You just use the comma as a half-second pause right?
Is there a way to get it to wait for the phone to pickup... that part is variable (3-7 seconds in my experience)... if there was some character to do that I'd program it in...
You'd have to make sure that you wouldn't injure the target with that many beams in the same place, of course - would getting 20 of those in the eye at once be harmful?
Getting one in your eye at once is harmful. Focussed laser light can burn your retina, even low power light such as that.
however, if you see them at different locations, that means the laser light is focused on different area of the retina. So 20 isn't necessarily an order of magnitude more harmful, it's just 20 times the risk...
RoadRunner is on my cell phone's voice dial list. I just pick it up and say roadrunner.
I navigate the menu to get to roadrunner level 2 support by pressing 1,3,1,2,3, which means: 1 (english), 3 (existing customer / high speed internet), 1 (road runner), 2 (I do not want to refresh my converter box), 3 (the scripts for options 1 and 2, which are rebooting the modem and rebooting the computer respectively, did not solve my problem)
Needless to say, roadrunner in my area is not incredibly reliable.
Actual, more accurately, AVP2 has a documented problem with it's network stack and the Toshiba cable modem. For the curious, a NATting firewall fixed it. D-Link DI 614+ is I believe the model I got.
Be proactive, people! Print off a copy of the goatse.cx guy so if and when the net chokes you can tape it to your monitor. You may not even remember that you're offline after a few hours.
For increased realism, print out copies of slashdot articles... then when the internet goes out just paste a bunch of these together, and start writing on it in pen about how the editors are so lame for posting a bunch of dupes.
Behind that page put the goatse.cx guy. Every now and then accidently flip up the first page to view the second. Gasp in horror and bitch about the trolls before hitting the back key (by which I mean, flip page one back down)
Would a shift in design principles not be the ultimate homage to Hubble, that it would live on as inspiration for developing space exploration devices that were upgradable?...On the other hand, didn't they think of all these things 13 years ago when the were launching Hubble?
The problem isn't that they didn't plan for it... the problem is that you have to keep maintenance to a minimum, because it requires real people to go into space at a cost of millions of dollars to do work on an EVA... not the friendliest work environment.
The second problem is that, while they considered it, the gyros on the telescope failed way before the MTBF rating would indicate. They are presently running on 2 out of the original 6 gyros; the original design was that they could lose any 3 and continue to run; some very smart software was developped before the fourth one was lost so that they could continue to run. Just plain ol' dumb luck that those 4 failed so quickly however. But it loses one more gyro and it's a goner...
In the real world math, logic and computer science theory don't matter as much as you think they do. In the real world, programs that I write will run orders of magnitude faster than ones that you write. Of course, this may not matter to you, writing simple web or dialog box code that interfaces with a db containing a few thousand items(or less). But my code can scale to processing millions, even billions of items. Can you say that? Of course not, you wouldn't know the difference between an n^2 and a log(n) algorithm if it smacked you in the face.
It's funny... I was pondering just last night how the most mathematically correct and logical way to implement an algorithm usually turns out to be the least performant, and how when I first started writing graphics apps I found that the best way to do it was to implement logically, then detune / denormalize to something that could actually process a couple million pixels in a 30th of a second...
Also, people with real accomplishments here have home pages next to their names.
I don't have a home page. Does that mean I necessarily haven't accomplished anything? Sure I may not write papers or give lectures... but that doesn't make me unskilled.
And the skills I do have, the accomplishments I've made, I prefer not to advertise on slashdot. The trolls can do amazing things with a contact us form, let me tell you...
They already have a way to filter automatic signups... a person has to be present in order to create an account... so if you can bring the level of personal interaction required to an amount where a person can make more money working for minimum wage, the problem takes care of itself. I myself, when I get spim, immediately put the person on ignore.
If someone has twice as many ignores than friends, then you throttle their messages down to one an hour. Spimmers are not likely to have a huge friend list, and are likely to have a huge number of ignores.
Apply a decay to the ignore feature. An ignore that happened today counts as one, one that happened last month counts as 50% of that, etc. Otherwise they would accumulate to the point where all users would eventually be throttled.
