in the process, end up with software that's so automatic that nothing works properly; that's designed so stupidly because stupid users think doing it the right way is "too confusing"; that has all kinds of stupid things like Clippy the talking paperclip because users are too dumb to read a dialog box; that's slow because all kinds of poorly written and totally unnecessary graphical crap takes up all the resources; that causes loss and destruction of data because it contains errors that allow malicious software and users to gain control over the system... instead of creating such trash, all in the name of "the user", programmers should strive for software perfection. As each piece of software is perfected, we can move on to the next piece. Maybe all the "features" won't be there right away, but the software will be reliable, won't crash, won't do all kinds of weird things... and yes, you'll have to learn how to use it, but once you do, it'll just work. None of this garbage that made Windows the complete and utter trash garbage shit that it is.
All this bothering with trying to get it out by remote control is useless. I mean, yeah, it'd be cool to say, "Yeah man, I got that rover out by remote control!" But seriously. Just pick it up and set it down somewhere else.
Eh?! Dost my ears deceive me? Troll? I have 30% insightful, 30% interesting. Only 40% troll! And that's going down by the minute.
Troll... Bah humbug.
In other words, be careful, folks... you're playing in God's realm, and He might not like that.
What they should do is invent a power supply that runs on piss and shit. This way, you won't have to go to the bathroom anymore. The power could be used to run all kinds of body peripherals, such as mechanical muscles that will allow you to lift something 5,000 times your weight, or run 100 miles at 25 miles per hour without your heart rate going above 55 beats a minute, or brain implants that allow you to make complex computations that would normally take number-crunching software, in your head. Or better yet, imaging technology that can superimpose things on top of your vision, so that you can view a digitized copy of a textbook or a crib sheet during a test in school, or for other uses like that, or cameras built in to the eyes, so that if you see a hot chick you can record the image for later use, or to email to a friend. Also, excess power could be stored in batteries, for use during times when the requisite materials are not available to the power supply.
It doesn't take a great genius to discover that all Microsoft software is completely and utterly defective down to its very core, while software made under F/OSS methods is generally quite good, solid, and sound. Perhaps some features aren't implemented in F/OSS which exist in Microsoft's trash, but those features will eventually become available, and in the meantime, it is much safer to compute with F/OSS.
For years, Microsoft deliberately created defective software in order to continuously sell upgrade after upgrade. But today, people are waking up to Microsoft's defective business models and realizing that they have been the victim of Microsoft for many years. Therefore, Microsoft is going to lose. Day after day, more users switch away from Microsoft's garbage. And say what you will, but Microsoft will lose eventually, and they will go out of business. There is nothing they can do about this now. No matter how hard they try. No matter what Longtooth does when it comes out, if it ever comes out. And guess what, no matter what they do, Longtooth will still be a very extremely defective and insecure piece of trash software. And that makes me glad. Because I hate Microsoft.
These people want to be in control over everybody. This is why they increasingly want to create laws limiting the rights of people to information. When their goal is reached, there will be no such thing as movies, music, books, software, etc. All people will be brainwashed from childhood into a state of near unconsciousness. Only the few elite will be learned and have access to information. They will control the masses to obtain their own goals. And we will all be slaves, in eternal bondage of the mind.
That, not profits, is the goal of the RIAA, MPAA, and Microsoft. Otherwise, they would wake up to the obviousness of piracy's advantages to their business. (For example, some businesses spend a ton of money for publicity. Piracy provides this for free.) That is why we must fight these evil organizations.
Then maybe we should use the pintbyte, quartbyte, and gallonbyte, instead of the less intuitive kilobyte, megabyte, and gigabyte.
Reminds me of several things:
- The mafia. They threaten to burn down your home and business, rape your wife, and kill your children. However, for a nominal fee, payable in several convenient methods, you can buy protection, and then they won't do that to you, maybe.
- The United States Immigration and Naturalization "Service" (INS). They screw up your paperwork as a result of problems inside their own bureaucracy, which is their fault. Then, as a result of their screwups, your petition is not handled in the timeframe prescribed by law. Furthermore, there is nobody inside this bureaucracy whom you can contact to find out the status of your petition or why it isn't being handled. Instead, there is a recording telling you something to the effect of, "Don't call us; we'll call you." Because your petition has now extended beyond the deadline prescribed by law, you (that's right, YOU ) must pay a fine to the INS of approximately $1,000.00 USD. To recap: The INS screws up; You suffer; Then you pay the INS a fine for this priviledge.
The above examples are akin to:- Cause damage to someone.
