Why? Just because I don't think you/in particular/ are better than me doesn't mean I don't think that there are people better than me.
About the rest -- you're wrong. Some people are not physically capable of achieving the same speed, quickness, strength, or muscle mass as some other people. This is a biological fact.
Do you think that if a child eats right, exercises, etc and stays away from things like caffeine then he could grow to be the tallest person in the world? No -- height is in part determined by genetics. He might be taller than if he did not try, but he might be shorter than another person who didn't try at all.
You say it's just like a muscle. OK, I'll bite. Some people are naturally stronger (or predisposed to strength) than others. There was a story on Slashdot a while back about a German baby that had massive amounts of muscle entirely due to genetics.
Despite what we learned on Sesame Street, some people really are better than others.
I hate Microsoft mostly because I dislike their basic philosophy and begrudge them their power. I also believe that their power was acquired and maintained through unfair -- successful, but unfair -- business practices.
They just contract out to make silicon. I hand them a design sheet and a lot of cash, and they give me a bunch of ICs. Then it's up to me to design and produce the PCB etc.
It's like saying Dell and Gateway don't compete with each other because they both use Intel CPUs.
I have a Promise FastTrak100 Lite controller built into my MB, and I've been using it for firmware RAID for about three years now. It worked fine in Windows (using the Promise SCSI emulation drivers) and in Linux 2.4 (via/dev/ataraid/d0pN). But Linux 2.6 can't see it. I've done some reading and from what I can tell it doesn't support the/dev/ataraid tree anymore.
Is there any way to get a 2.6 kernel to see the array while leaving the data intact?
My dad almost had a 4.0 in grad school, but one of his profs gave him an A-. My dad went to him to complain about it -- he deserved an A -- and the prof just told him he got an A- because was too concerned with grades.
Statically linked. Great. So now, when someone finds a security bug in the library, you not only have to update the library, you have to figure out all the programs that use that library statically and update them as well.
Wonderful idea! I'm sure that'll make everything/much/ easier for end users.
It works fine in Windows. I've been doing it since 2000 (the year, not the OS -- well OK, the OS too).
Frankly, your "large amount of clients" point is the most bogus of them all. Do you actually work in a corporate environment? I do, with thousands of users. A handful -- 100 or so -- have admin permissions. Believe me, it solves more problems than it creates.
More to the point, lots of other applications (media players, Sun's JVM, etc) by default usually use the proxy settings in IE. The problem in question is not as simple as switching the browser since the IE setting is a de facto OS-wide default.
There have been RCEs for Firefox in the past, and there probably will be in the future. Those are software "holes".
Addressing your other statement, which is pure FUD, there are vectors/other/ than ActiveX. XUL, for example, is just such a vector. Though Firefox does a pretty good job of snadboxing XUL apps, it's possible that a virus could hose the browser if not the rest of the system.
I doubt it. If that were the case, it would be illegal for an employer to, say, record logs of where employees surf, keep e-mail logs, and possibly even block sites with a proxy.
Where I work, that's been the requirement for years. Users are used to it, so it's not a big deal. You don't find stickies lying on the desk either (well, you do, but only passwords for additional systems -- we don't have SSO yet). Actually, our requirements are harsher because you can't reuse a password that's less that two years old. Also, they run a password cracker against everyone's passwords every once in a while, just to make sure people really are making good passwords.
I like to use mathematical formulae. I memorized them years ago -- might as well make use of them now.
Here in Germany, I'm paying E40 (~$55) per month for dial-up. It's 56k, thankfully, but I also a) have a time limit of 60 hours, plus I have to pay per minute for the fucking phone call to the ISP.
Slashdot Mirror
Generally speaking, Moroccans are light-skinned, retard.
why [can] not I, specifically, [be] better than you?
You could be, but it's statistically unlikely for you to be better than me in all respects. Simply *saying* you're better doesn't mean much.
The brain does not follow those same rules [as physical attributes].
You're the one who compared the brain to a muscle. I just ran with it. I think your initial comparison is more truthful than you want it to be.
Why? Just because I don't think you /in particular/ are better than me doesn't mean I don't think that there are people better than me.
About the rest -- you're wrong. Some people are not physically capable of achieving the same speed, quickness, strength, or muscle mass as some other people. This is a biological fact.
Do you think that if a child eats right, exercises, etc and stays away from things like caffeine then he could grow to be the tallest person in the world? No -- height is in part determined by genetics. He might be taller than if he did not try, but he might be shorter than another person who didn't try at all.