When the spimmers coddle onto the ignore to friends ratio and just start having a farm of accounts that they automatically befriend, you enact the following: If a person gets a certain number of ignores (25?) in an hour, then cut them off for 1 hour... The next time it happens, you cut them off for 2 hours... then 4... etc.
I believe these steps will severely limit the amount of spim. It will no longer be economical (or possible) for someone to sign up for an account and send a million spims.
Is it possible to spoof a mac address? Perhaps the products that were described to me rely on a number (other than an IP) that is harder to spoof.
It is possible, but commodity networking cards generally don't support it (for a reason)
But I do not believe that mac addresses survive transit to the internet...
Many ISPs DO require static mac addresses, though, and if your mac address / IP address aren't the same then they don't route your packets. This was a big inconvenience to people with a home network until NATs started getting the feature to imitate a particular mac address.
Anyways, if your ISP requires your mac address, then you can't IP spoof... because they'll have a big table in a router saying what IP addresses belong to what macs, and if the two numbers on any upstream packet aren't in the table... it just won't route the packet.
There are networks that are resistant to DDoS attacks... basically the network just block superfluous traffic.
Unfortunately, there is no solution to DDoS attacks other than good security at the edges of the network. As long as anyone in the world can install Win98, not run Windows Update once, get cable internet service, and not be held accountable by their ISP for any bad things their computer may do that they didn't know about... DDoS will always be with us.
A strategy to deal with DDoS must be part policy, part networking hardware, part server hardware, and part software. Basically, you use an ISP whose routing hardware is DDoS resistant, you over-build your servers, and trim the software. That should eliminate big points of failure. At least until the next generation DDoS software comes out.
If I were to design a perfect world where DDoS attacks don't happen, I would enact legislation (world-wide, mind you... though only a few countries implementing it would be a good thing)... basically requiring two things:
1. An internet router is responsible for ensuring that packets coming from outside the internet are from an IP address that is directly connected to it 2. An internet router is required to suspend service for 1 hour in the case of a packet storm, where a packet storm is a series of packets from one IP to another IP utilizing 50% of the available bandwidth
Alternatively, a less severe suggestion for number 2... if you see a packet storm, throttle the bandwidth of those packets severely for 10 minutes.
If every ISP implemented the above two rules, DDoS would be MUCH harder to implement.
You can build a DDoS resistant router based on heuristics... if you see a sudden spike in traffic going to a particular server, then put that traffic on a lower priority level. As you see packets come across, characterise them. Once a certain number of packets share a certain number of characteristics in a certain amount of time, it is safe to assume that the packets are part of a DDoS and should be filtered for a small period of time... 15 minutes or so; just enough to keep the traffic to a manageable level.
I was under the assumption that products are available that allow you to block traffic from any IP that sends data over a pre-defined threshold. This block happens automatically when the data limit is reached.
But in a DDoS attack, the traffic is coming from thousands of IPs... even if each one individually trips that threshold, there's no reason a DDoS can't IP-spoof. As a matter of fact most of them do anyways, because it generates three times as many packets if the SYN/ACK handshake protocol fails...
This means, for one thing, that a reversible computer has no concept of boolean AND. Or OR, for that matter
Actually, you can add one additional output to any binary logic gate in order to make it reverseable; most reverseable computing designs focus on that and the logic circuits themselves ignore the secondary output...
personally I applaud the enforcement of standards in advertising
I for one welcome our new borg overlords!
But seriously folks truth-in-advertising laws are a very good thing... see Niven's known world series for some good speculation on what might happen in a world where lying advertisers are put to death...
Re:Confusion with later Voodoo cards?
on
Video Card History
·
· Score: 1
SLI was a great boost back when 3D hardware was slow at texturing. These days the hardware can pump a couple thousand frames per second worth of textures, it's fancy multipass rendering and dynamic shaders (and to some extent, the geometry) that take up all of the frame generation time. SLI could speed some of this up, but it wouldn't help with most of the bottlenecks. It would be like putting new tires on a car that needs an engine tuneup.
