The Soviet (and later Russian) nuclear dead-man mechanism is reasonably well know to the public by now (well such things are hard to verify of course). It includes a lot of sensors designed to detect nuclear detonations on Russian ground, specialized hardened communications lines and hardened bunker(s) that is always active. If sensors detect detonations _and_ the normal chain of command can't be reached the personnel at the bunker(s) is given authority to decide if a nuclear attack have occurred and if retaliation is needed. They then can activate the system which uses misc. ways to communicate a launch signal to missile silos, it is claimed one way is sending commands to specialized missiles to launch which in turn fly over Russian territory broadcasting launch code(s) to silos below.
While the system described may be bogus it seems reasonable and also more foolproof than trying to make a system based on ordinary radio broadcasts. Jamming a radio transmitter is trivial compared to jamming multiple optical fibers buried underground.
I think I spot a logical hole there with a larger diameter than that of Mr. Goatse.cx, how about you run away and play with the other nuts at abovetopsecret?
Scarily no, that's not the case anymore. Guantanamo, secret courts and a lot of other crap new and old (like holding a person as suspect of something obviously false until a case can be built up) means the US legal system can't be trusted.
Take that parallel construction and shove it! Do you know what it describes? Do you understand that using it without a proper context and without any reason you sound like a conspiracy nut without a clue?
Waited a while before posting the above. I'll not change anything as I stand by it but you shouldn't necessarily take it 100% seriously...
Yes it's understood by most. The problem is that begging the question really means another thing than most think it does - a thing that is hard to describe without using the phrase. So the problem isn't one of a language evolving rather than devolving, the common use of the phrase now hinders the proper* use meaning it's harder to express the original meaning. And there's no reason as the phrase people really want to express already exist, is just one extra letter and is more logical (the use of "begs" needs some strange definition of the word to make it fit).
(* well a language is a democratic thing so the proper use isn't decided by some language god somewhere...)
Witnesses. Fleeing prosecution. Witnesses that can tell his MO (drugging underage girls). Witnesses that can tell how he took advantage of them. Yeah, I consider him guilty and unless he have the guts to ever face legal scrutiny I will continue to hold that view. But don't take my word - you can easily find out the facts yourself.
Well I consider myself an audiophile however I'd never buy monster cables (unless they have some real advantage - like how they look, how flexible they are etc.), tiny stickers to place near interconnect cables, special stones to place on the expensive equipment etc. Much pseudo-science and magical thinking in some circles.
What I do is buy reasonable priced headphones with good sound reproduction (currently using Philips Fidelity X1 somewhat modified) and a good source e.g. my current system is a MSI GS60 which uses a dedicated headphone DAC/amplifier design avoiding the analog processing of the normal audio codec. I actually replaced the standard headphone cable (something I've always considered suspect as designing a cable isn't hard) as they simply weren't good in a previous system, could hear a difference in blind A/B testing and measuring the response/resistance/capacitance showed that they should indeed produce audible distortions. The replacement? A cheap ass cable selected more for flexibility than anything else but didn't have the same reproduction problems. Doubt that I'd need it now with the current setup (the DAC/Amp are capable of driving difficult cables without problem) but still...
Good luck with the assembly language part. Have you tried optimizing in assembly language in a modern processor? Out of order execution and compiler optimizations for it make compilers often more efficient than good assembly coders.
That meme is old (at least since the 80's) and still not correct. A skilled assembly programmer can do better than a compiler due to the lower level of abstraction, that will be the case until the processors actually run high-level programs in hardware. That compilers have improved and processors are optimizing execution towards compiler generated code just decreases how large the assembly advantage will be and how often the increased effort of using asm will pay off.
The meme will never be true. Assembly language provides a skilled programmer with a more direct interface to the execution hardware that the higher level language just can't give.
That means that ARMv6 code is forwards compatible with ARMv7 but ARMv7 code isn't backwards compatible with ARMv6. In other words the old assembly code written to the ARMv6 target will still run on later processors.
Aarch64 is a completely different ISA from the same company.
IMHO that doesn't say what was stated above. That there are problems due to file system differences should be obvious for people who are familiar with both Windows and Unix on a lower level. But saying that one simply shouldn't do that ignores the fact that one can do it in a safe manner* by just following a restriction to just use compatible features. Lusers perhaps should avoid the problem entirely but then they aren't likely to use the "Linux subsystem"...
(* unless MS have really fucked things up - I hope not given that this is the third Posix type subsystem they have included in NT systems, they should have some experience by now)
...when they accept and try to limit prostitution not only for "... vulnerable women and young girls" but for "vulnerable men and young boys". Strange that male prostitution _never_ get mentioned by people/bills like this even though in some areas there are more male prostitutes than female (according to measurements that admittedly have a high error marginal).
I guess women can't make a conscious choice due to their small brains while men can/s.
Don't think anything flew over the poster... Such a system would still (if reasonably designed) keep most/all advantages with bitcoin while removing the problems of some idiotic* design choices.
