USB is still a serial protocol with the change between USB 2 and 3 was 1) splitting a common pair used for sending and receiving (simplex) to two pairs to allow for duplex transfer 2) specifying the higher speed pairs to have tighter ratings to enable higher bit rates.
The idea that Ethernet (assuming you mean common Cat 5/6 cables) works better than USB cables is ludicrous! They aren't specified to tolerate the plug/unplug cycles of even a cheap USB cable and the plug itself is fragile.
Byte size have varied a lot in the past and could conceivably vary in the future too (but it's unlikely). Even the definition of byte as a concept have varied, most have byte as the smallest addressable element while some systems had it as the character size etc. Word addressed machines very seldom used byte to describe the addressable element size but some had word-sized characters... It's a mess.
A more correct name is octet which by definition consists of 8 binary digits.
Microsofts compilers have always been conservative when it comes to optimization. And frankly in most cases a smart compiler using the best optimization possible* will be at most a few percentages faster than the one that only does basic optimizations (like register allocation, common subexpression elimination etc.).
GCC and Clang/LLVM have switched to the idea that all undefined types of code shouldn't produce what is likely to be the programmers intent like C compilers of old, nor should they flag undefined cases as errors and stop compiling (as that would break a huge amount of software) - instead it is an invitation to optimize like if the undefined case couldn't be. Sure it breaks software but unless you are important (read: SPEC benchmarks) it's your own damn fault. If you are important you'll be special cased instead in order to not break the code...
(* this is a theoretical compiler - it doesn't exist)
Maybe that it is completely wrong (grammatically) and something mostly done by far-right racists?
There are no thing that is a "white" people. If you mean Europeans, write that. But that covers a lot of different groups of people with varying skin color and other physical characteristics.
The same is true of "black" people. The genetic variation in Africans is incredible. There are people of a huge variety of skin colors etc.
Who knows? Not us, it's classified. It may have helped much in whatever NSA is targeted to or have been totally useless. I don't think that question is that interesting though, the important question is what are the costs of the program. And I'm not talking money - trust, morality and freedoms are worth much more.
Eliminating "Judeo-Christian" civilization would be a good thing. Islam isn't a good replacement though, a humanistic secular state based on science is the better deal.
Remember that most of our current freedoms and advances are _despite_ Christianity.
You understand that the OP are talking about EU transforming to something closer to the US, right? I don't see where you get the idea of Fascism or the removal of the democratic principle. Neither of that is stated nor implied in the OP...
Compared to a file based design where each access have to go through security checks? I don't understand what your complaint is based on given the design of the operating system you are running on (unless you are surfing from a KEYKOS machine) have similar intrinsic security problems.
Compare:/slufs/ert.txt with http://slurfs/ert.txt What extra security checks are needed? Well you could check if the slurfs location can support the http protocol but that is a feature, not a problem. The standard Unix design can't check that as a file is untyped (and a mount point almost untyped). Or do you think that the URL may refer to a remote server is a problem? Any capable operating system have the same "problem" if so.
I don't like the idea of "everything is a file" being replaced with "everything is an URL" but security isn't the reason.
Stop improving things? Don't think that's a good idea. Stop changing ports without good reasons? That would be better _but_ not possible in general.
However you are listing things that don't change without good reasons: USB. You list USB 3.0 and 3.1 type C separately while it is one port, you also list USB A twice while it is one port. Plug a USB 3.x device into a USB 2.x port and it will work, plug a USB 2.x device into a USB 3.x port and it will work. While the USB 2.x micro and USB 3.x micro ports are different physically the USB 3.x ports are a superset of the USB 2.x ones.
Your complaint about the USB C port is funny as it is the closest thing ever to your ideal connector: it is designed to scale in the future, it is designed for and intended to support interfaces that aren't yet created.
Bullshit. The cheat part that is, that nearby signals can interfere is true but trivially so. Water is wet, signals can interfere - so what?
The problems isn't caused by cheating and implying that not only confuses people but also takes away the important lesson that computers are complex on many levels and that avoiding bugs is f-king hard.
[And that critical systems should have ECC in hardware, software or preferably both]
Parents? Assuming you mean _patents_ the whole idea behind them is to get people to _willingly_ disclose an innovation in such a manner that others can implement it, implying a patent holder have to be forced to disclose them is ridiculous!
This is a modification of noise radar intended to make the signals even harder to detect as far as I can tell. While I wouldn't call the signal encrypted it is still true one have to have the "key" to make sense of the radar return. That and a extreme amount of processing power!
Slashdot Mirror
USB is still a serial protocol with the change between USB 2 and 3 was 1) splitting a common pair used for sending and receiving (simplex) to two pairs to allow for duplex transfer 2) specifying the higher speed pairs to have tighter ratings to enable higher bit rates.
The idea that Ethernet (assuming you mean common Cat 5/6 cables) works better than USB cables is ludicrous! They aren't specified to tolerate the plug/unplug cycles of even a cheap USB cable and the plug itself is fragile.
I think your computer was "hacked" by weev...
I thought you were just an idiot but this post hows that you are most aligned with German national socialism. FOAD please!