But if both cards are on the AGP bus (I know, only one client device on the AGP bus... we're strongly in theory-is-nice land here) and both have identical hardware, then they can both listen to the same geometry data, etc... and basically when it comes time to do a frame, they both do half-vertical resolution frames and marry them together at the DACs... why wouldn't this technique double framerate?
I mean there's nothing inherent to multipass rendering or dynamic shaders that would prevent this technique from working... except maybe reflective textures (a mirror for instance)... or a dynamic shader that uses a random number generator once a frame...
I see no reason why this wouldn't be like halfing the vertical resolution to get increased framerate...
Re:Confusion with later Voodoo cards?
on
Video Card History
·
· Score: 1
It was called SLI... and basically the cards interleaved, one doing the odds and the other doing the evens.
Which is a pretty simple way to get double the performance. I wonder why noone's done this recently...
I note that the history of this article starts in 1996 . . . one year after Rendition's Verite chip became the first consumer add-on 3D accelerator
And absolutely no mention of Matrox whatsoever... despite the fact that their add-on 3D accelerator was arguably superior to the voodoo, and the parhelia is the ONLY 3d solution to support 3 display devices.
I.e: You can take out that TV station (like we may have done in Iraq?), but you (probably) won't be able to fry the radar on that MIG-29.
Actually, the radar and some other communications gear is the only stuff you will be able to fry.
You can't shield a signal receiver. The best you can do is optically isolate it's output... in which case an EMP won't fry your control computer, it'll just burn out the LEDs in the optical circuit. Which is still plenty enough damage to render the radar inoperable...
Think about it, can YOU name any war that happened 1000 years ago? How about all the leaders of a country somewhere?
Right off the top of my head... the Battle of Hastings happened October 14, 1066. It was the conclusion of a period of war between the Saxons and the Normans, and the start of the Anglo-Saxon race that would eventually found a little colony called America.
The leader of the Normans was Guilliam, aka William the Conquorer. The leader of the Saxons was King Harold, himself of partially-Norman descent.
Norman and Saxon, BTW, are shorthands of the ancient terms for northman and southman.
* Other robots for romantic interludes: (IF Query(Other_Bot, EXCHANGE_CODE) == TRUE Extend_Programming_Probe(Other_Bot))
A truly intelligent robot that queries another machine and receives the Exchange code as a response would cut off it's own programming probe as opposed to interacting with such a dangerous piece of code...
What's the advantage of a robot like this versus describing every object by hand, as 3d animators do (typically in some kind of interpreted language).
It seems like writing "there's a sphere of radius 3 centered here" would take less time than waiting for the robot to scan it.
well, it's like the difference between what the public perceives a dictionary as, and what a dictionary actually is.
For instance, when I was a senior in high school, Webster's started including the word ain't. Now some teachers were very upset by it while others were ecstatic.
Then my english teacher put it in perspective.
Many people belive that dictionaries define a language. They do not. They describe a language.
Same thing here. Sure you could model a building by hand, but what you get is a definition of an ideal building. Whereas 3-D laser scanning describes the building as it is, very precisely.
Real world examples where this is a good thing?
Well recently they did some 3-D scans of stonehenge. The scan data was precise enough to show markings on many stones that had never been seen before (too shallow / worn)
Or imagine a world of the future based on some form of 3d on-demand printing that's cheaper and stronger than traditional fabrication. We already have that in certain fields, BTW... it's quickly growing to be universal. You have a 3D laser system that precisely measures an existing building, and then a printer that prints new structures to be joined to the building instantly, automatically precisely sized and positioned.
That was the reason we did it... A coworker of mine spent a good two weeks cleaning all the logos and identifiable stuff out of a windows install and replacing them with custom graphics for a move once... we used that N-word browser (not netscape... forgot the name) that's completely skinnable to do most of it...