You say it's just like a muscle. OK, I'll bite. Some people are naturally stronger (or predisposed to strength) than others. There was a story on Slashdot a while back about a German baby that had massive amounts of muscle entirely due to genetics.
Despite what we learned on Sesame Street, some people really are better than others.
You're apparently not one of those folks in the 150+ IQ group. Consider IQ scores for two populations:
A -- 20 50 100 150 180
B -- 50 60 100 140 150
The mean IQs for A and B are both 100, but population A has a higher rate of people with 150+ IQ.
I have a Moroccan friend who sunburns quite easily.
I hate Microsoft mostly because I dislike their basic philosophy and begrudge them their power. I also believe that their power was acquired and maintained through unfair -- successful, but unfair -- business practices.
They just contract out to make silicon. I hand them a design sheet and a lot of cash, and they give me a bunch of ICs. Then it's up to me to design and produce the PCB etc.
It's like saying Dell and Gateway don't compete with each other because they both use Intel CPUs.
OK, I'd like to piggyback on this question.
/dev/ataraid/d0pN). But Linux 2.6 can't see it. I've done some reading and from what I can tell it doesn't support the /dev/ataraid tree anymore.
I have a Promise FastTrak100 Lite controller built into my MB, and I've been using it for firmware RAID for about three years now. It worked fine in Windows (using the Promise SCSI emulation drivers) and in Linux 2.4 (via
Is there any way to get a 2.6 kernel to see the array while leaving the data intact?
That's an extraodinarily appropriate comment. He was in a MS Psych program.
My dad almost had a 4.0 in grad school, but one of his profs gave him an A-. My dad went to him to complain about it -- he deserved an A -- and the prof just told him he got an A- because was too concerned with grades.
Statically linked. Great. So now, when someone finds a security bug in the library, you not only have to update the library, you have to figure out all the programs that use that library statically and update them as well.
/much/ easier for end users.
Wonderful idea! I'm sure that'll make everything
Let me get this straight.
Your father can't figure out how to "Please eject non-system disk...", but you expect him to carry out those instructions correctly?
It works fine in Windows. I've been doing it since 2000 (the year, not the OS -- well OK, the OS too).
Frankly, your "large amount of clients" point is the most bogus of them all. Do you actually work in a corporate environment? I do, with thousands of users. A handful -- 100 or so -- have admin permissions. Believe me, it solves more problems than it creates.
More to the point, lots of other applications (media players, Sun's JVM, etc) by default usually use the proxy settings in IE. The problem in question is not as simple as switching the browser since the IE setting is a de facto OS-wide default.
But what it did say is still wrong.
/other/ than ActiveX. XUL, for example, is just such a vector. Though Firefox does a pretty good job of snadboxing XUL apps, it's possible that a virus could hose the browser if not the rest of the system.
There have been RCEs for Firefox in the past, and there probably will be in the future. Those are software "holes".
Addressing your other statement, which is pure FUD, there are vectors
Holy crap, a Dune reference mistaken for a Harry Potter one? Turn in your geek card, pronto. What's the world coming to?
I doubt it. If that were the case, it would be illegal for an employer to, say, record logs of where employees surf, keep e-mail logs, and possibly even block sites with a proxy.
You don't own the phone *lines*.
Nope, at least not without asking first. He specifically stated he doesn't want anyone using the pictures without permission.
Where I work, that's been the requirement for years. Users are used to it, so it's not a big deal. You don't find stickies lying on the desk either (well, you do, but only passwords for additional systems -- we don't have SSO yet). Actually, our requirements are harsher because you can't reuse a password that's less that two years old. Also, they run a password cracker against everyone's passwords every once in a while, just to make sure people really are making good passwords.
I like to use mathematical formulae. I memorized them years ago -- might as well make use of them now.
They read the instructions, and then play aroud with it.
;-)
Was that supposed to be "play around" or "pray aloud"?
Here in Germany, I'm paying E40 (~$55) per month for dial-up. It's 56k, thankfully, but I also a) have a time limit of 60 hours, plus I have to pay per minute for the fucking phone call to the ISP.
Not quite right. 1Mb is one million bits, not 1024 * 1024 bits. So the math is:
500GB * (1024 * 1024 * 1024)B/GB * 8b/B / (8Mb/s * 1000000b/Mb) * 1hr/3600s * 1d/24hr = 6.21 days. Or, 6 days 5 hours 7 minutes and just shy of 51 seconds.
I don't know anyone that runs anything older than Win2K. And yes -- everyone that I need to access remotely runs SSH.