"obviously they didn't listen to one million mp3 files to make sure they were actually such-and-such a song, that would take years"
You don't have a clue what method they used and your logic is screwed. This following method would work. I could check one million mp3 files to a fairly accurate degree within only a day or two.
1. Download an mp3 with a metallica related name in the title (provided I had the bandwidth).
2. Listen to it and evaluate whether it's a genuine metallica song (and not a bootleg, which they allow). If it a genuine copy (we'll call this the master copy) then mark the user as having a copy of a metallica song and go to step 3.
3. Automise the following process: search by the filename of your master copy. Filter out those that don't have the same filesize and review these mp3 at step 2. Download a couple of KB from files that remain and if it matches with your master copy you can be pretty sure it's the same so mark that person as having a copy of a Metallica song.
I'm not saying that what Metallica did was right - but this process would be a good way of tracking copies of their songs - and it would be an exponential process. The more songs you check the more you can accurately mark off as being copies.
You know, I would talk about the Wanderungenmitpenguinenborkborkbierdrinkinundsowei ter if I wasn't so sure that slashcode would put a thousand spaces rendering the word unreadable.
Jacob Nielson agrees with me. 76% of users are as stupid as me. Do 5 person tests and you'll see yourself.
PHP produces the cruftiest HTML I have ever seen. The barely commented code is littered with font tags and tables with width=100% - it won't fit into many site designs and drags children away into the cellar. This disgusts me!
Geez, I was bitter in that previous post now wasn't I?
Anyway, E2 does posture to be a reference for many things. This may be the bitter rantings of an unloved member (rather these are the bitter rantings of an unloved member) but after writing factual nodes for a week or two I was always irritated to see how non-sensical nodes floated to the top while detailed nodes based in reality (not some wet dream) don't.
It does posture to be a reference and Slashdot uses it as such, that's why I dislike E2.
Hell yes. Although E2 is just a few 1970s ideas about two way links and definition systems (stupid descriptions of how an internet would be where a node title was the url).
Anyway, E2 sucks. They posture to be a dictionary, or encyclopedia, but look at what they celebrate. It'll be Dem Bones ate my Hamster, or some other unfunny injoke for The Community.
E2's about as much an encyclopedia as a chewing gum wrapper chronicle on the 1932 olympics, or something.
Internally and as of yet not released they have written OpenGL support that is faster than Windows by about 10%. This has been well known for a while now - and along with BONE will probably be out for BeOS 6.
If you're one of their developers, or you ask them nicely, they'll send you a copy. It's going through extensive testing as - rumour has it - that the new BeOS desktop will be hardware accelerated.
"What do you want to say this week?"
"Oh I don't know - anything will do. What's the president up to?" "That's not the attitude, Billy, why I remember when you started this business nigh on three years ago and boy, you weren't flacid my son"
"Well I liked writing about stuff that I found interesting. That was natural. But there's no relation between interesting things and a regular publishing schedule. I let the quality drop, it was either that or not publish. Now it's three years later and I barely recognise my thoughts so categorised into 'publisher' with 'headlines' and five main stories, ten on a weekend - I would have been as happy saying what I wanted in a cartoon. The audience broke me, but I wanted their attention. I've become a whore you know." "All your base are belong to us"
"What?" "What!!"
Do you want to send audio via the network or just take several soundcard outs and make them one in?
If it's the later any Radio Shack, or Dick Smith will have 50c 2input->1output so just buy half a dozen and they'll concatenate to 1 signal (with surprisingly little loss of quality), then just drop some plain cable about. If you want quite high quality, though, spend $5 and get a proper audio mixing kit with seperate volumes and other guff - less connections ensure quality.
If you it's the prior, haven't a clue sorry. Does anyone know of something that would send audio via the network though?
When you write to a hard-drive consider it like leaning towards 0 or 1 rather than flicking to a binary position. It's read off the platter to be 0 or 1 if it's nearer to one point than it is the other.
If it's been written to a million times as '0', then you write once as '1', it will be only be most of the way towards '1' but not as far as if it were originally written '1'. It's read off as binary but the universe is analogue.
Using this information (and other certainly more complex ideas) you can estimate the previous data, often up to eight generations ago.
To really erase the data you can write randomly to it many times (KDE's filemanager offers a scramble option which write randomly a dozen times - or something), which may suffice for most things.
However randomly writing data isn't the best, apparently. There are certain writing patterns shown to more quickly wear the result down than random (they probably take into account the original value and try to counteract that).
What? How might a script kiddie get access to something when you're only sending interface and you keep the state on the server? Do you just mean having a server online - or wot, eh?
As for X exploding, have you ever tried to mess around with the refresh rates in the XF86Config file? At least with Windows, it tells me if a refresh rate I'm attempting to use isn't safe, and if necessary, defaults to a 256 VGA screen (or even 16-colors in emergencies). X will let you run an evil refresh rate, and fry your monitor.