The movie, FYI was Above Suspicion... here's a link to amazon's page for it... http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000 05UQD4/ref=ase_ralphkudlinski/103-4402635-9999832? v=glance&s=video
Re:Microsoft has come a long way
on
Microsoft's new CLI
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Recently, Microsoft has actually begun to produce command line tools for system operations, controlling your services, networks, policies, and registry from the command prompt [...] and still don't provide the full set of features.
One of Microsoft's design requirements for Windows Server 2003 was that EVERYTHING can be done from the commandline, that the GUI interfaces would have NO functionality that the commandline interface does not.
The Windows.NET Server bootcamp covers the GUI and commandline versions of all the tools, plus provides a take-away reference to each utility.
But they still have a long way to go, these features are poorly documented
Here's a list of the command line utilities in Windows Server 2003: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.a sp?url=/library/en-us/xpehelp/html/_server_command.asp
Searching on individual names, or typing the name with a "/?" on the command line will yield more documentation.
Here's a link to the root reference for the WMIC utilities which are a little more powerful and easily scripted than the command line utilities:
After learning this, I hope they scrapped the previous 4-proc systems and upgraded to Uniprocessor Technology.
Extrapolating from those datapoints, they'll be able to run 160 users on a single box!
I had a chance to speak with the Microsoft High Performance Computing lab about this very thing...
Basically, they have found that every application has an ideal number of processors. Adding another processor will never double the speed of a single-proc box, but it'll come close. But there's some number of processors where the expected gains graph takes a huge dip... for instance, 32-bit SQL Server runs best on 2-procs... most Citrix Metaframe apps (back then) ran best on 4 or 8 procs. They did some tuning and today it is reasonable to run Metaframe on a 32 or 64-way box... but even then you have to be careful.
If you are thinking of going multi proc on a Microsoft platform, I highly recommend getting in touch with the Microsoft HPC group (they attend all the TechEds and PDCs... your best shot at getting their contact info) These guys have a lab with a bunch of different multiproc configurations and are happy to let you benchmark on them to determine your best setup...
Slashdot Mirror
You just use the comma as a half-second pause right?
Is there a way to get it to wait for the phone to pickup... that part is variable (3-7 seconds in my experience)... if there was some character to do that I'd program it in...
You'd have to make sure that you wouldn't injure the target with that many beams in the same place, of course - would getting 20 of those in the eye at once be harmful?
Getting one in your eye at once is harmful. Focussed laser light can burn your retina, even low power light such as that.
however, if you see them at different locations, that means the laser light is focused on different area of the retina. So 20 isn't necessarily an order of magnitude more harmful, it's just 20 times the risk...
You have your ISP Service Desk on Speed Dial.
RoadRunner is on my cell phone's voice dial list. I just pick it up and say roadrunner.
I navigate the menu to get to roadrunner level 2 support by pressing
1,3,1,2,3, which means: 1 (english), 3 (existing customer / high speed internet), 1 (road runner), 2 (I do not want to refresh my converter box), 3 (the scripts for options 1 and 2, which are rebooting the modem and rebooting the computer respectively, did not solve my problem)
Needless to say, roadrunner in my area is not incredibly reliable.
Actual, more accurately, AVP2 has a documented problem with it's network stack and the Toshiba cable modem. For the curious, a NATting firewall fixed it. D-Link DI 614+ is I believe the model I got.
Be proactive, people! Print off a copy of the goatse.cx guy so if and when the net chokes you can tape it to your monitor. You may not even remember that you're offline after a few hours.
For increased realism, print out copies of slashdot articles... then when the internet goes out just paste a bunch of these together, and start writing on it in pen about how the editors are so lame for posting a bunch of dupes.
Behind that page put the goatse.cx guy. Every now and then accidently flip up the first page to view the second. Gasp in horror and bitch about the trolls before hitting the back key (by which I mean, flip page one back down)
The first two "most popular" articles on their service are the same one: Microsoft Tests Web News Service
That couldn't have anything to do with millions of slashdot users clicking through to read an article on the new web news service, could it?
Would a shift in design principles not be the ultimate homage to Hubble, that it would live on as inspiration for developing space exploration devices that were upgradable? ...On the other hand, didn't they think of all these things 13 years ago when the were launching Hubble?