Byte size have varied a lot in the past and could conceivably vary in the future too (but it's unlikely). Even the definition of byte as a concept have varied, most have byte as the smallest addressable element while some systems had it as the character size etc. Word addressed machines very seldom used byte to describe the addressable element size but some had word-sized characters... It's a mess.
A more correct name is octet which by definition consists of 8 binary digits.
Microsofts compilers have always been conservative when it comes to optimization. And frankly in most cases a smart compiler using the best optimization possible* will be at most a few percentages faster than the one that only does basic optimizations (like register allocation, common subexpression elimination etc.).
GCC and Clang/LLVM have switched to the idea that all undefined types of code shouldn't produce what is likely to be the programmers intent like C compilers of old, nor should they flag undefined cases as errors and stop compiling (as that would break a huge amount of software) - instead it is an invitation to optimize like if the undefined case couldn't be. Sure it breaks software but unless you are important (read: SPEC benchmarks) it's your own damn fault. If you are important you'll be special cased instead in order to not break the code...
(* this is a theoretical compiler - it doesn't exist)
You seem to have some kind of mental problem! You see things that aren't there (apologizing? where?). fuck off.
You can't have read what the bible actually says nor learned what people that claim to follow it thinks it allows or even forces them to do.
Religions and Abrahamic religions in particular are dangerous.
Maybe that it is completely wrong (grammatically) and something mostly done by far-right racists?
There are no thing that is a "white" people. If you mean Europeans, write that. But that covers a lot of different groups of people with varying skin color and other physical characteristics.
The same is true of "black" people. The genetic variation in Africans is incredible. There are people of a huge variety of skin colors etc.
Who knows? Not us, it's classified. It may have helped much in whatever NSA is targeted to or have been totally useless. I don't think that question is that interesting though, the important question is what are the costs of the program. And I'm not talking money - trust, morality and freedoms are worth much more.
Eliminating "Judeo-Christian" civilization would be a good thing. Islam isn't a good replacement though, a humanistic secular state based on science is the better deal.
Remember that most of our current freedoms and advances are _despite_ Christianity.
What a question. Yes!
Have you ever seen or spoken to a Muslim? You'd notice that they look and act as human beings, invent things, works, takes part in social life etc.
So yes.
One European state have tried it in the past. The US is doing it now.
All Abrahamic religions and a lot more if you want to be correct.
Racist Fascists are the snake. "Regular" anti-Islamists are the grass.
If anyone is "kicked out" they will be kicked out of the EU. External borders still exist you know...
You understand that the OP are talking about EU transforming to something closer to the US, right? I don't see where you get the idea of Fascism or the removal of the democratic principle. Neither of that is stated nor implied in the OP...
Compared to a file based design where each access have to go through security checks? I don't understand what your complaint is based on given the design of the operating system you are running on (unless you are surfing from a KEYKOS machine) have similar intrinsic security problems.
Compare: /slufs/ert.txt with http://slurfs/ert.txt
What extra security checks are needed? Well you could check if the slurfs location can support the http protocol but that is a feature, not a problem. The standard Unix design can't check that as a file is untyped (and a mount point almost untyped). Or do you think that the URL may refer to a remote server is a problem? Any capable operating system have the same "problem" if so.
I don't like the idea of "everything is a file" being replaced with "everything is an URL" but security isn't the reason.
Stop improving things? Don't think that's a good idea. Stop changing ports without good reasons? That would be better _but_ not possible in general.
However you are listing things that don't change without good reasons: USB. You list USB 3.0 and 3.1 type C separately while it is one port, you also list USB A twice while it is one port. Plug a USB 3.x device into a USB 2.x port and it will work, plug a USB 2.x device into a USB 3.x port and it will work. While the USB 2.x micro and USB 3.x micro ports are different physically the USB 3.x ports are a superset of the USB 2.x ones.
Your complaint about the USB C port is funny as it is the closest thing ever to your ideal connector: it is designed to scale in the future, it is designed for and intended to support interfaces that aren't yet created.
Bullshit. The cheat part that is, that nearby signals can interfere is true but trivially so. Water is wet, signals can interfere - so what?
The problems isn't caused by cheating and implying that not only confuses people but also takes away the important lesson that computers are complex on many levels and that avoiding bugs is f-king hard.
[And that critical systems should have ECC in hardware, software or preferably both]
If one can apply for the right to use the patent for a reasonable sum of money then it _isn't_ a monopoly. That is the case here.
A better example would be the use of the exFAT filesystem on larger capacity SD Cards but even then calling it a monopoly would be wrong.
Parents? Assuming you mean _patents_ the whole idea behind them is to get people to _willingly_ disclose an innovation in such a manner that others can implement it, implying a patent holder have to be forced to disclose them is ridiculous!
This is a modification of noise radar intended to make the signals even harder to detect as far as I can tell. While I wouldn't call the signal encrypted it is still true one have to have the "key" to make sense of the radar return. That and a extreme amount of processing power!
Making a binary isn't a statement, pretending it is = lying.
If you are proud of that why not post logged in?
Of the top of my head K42 and a few L4 projects (Wombat/Iguana) does that. Don't know if calling it "replacing" is correct though.