Linux methology, in general, is making an operating system that assumes you do know what you're doing - and otherwise you've got an ever decreasing circle (are you really sure you want to delete the file?). You can push your monitor beyond the specification limits and many times you don't fry it (and achieve better performance - consider it like overclocking and entirely at your risk).
Windows limits you (well, you could edit the registry) to what the manufacturer is sure the equipment can do. I think that's a bad thing.
Anyway, XFree4 can read the monitors syncs frequencies. There's no reason to burn something on purpose if you do your research. I've fried a few monitors (on purpose - they were going to the dump and it sounded like fun), chalk it up to experience.
The W3c should release a standardised way of dealing with b0rken HTML. Every browser will try and do the best with what they're given and try to guess what the person meant -- they should realise this by now.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't have a clue what method they used and your logic is screwed. This following method would work. I could check one million mp3 files to a fairly accurate degree within only a day or two.
1. Download an mp3 with a metallica related name in the title (provided I had the bandwidth).
2. Listen to it and evaluate whether it's a genuine metallica song (and not a bootleg, which they allow). If it a genuine copy (we'll call this the master copy) then mark the user as having a copy of a metallica song and go to step 3.
3. Automise the following process: search by the filename of your master copy. Filter out those that don't have the same filesize and review these mp3 at step 2. Download a couple of KB from files that remain and if it matches with your master copy you can be pretty sure it's the same so mark that person as having a copy of a Metallica song.
I'm not saying that what Metallica did was right - but this process would be a good way of tracking copies of their songs - and it would be an exponential process. The more songs you check the more you can accurately mark off as being copies.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Jacob Nielson agrees with me. 76% of users are as stupid as me. Do 5 person tests and you'll see yourself.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Anyway, E2 does posture to be a reference for many things. This may be the bitter rantings of an unloved member (rather these are the bitter rantings of an unloved member) but after writing factual nodes for a week or two I was always irritated to see how non-sensical nodes floated to the top while detailed nodes based in reality (not some wet dream) don't.
It does posture to be a reference and Slashdot uses it as such, that's why I dislike E2.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Anyway, E2 sucks. They posture to be a dictionary, or encyclopedia, but look at what they celebrate. It'll be Dem Bones ate my Hamster, or some other unfunny injoke for The Community.
E2's about as much an encyclopedia as a chewing gum wrapper chronicle on the 1932 olympics, or something.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
If you're one of their developers, or you ask them nicely, they'll send you a copy. It's going through extensive testing as - rumour has it - that the new BeOS desktop will be hardware accelerated.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
"Oh I don't know - anything will do. What's the president up to?"
"That's not the attitude, Billy, why I remember when you started this business nigh on three years ago and boy, you weren't flacid my son"
"Well I liked writing about stuff that I found interesting. That was natural. But there's no relation between interesting things and a regular publishing schedule. I let the quality drop, it was either that or not publish. Now it's three years later and I barely recognise my thoughts so categorised into 'publisher' with 'headlines' and five main stories, ten on a weekend - I would have been as happy saying what I wanted in a cartoon. The audience broke me, but I wanted their attention. I've become a whore you know."
"All your base are belong to us"
"What?"
"What!!"
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
If it's the later any Radio Shack, or Dick Smith will have 50c 2input->1output so just buy half a dozen and they'll concatenate to 1 signal (with surprisingly little loss of quality), then just drop some plain cable about. If you want quite high quality, though, spend $5 and get a proper audio mixing kit with seperate volumes and other guff - less connections ensure quality.
If you it's the prior, haven't a clue sorry. Does anyone know of something that would send audio via the network though?
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
"He's making a run for it and we're a million miles away. DO YOU THINK I'M STUPID?"
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
When you write to a hard-drive consider it like leaning towards 0 or 1 rather than flicking to a binary position. It's read off the platter to be 0 or 1 if it's nearer to one point than it is the other.
If it's been written to a million times as '0', then you write once as '1', it will be only be most of the way towards '1' but not as far as if it were originally written '1'. It's read off as binary but the universe is analogue.
Using this information (and other certainly more complex ideas) you can estimate the previous data, often up to eight generations ago.
To really erase the data you can write randomly to it many times (KDE's filemanager offers a scramble option which write randomly a dozen times - or something), which may suffice for most things.
However randomly writing data isn't the best, apparently. There are certain writing patterns shown to more quickly wear the result down than random (they probably take into account the original value and try to counteract that).
In conclusion, fuck you. I post at 0 too.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Good thing: There's a haystack right below me!
Bad thing; It's got a pitchfork in it!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Linux methology, in general, is making an operating system that assumes you do know what you're doing - and otherwise you've got an ever decreasing circle (are you really sure you want to delete the file?). You can push your monitor beyond the specification limits and many times you don't fry it (and achieve better performance - consider it like overclocking and entirely at your risk).
Windows limits you (well, you could edit the registry) to what the manufacturer is sure the equipment can do. I think that's a bad thing.
Anyway, XFree4 can read the monitors syncs frequencies. There's no reason to burn something on purpose if you do your research. I've fried a few monitors (on purpose - they were going to the dump and it sounded like fun), chalk it up to experience.
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!