The problem isn't that they didn't plan for it... the problem is that you have to keep maintenance to a minimum, because it requires real people to go into space at a cost of millions of dollars to do work on an EVA... not the friendliest work environment.
The second problem is that, while they considered it, the gyros on the telescope failed way before the MTBF rating would indicate. They are presently running on 2 out of the original 6 gyros; the original design was that they could lose any 3 and continue to run; some very smart software was developped before the fourth one was lost so that they could continue to run. Just plain ol' dumb luck that those 4 failed so quickly however. But it loses one more gyro and it's a goner...
In the real world math, logic and computer science theory don't matter as much as you think they do.
In the real world, programs that I write will run orders of magnitude faster than ones that you write. Of course, this may not matter to you, writing simple web or dialog box code that interfaces with a db containing a few thousand items(or less). But my code can scale to processing millions, even billions of items. Can you say that? Of course not, you wouldn't know the difference between an n^2 and a log(n) algorithm if it smacked you in the face.
It's funny... I was pondering just last night how the most mathematically correct and logical way to implement an algorithm usually turns out to be the least performant, and how when I first started writing graphics apps I found that the best way to do it was to implement logically, then detune / denormalize to something that could actually process a couple million pixels in a 30th of a second...
Also, people with real accomplishments here have home pages next to their names.
I don't have a home page. Does that mean I necessarily haven't accomplished anything? Sure I may not write papers or give lectures... but that doesn't make me unskilled.
And the skills I do have, the accomplishments I've made, I prefer not to advertise on slashdot. The trolls can do amazing things with a contact us form, let me tell you...
They already have a way to filter automatic signups... a person has to be present in order to create an account... so if you can bring the level of personal interaction required to an amount where a person can make more money working for minimum wage, the problem takes care of itself. I myself, when I get spim, immediately put the person on ignore.
If someone has twice as many ignores than friends, then you throttle their messages down to one an hour. Spimmers are not likely to have a huge friend list, and are likely to have a huge number of ignores.
Apply a decay to the ignore feature. An ignore that happened today counts as one, one that happened last month counts as 50% of that, etc. Otherwise they would accumulate to the point where all users would eventually be throttled.
When the spimmers coddle onto the ignore to friends ratio and just start having a farm of accounts that they automatically befriend, you enact the following: If a person gets a certain number of ignores (25?) in an hour, then cut them off for 1 hour... The next time it happens, you cut them off for 2 hours... then 4... etc.
I believe these steps will severely limit the amount of spim. It will no longer be economical (or possible) for someone to sign up for an account and send a million spims.
Is it possible to spoof a mac address? Perhaps the products that were described to me rely on a number (other than an IP) that is harder to spoof.
It is possible, but commodity networking cards generally don't support it (for a reason)
But I do not believe that mac addresses survive transit to the internet...
Many ISPs DO require static mac addresses, though, and if your mac address / IP address aren't the same then they don't route your packets. This was a big inconvenience to people with a home network until NATs started getting the feature to imitate a particular mac address.
Anyways, if your ISP requires your mac address, then you can't IP spoof... because they'll have a big table in a router saying what IP addresses belong to what macs, and if the two numbers on any upstream packet aren't in the table... it just won't route the packet.
There are networks that are resistant to DDoS attacks... basically the network just block superfluous traffic.
Unfortunately, there is no solution to DDoS attacks other than good security at the edges of the network. As long as anyone in the world can install Win98, not run Windows Update once, get cable internet service, and not be held accountable by their ISP for any bad things their computer may do that they didn't know about... DDoS will always be with us.
A strategy to deal with DDoS must be part policy, part networking hardware, part server hardware, and part software. Basically, you use an ISP whose routing hardware is DDoS resistant, you over-build your servers, and trim the software. That should eliminate big points of failure. At least until the next generation DDoS software comes out.