- ???
- Profit!!!
So we've finally discovered the secret to success.This would be the ideal situation because you could use the laptop for any practical amount of time, and the battery would recharge whenever the laptop is plugged in, as it could and should be when used in a desktop situation where power is easy to obtain.
Such a laptop might even provide power to external peripherals when used in a mobile situation.
Other applications for such a battery could include UPS power supplies, in addition to embedded batteries in wall outlets in homes, office buildings, and even industrial facilities, such that you won't even perceive a power loss situation in a blackout. Furthermore, in a blackout situation, the meter could run backwards, supplying power to the grid, so that a blackout will be a thing of the past.
Nucular, as our great president says. Nucular.
This would solve a variety of problems: Fair use would not be destroyed. And because information broadcast is, to all practical extents, available for consumption by "the public", then there should be no restriction on time- or format-shifting of the same. This law would be much more fair to both sides of the issue, as the bottom line is that our country is meant to be free, not governed by the will of corporations, though corporations should still have a fair chance at profits, even big profits, because corporations are the ones that pay us, feed us, drive our economy, and give us a better standard of living through the channeling of funds and efforts that would otherwise not take place.
There was a large up-front cost (sometimes called NRE by PHBs), which I have to amortize over a long period of time by reusing the aforementioned rant.
Speaking of which, I was just thinking how Microsoft could reduce the complexity of the next version of Windows, Longtooth, due in 2009.
Longtooth will include a tremendous amount of new features implemented in completely new code. Many, but not all, existing features would be reimplemented in VisualBasic.NET just for the heck of it, even if mature versions are already implemented in C or C++. Programmers making...
Ah, what's the use? Nobody cares anyway... :-)
This is because all following versions of Windows XP are intended to run only on the G5 processor (the same one used in modern Macintosh computers). By checking the CPUID, Microsoft is making sure that you don't try to execute the G5 code on the incompatible and totally different x86 platform, which cannot execute G5 code.
It is a smart business decision to make sure that your customers don't try to run your binaries on the wrong hardware platform.
Yeah. In the days when the biggest hard drive you could get was 2 gigs, you would get 147,483,648 bytes less storage than advertised, unless you read the fine print located somewhere. This is only about 140 megs less than advertised. Today, when you can get 200 gig hard drives, the difference is much larger: 14,748,364,800 bytes less storage than advertised. This means that now, you get almost FOURTEEN GIGABYTES less storage than advertised. That's bigger than any hard drive that existed in 1995. That is a big deal.
I'm bringing up the size issue in a thread on fsync() because it is only one more area where hard drive manufacturers are cheating to get "better" performance numbers, instead of being honest and producing a good product. As a result, journaling filesystems and the like cannot be guaranteed to work properly.
If the hard drive mfgs really want good performance numbers, this is what they should do: Hard drives already have a small amount of memory (cache) in the drive electronics. Unfortunately, when the power goes away, the data therein becomes incoherent within nanoseconds. So, embed a flash chip on the hard drive electronics, along with a small rechargeable battery. If the battery is dead or the flash is fscked up, both of which can easily be tested today, the hard drive obeys all fsync() more religiously than the pope and works slightly more slowly. If the battery is alive and the flash works, the hard drive will, in the event of power-off with data remaining in the cache (now backed by battery), that data would be written to the flash chip. Upon the next powerup, the hard drive will initialize as normal, but before it accepts any incoming read or write commands, it will first record the information from flash to the platter. This is a good enough guarantee that data will not be lost, as the reliability of flash memory exceeds that of the magnetic platter, provided the flash is not written too many times, which it won't be under this kind of design; and as I said, nothing will be written to flash if the flash doesn't work anymore.
Perfect example: Microsoft. From the complete lack of quality in Microsoft code, as demonstrated by the unreliability and inefficiency thereof, you can tell that a company consisting entirely of people who do not give half a rat's behind about doing even a mediocre job, let alone a good one, can become one of the richest companies in the world.
Actually, speaking of Microsoft, I was just thinking how Microsoft could reduce the complexity of the next version of Windows, Longtooth, due in 2009.
Longtooth will include a tremendous amount of new features implemented in completely new code. Many, but not all, existing features would be reimplemented in VisualBasic.NET just for the heck of it, even if mature versions are already implemented in C or C++. Programmers making the new VisualBasic.NET code would not be allowed to look at the code that already exists, so that new ideas might be better implemented. The features will be chosen by random for reimplementation.