Bull. Change what considerations an examiner should include when doing a search, change how much time they should spend on the search and pay them accordingly. Change what should be considered patentable. Those things could make a difference unlike your idea of economical revenge.
The patent system is fucked up, very few examiners fuck up though, it is a systematic problem rather than an individual one. Your proposal misses the distinction that courts and others can make different . But is the court more competent than the examiner? I find that hard to believe as the examiner should be knowledgeable in the area of the patent unlike the court that should be knowledgeable in the area of law and so require external experts that aren't necessarily unbiased (or even knowledgeable).
TL;DR reform the patent system to work, keeping the current system and adding economical sanctions when two separate entities have different opinions of the patentability will not improve anything.
Last time I had a BSOD was ages ago, probably at least 10 years. Caused by a driver that didn't like flaky hardware. Never tried Linux on that machine but I don't think it would be better unless it just didn't use the flaky hardware bits.
Safe mode worked fine on that machine but the graphics performance was quite a bit worse...
Because it implements a Linux compatible subsystem which can be used for running Linux compatible stuff _including_ the GNU bits you mention. What the subsystem implements is a translation layer changing Linux system calls into Windows system calls.
This naming scheme goes back a long time, e.g. "OS/2 subsystem for NT" was what the OS/2 subsystem was called back in the days. MS now have decided that there should only be one unified Windows system so NT is replaced with Windows. And it is logical even if you don't like it.
Been there. Do a thorough hardware checkup before blaming MS (or the driver vendors), in all cases I've seen it have been caused by failing hardware (HDD, RAM). Once the failing component was exchanged the system installed correctly. YMMV of course.
IOW we should continue this entitled whining shit instead of using the reason free software (and open software, freeware etc.) exists in the first place?
There are alternatives. Use them if you don't like something in your current system _and_ can't be bothered to do something to fix that. Even if you can't code you sure as fuck can start a website and try to collect like minded hopefully attracting those that can code. Whining is a losers game.
I am starting to be increasingly irritated in the direction Windows is moving. Do I whine? Nope. I consider what alternative would be the best system to switch to as a replacement if that is what it comes to, I also try to remove/reduce those things that are irritating. Much better than flailing and posting (mostly) uninformed shit on online forums.
Slashdot Mirror
For research? No.
Beesexuals? Hard to get laid without talking first...
The Soviet (and later Russian) nuclear dead-man mechanism is reasonably well know to the public by now (well such things are hard to verify of course). It includes a lot of sensors designed to detect nuclear detonations on Russian ground, specialized hardened communications lines and hardened bunker(s) that is always active. If sensors detect detonations _and_ the normal chain of command can't be reached the personnel at the bunker(s) is given authority to decide if a nuclear attack have occurred and if retaliation is needed. They then can activate the system which uses misc. ways to communicate a launch signal to missile silos, it is claimed one way is sending commands to specialized missiles to launch which in turn fly over Russian territory broadcasting launch code(s) to silos below.
While the system described may be bogus it seems reasonable and also more foolproof than trying to make a system based on ordinary radio broadcasts. Jamming a radio transmitter is trivial compared to jamming multiple optical fibers buried underground.
It's not tinfoil - it's his overconsumption of colloidal silver showing.
I think I spot a logical hole there with a larger diameter than that of Mr. Goatse.cx, how about you run away and play with the other nuts at abovetopsecret?
Scarily no, that's not the case anymore. Guantanamo, secret courts and a lot of other crap new and old (like holding a person as suspect of something obviously false until a case can be built up) means the US legal system can't be trusted.
Take that parallel construction and shove it! Do you know what it describes? Do you understand that using it without a proper context and without any reason you sound like a conspiracy nut without a clue?
Waited a while before posting the above. I'll not change anything as I stand by it but you shouldn't necessarily take it 100% seriously...
Yes it's understood by most. The problem is that begging the question really means another thing than most think it does - a thing that is hard to describe without using the phrase. So the problem isn't one of a language evolving rather than devolving, the common use of the phrase now hinders the proper* use meaning it's harder to express the original meaning. And there's no reason as the phrase people really want to express already exist, is just one extra letter and is more logical (the use of "begs" needs some strange definition of the word to make it fit).
(* well a language is a democratic thing so the proper use isn't decided by some language god somewhere...)
Witnesses. Fleeing prosecution. Witnesses that can tell his MO (drugging underage girls). Witnesses that can tell how he took advantage of them. Yeah, I consider him guilty and unless he have the guts to ever face legal scrutiny I will continue to hold that view. But don't take my word - you can easily find out the facts yourself.
TL;DR Fuck off you disgusting shit of a coward.
Another example: the (old) QNX demonstration floppy. Unix type OS + GUI + networking drivers + browser on one 1.44MB floppy.
Well I consider myself an audiophile however I'd never buy monster cables (unless they have some real advantage - like how they look, how flexible they are etc.), tiny stickers to place near interconnect cables, special stones to place on the expensive equipment etc. Much pseudo-science and magical thinking in some circles.