If I were to design a perfect world where DDoS attacks don't happen, I would enact legislation (world-wide, mind you... though only a few countries implementing it would be a good thing)... basically requiring two things:
1. An internet router is responsible for ensuring that packets coming from outside the internet are from an IP address that is directly connected to it
2. An internet router is required to suspend service for 1 hour in the case of a packet storm, where a packet storm is a series of packets from one IP to another IP utilizing 50% of the available bandwidth
Alternatively, a less severe suggestion for number 2... if you see a packet storm, throttle the bandwidth of those packets severely for 10 minutes.
If every ISP implemented the above two rules, DDoS would be MUCH harder to implement.
You can build a DDoS resistant router based on heuristics... if you see a sudden spike in traffic going to a particular server, then put that traffic on a lower priority level. As you see packets come across, characterise them. Once a certain number of packets share a certain number of characteristics in a certain amount of time, it is safe to assume that the packets are part of a DDoS and should be filtered for a small period of time... 15 minutes or so; just enough to keep the traffic to a manageable level.
I was under the assumption that products are available that allow you to block traffic from any IP that sends data over a pre-defined threshold. This block happens automatically when the data limit is reached.
But in a DDoS attack, the traffic is coming from thousands of IPs... even if each one individually trips that threshold, there's no reason a DDoS can't IP-spoof. As a matter of fact most of them do anyways, because it generates three times as many packets if the SYN/ACK handshake protocol fails...
This means, for one thing, that a reversible computer has no concept of boolean AND. Or OR, for that matter
Actually, you can add one additional output to any binary logic gate in order to make it reverseable; most reverseable computing designs focus on that and the logic circuits themselves ignore the secondary output...
personally I applaud the enforcement of standards in advertising
I for one welcome our new borg overlords!
But seriously folks truth-in-advertising laws are a very good thing... see Niven's known world series for some good speculation on what might happen in a world where lying advertisers are put to death...
SLI was a great boost back when 3D hardware was slow at texturing. These days the hardware can pump a couple thousand frames per second worth of textures, it's fancy multipass rendering and dynamic shaders (and to some extent, the geometry) that take up all of the frame generation time. SLI could speed some of this up, but it wouldn't help with most of the bottlenecks. It would be like putting new tires on a car that needs an engine tuneup.
But if both cards are on the AGP bus (I know, only one client device on the AGP bus... we're strongly in theory-is-nice land here) and both have identical hardware, then they can both listen to the same geometry data, etc... and basically when it comes time to do a frame, they both do half-vertical resolution frames and marry them together at the DACs... why wouldn't this technique double framerate?
I mean there's nothing inherent to multipass rendering or dynamic shaders that would prevent this technique from working... except maybe reflective textures (a mirror for instance)... or a dynamic shader that uses a random number generator once a frame...
I see no reason why this wouldn't be like halfing the vertical resolution to get increased framerate...
It was called SLI... and basically the cards interleaved, one doing the odds and the other doing the evens.
Which is a pretty simple way to get double the performance. I wonder why noone's done this recently...
I note that the history of this article starts in 1996 . . . one year after Rendition's Verite chip became the first consumer add-on 3D accelerator
And absolutely no mention of Matrox whatsoever... despite the fact that their add-on 3D accelerator was arguably superior to the voodoo, and the parhelia is the ONLY 3d solution to support 3 display devices.
I.e: You can take out that TV station (like we may have done in Iraq?), but you (probably) won't be able to fry the radar on that MIG-29.
Actually, the radar and some other communications gear is the only stuff you will be able to fry.
You can't shield a signal receiver. The best you can do is optically isolate it's output... in which case an EMP won't fry your control computer, it'll just burn out the LEDs in the optical circuit. Which is still plenty enough damage to render the radar inoperable...
Think about it, can YOU name any war that happened 1000 years ago? How about all the leaders of a country somewhere?
Right off the top of my head... the Battle of Hastings happened October 14, 1066. It was the conclusion of a period of war between the Saxons and the Normans, and the start of the Anglo-Saxon race that would eventually found a little colony called America.
The leader of the Normans was Guilliam, aka William the Conquorer. The leader of the Saxons was King Harold, himself of partially-Norman descent.