All Microsoft code would assume that any Microsoft code (the OS and any Microsoft applications) is secure. This code will always execute with no checks to make it run faster. All other code will be subject to Longtooth's new security system, dubbed Microsoft Longtooth Security Center 2003. This feature will give users more control over processes that execute in their computers. I will explain some of its features here:
To maximize security, Microsoft Longtooth Security Center 2003 will make certain assumptions about the user. For example, users who use Microsoft products are assumed to know what they are doing. However, users of 3rd party applications not made by Microsoft are always assumed to be complete idiots. Therefore, all user interface events occurring outside of Microsoft applications will trigger a safety mechanism.
For example, each time the user moves the mouse in an area not controlled by a Microsoft application, the user will see crosshairs moving across the screen to indicate where the mouse will be located. When the user stops moving the mouse, an authentication window will appear and state: "The user has requested that the mouse be moved to the location on the screen indicated by the crosshairs. This area of the screen is controlled by untrusted code that may cause damage to your computer, your documents, or your network. Do you wish to allow the mouse to move to this location?" Buttons for "yes", "no", "details", and "help" will be displayed.
Selecting "no" will cause the mouse cursor to remain at its previous location. Selecting "yes" will bring up another window, requesting the user's password to authenticate the movement of the mouse. If the user enters the correct password, the mouse cursor movement will be authenticated to that user and the cursor will be placed at the new location. Selecting "details" will display the X and Y coordinates of the new position, followed by warnings against using untrusted rogue code such as Linux.
For additional protection, clicks, keys pressed on the keyboard, items selected in a menu, or other input events will trigger similar security mechanisms. Since Microsoft code is considered secure, these checks will not occur in windows owned by Microsoft code. Also, the mouse may be used to click on the above buttons and fields during mouse movement authentication. If any such movement of the mouse takes place during the authentication process, the mouse will still be moved to the location indicated by the crosshairs, but a bug in Windows will cause the cursor to immediately "bounce" back to the location where it was last used during authentication. Microsoft will refuse to fix the bug unless Linux is outlawed in all countries, even those countries that have no computers.
Many other authentication checks will be made by Windows. I'll return to this topic in a moment. First, let me mention that Clippy, the talking paperclip, along with other Micros
Why don't we just do like that episode from Star Trek, where as soon as you turn 60 you have to be put to death. (It was an episode about a 59 y/o scientist from that planet who was on the verge of a great discovery and there was an argument whether to invoke the prime directive or not to save this guy's life.)
We, paleface?
Heh heh heh. Just kidding, dude. But seriously, there are companies like that.
We know from the study of basic economics that specialization creates synergies between global organizations and that by leveraging innovative technologies, content providers streamline compelling enterprise solutions. Therefore, there should be one big huge company that always employs everybody in the labor force, and those employees would be rented on an hourly basis to other companies for their use. This would have the following advantages: First, this big huge company would have its payroll system totally dialed in, so that it would happen with minimal overhead. Secondly, everybody would have benefits. Third, you could never get fired. Fourth, when a company decides not to "use" you anymore, the big huge company will automatically place you in a job by the next day. This would maximize the amount of employment throughout the country, reduce the amount corporations are spending on the hiring and firing process, reduce litigation, and give everyone a good, stable job.
I think that's what Graham means when he says that hiring is obsolete.
Also, instead of just using one widget library, I think this office suite should use QT, GTK+ (1 and 2), Motif, OLIT, Athena, CDK, Java Swing, XView, AWT, JFC, XTC, OpenStep, and Tk are a few that come to mind.
Also, I think this office suite should use every open source shared library there is. In other words, in order to install and use this office suite, you would need to download about 100 gigs of dependency sources and compile them for about a year. When running, it would only require about two gigs of RAM. Every window and every part of the user interface would look and behave completely differently from the other parts. Some operations (like saving a file) would require opening a shell and invoking strange and obscure commands. It would take a lifetime to learn how to operate this office suite before a user could write a note to his grandma.
And then, we can tell everyone that this office suite, call it FreeAwfis for professionalism, is better than anything else out there.
Incidentally, one car was there first, so when I realized it was going to be a while before I fix it, I bought a second car (used). After driving that for some 25,000 miles, it broke, too. When I finished dismantling it and realized that it would be a while, I bought a third car. This is getting ridiculous.
The point of the above is this: Instead of reassembling these cars, maybe what I ought to do is sell the motor, trans, and anything else that will fetch some dough, and then convert them into a video game! That would be so freaking down!
In fact, I could set it up like a race, so you've got two people in two separate cars playing against each other!