What I do is buy reasonable priced headphones with good sound reproduction (currently using Philips Fidelity X1 somewhat modified) and a good source e.g. my current system is a MSI GS60 which uses a dedicated headphone DAC/amplifier design avoiding the analog processing of the normal audio codec. I actually replaced the standard headphone cable (something I've always considered suspect as designing a cable isn't hard) as they simply weren't good in a previous system, could hear a difference in blind A/B testing and measuring the response/resistance/capacitance showed that they should indeed produce audible distortions. The replacement? A cheap ass cable selected more for flexibility than anything else but didn't have the same reproduction problems. Doubt that I'd need it now with the current setup (the DAC/Amp are capable of driving difficult cables without problem) but still...
Good luck with the assembly language part. Have you tried optimizing in assembly language in a modern processor? Out of order execution and compiler optimizations for it make compilers often more efficient than good assembly coders.
That meme is old (at least since the 80's) and still not correct. A skilled assembly programmer can do better than a compiler due to the lower level of abstraction, that will be the case until the processors actually run high-level programs in hardware. That compilers have improved and processors are optimizing execution towards compiler generated code just decreases how large the assembly advantage will be and how often the increased effort of using asm will pay off.
The meme will never be true. Assembly language provides a skilled programmer with a more direct interface to the execution hardware that the higher level language just can't give.
IMO that's the real problem with todays software - not too little reuse but too much reuse in the form of bloated incestuous libraries.
That means that ARMv6 code is forwards compatible with ARMv7 but ARMv7 code isn't backwards compatible with ARMv6. In other words the old assembly code written to the ARMv6 target will still run on later processors.
Aarch64 is a completely different ISA from the same company.
IMHO that doesn't say what was stated above. That there are problems due to file system differences should be obvious for people who are familiar with both Windows and Unix on a lower level. But saying that one simply shouldn't do that ignores the fact that one can do it in a safe manner* by just following a restriction to just use compatible features. Lusers perhaps should avoid the problem entirely but then they aren't likely to use the "Linux subsystem"...
(* unless MS have really fucked things up - I hope not given that this is the third Posix type subsystem they have included in NT systems, they should have some experience by now)
...when they accept and try to limit prostitution not only for "... vulnerable women and young girls" but for "vulnerable men and young boys". Strange that male prostitution _never_ get mentioned by people/bills like this even though in some areas there are more male prostitutes than female (according to measurements that admittedly have a high error marginal).
I guess women can't make a conscious choice due to their small brains while men can /s.
She was drugged and raped. No questions about it.
I like Polanski's movies but he should spend the rest of his life in jail. Rapist scum should be neutered and locked up - no exceptions.
Don't think anything flew over the poster... Such a system would still (if reasonably designed) keep most/all advantages with bitcoin while removing the problems of some idiotic* design choices.
(* IMHO, no make that IMAO)
Bull. Change what considerations an examiner should include when doing a search, change how much time they should spend on the search and pay them accordingly. Change what should be considered patentable. Those things could make a difference unlike your idea of economical revenge.
The patent system is fucked up, very few examiners fuck up though, it is a systematic problem rather than an individual one. Your proposal misses the distinction that courts and others can make different . But is the court more competent than the examiner? I find that hard to believe as the examiner should be knowledgeable in the area of the patent unlike the court that should be knowledgeable in the area of law and so require external experts that aren't necessarily unbiased (or even knowledgeable).
TL;DR reform the patent system to work, keeping the current system and adding economical sanctions when two separate entities have different opinions of the patentability will not improve anything.
I don't think I use anything MS except the basic UI. No problems here.
Last time I had a BSOD was ages ago, probably at least 10 years. Caused by a driver that didn't like flaky hardware. Never tried Linux on that machine but I don't think it would be better unless it just didn't use the flaky hardware bits.
Safe mode worked fine on that machine but the graphics performance was quite a bit worse...
Because it implements a Linux compatible subsystem which can be used for running Linux compatible stuff _including_ the GNU bits you mention. What the subsystem implements is a translation layer changing Linux system calls into Windows system calls.
This naming scheme goes back a long time, e.g. "OS/2 subsystem for NT" was what the OS/2 subsystem was called back in the days. MS now have decided that there should only be one unified Windows system so NT is replaced with Windows. And it is logical even if you don't like it.
Been there. Do a thorough hardware checkup before blaming MS (or the driver vendors), in all cases I've seen it have been caused by failing hardware (HDD, RAM). Once the failing component was exchanged the system installed correctly. YMMV of course.
IOW we should continue this entitled whining shit instead of using the reason free software (and open software, freeware etc.) exists in the first place?
There are alternatives. Use them if you don't like something in your current system _and_ can't be bothered to do something to fix that. Even if you can't code you sure as fuck can start a website and try to collect like minded hopefully attracting those that can code. Whining is a losers game.
I am starting to be increasingly irritated in the direction Windows is moving. Do I whine? Nope. I consider what alternative would be the best system to switch to as a replacement if that is what it comes to, I also try to remove/reduce those things that are irritating. Much better than flailing and posting (mostly) uninformed shit on online forums.