Norman and Saxon, BTW, are shorthands of the ancient terms for northman and southman.
* Other robots for romantic interludes:
(IF Query(Other_Bot, EXCHANGE_CODE) == TRUE Extend_Programming_Probe(Other_Bot))
A truly intelligent robot that queries another machine and receives the Exchange code as a response would cut off it's own programming probe as opposed to interacting with such a dangerous piece of code...
I mean who wants Welchia on their robot?
What's the advantage of a robot like this versus describing every object by hand, as 3d animators do (typically in some kind of interpreted language).
It seems like writing "there's a sphere of radius 3 centered here" would take less time than waiting for the robot to scan it.
well, it's like the difference between what the public perceives a dictionary as, and what a dictionary actually is.
For instance, when I was a senior in high school, Webster's started including the word ain't. Now some teachers were very upset by it while others were ecstatic.
Then my english teacher put it in perspective.
Many people belive that dictionaries define a language. They do not. They describe a language.
Same thing here. Sure you could model a building by hand, but what you get is a definition of an ideal building. Whereas 3-D laser scanning describes the building as it is, very precisely.
Real world examples where this is a good thing?
Well recently they did some 3-D scans of stonehenge. The scan data was precise enough to show markings on many stones that had never been seen before (too shallow / worn)
Or imagine a world of the future based on some form of 3d on-demand printing that's cheaper and stronger than traditional fabrication. We already have that in certain fields, BTW... it's quickly growing to be universal. You have a 3D laser system that precisely measures an existing building, and then a printer that prints new structures to be joined to the building instantly, automatically precisely sized and positioned.
Yes it was neoplanet that we used.
:)
It was a fun little project too. Making Windows not look like Windows, that is...
So why advertise MS Windows for free?
0 05UQD4/ref=ase_ralphkudlinski/103-4402635-9999832? v=glance&s=video
That was the reason we did it... A coworker of mine spent a good two weeks cleaning all the logos and identifiable stuff out of a windows install and replacing them with custom graphics for a move once... we used that N-word browser (not netscape... forgot the name) that's completely skinnable to do most of it...
The movie, FYI was Above Suspicion... here's a link to amazon's page for it... http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00
Recently, Microsoft has actually begun to produce command line tools for system operations, controlling your services, networks, policies, and registry from the command prompt [...] and still don't provide the full set of features.
.NET Server bootcamp covers the GUI and commandline versions of all the tools, plus provides a take-away reference to each utility.
a sp?url= /library/en-us/xpehelp/html/_server_command.asp
r l= /library/en-us/wmisdk/wmi/using_the_wmi_command_li ne_utilities.asp
One of Microsoft's design requirements for Windows Server 2003 was that EVERYTHING can be done from the commandline, that the GUI interfaces would have NO functionality that the commandline interface does not.
The Windows
But they still have a long way to go, these features are poorly documented
Here's a list of the command line utilities in Windows Server 2003:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.
Searching on individual names, or typing the name with a "/?" on the command line will yield more documentation.
Here's a link to the root reference for the WMIC utilities which are a little more powerful and easily scripted than the command line utilities:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?u
After learning this, I hope they scrapped the previous 4-proc systems and upgraded to Uniprocessor Technology.
Extrapolating from those datapoints, they'll be able to run 160 users on a single box!
I had a chance to speak with the Microsoft High Performance Computing lab about this very thing...
Basically, they have found that every application has an ideal number of processors. Adding another processor will never double the speed of a single-proc box, but it'll come close. But there's some number of processors where the expected gains graph takes a huge dip... for instance, 32-bit SQL Server runs best on 2-procs... most Citrix Metaframe apps (back then) ran best on 4 or 8 procs. They did some tuning and today it is reasonable to run Metaframe on a 32 or 64-way box... but even then you have to be careful.
If you are thinking of going multi proc on a Microsoft platform, I highly recommend getting in touch with the Microsoft HPC group (they attend all the TechEds and PDCs... your best shot at getting their contact info) These guys have a lab with a bunch of different multiproc configurations and are happy to let you benchmark on them to determine your best setup...