I bought an IDE hard drive a couple months ago, and it works just fine. A friend of mine bought one, and that works too.
Everyone, notice how silly this comment sounds? That's because the only people ranting about hard drive quality are the people who have had problems. That's why the parent requested STATISTICS, and that's why your anecdotes are worse than useless.
Yeah, you sure do need a goddamned details designer to get lucky once in a universe of this size. I mean, there are only like nine planets! Amazing that it worked out.
It seems kind of ridiculous to me to consider the "idea" of a block copying utility to be more important than the implementation. You could say they got the idea for dd from Unix and I wouldn't mind, but it's not right to say they got the actual software from there. It's harder to write it then to think it up.
BSD didn't get their software from AT&T Unix either. I don't understand what you mean? I personally don't give a damn that there's this "BSD project" and this "GNU project" out there, since I can use software from both of them on my computer. I see the two as in collaboration rather than competition, since they both promote free Unix. It's not like Apple versus Microsoft, it's just different groups of people doing different parts of the same cause. Get over it.
Well, I could imagine that someone flying over Oklahoma could be considered to be really "in" Oklahoma. If they have an emergency, they'll land in an Oklahoma airport, or on a farm or something, and they'll need the services of the state. Or they could crash into something in Oklahoma.
Someone in the ISS is totally detached from Oklahoma, since it's not exactly possible for them to reach Oklahoma just because they're over it, I guess.
Pain is essentially signals transmitted through neurons. I don't attach extra importance to neurons themselves, or to certain signals.
A human's pain is attached to a complicated emotional system, memory system, reasoning system, etc. When a chicken's nerves report pain, it's something that is acted upon in certain instinctual ways because their nervous system is wired to do these certain things. A human's pain has an entirely different, deeper meaning. Just because they both use the same general devices (neurons and such) or because they both scream or whatever doesn't make them equally important. There is a difference between a calculator and a Cray. What makes a human's pain important is not the fact that its nerves end in a bundle of neurons. It's the depth of meaning that those neurons have. A chicken doesn't have the resources to even understand, much less communicate, anything even as simple as "could you toss me a napkin? thanks."
~$ dd --version dd (fileutils) 4.1 Written by Paul Rubin, David MacKenzie, and Stuart Kemp.
Copyright (C) 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
It doesn't "just happen to be" in Linux. It's not like they got a copy of dd from AT&T or something, you know. They wrote their own, just like with everything else.
I didn't know I had to make an argument to be an omnivore. But really, I care about as much about the "pain" of a ball of instincts as I would care about a computer programmed to squeal if you formatted the hard drive. I don't decide the value of things based on how similar they are to me. I'm not exactly the shiznit.
Police. Or some form of law enforcement, anyway, if the owner refuses to comply with the law.
Playing CD's in your store is definitely considered public performance by the law, and you need a special license to play it. Even funeral homes that play copyrighted music that the families bring in at ceremonies are required to have that yearly license. The law is very clear on this and law enforcement will definitely go after it as copyright violation is criminal for some reason that I've never understood.
Even if he did say it for some reason his saying of it would be entirely irrelevant. The original PC chips, that IBM decided to put in, had a total addressing space of 1024K. 384K of that addressing was used for BIOS and adapters (which were obviously needed) leaving 640K of user addressing space.
In other words it wasn't Bill's decision. Now, what can be argued is whether it was appropriate of Microsoft to essentially ignore the 386 until 1995.
Don't you think you wouldn't need a "backup face" since your DNA wouldn't change in an accident (if it did, you have more serious problems). So you could just grow the face on an as-needed basis.
Of course if they manage to start growing human organs from human DNA, being able to replace faces would be the least of the boons.
What you say is often true but an interesting exception is American Beauty where smoking pot out back is cool and the coolest character is a drug dealer. There is a little bit of violence but it's more the unhappy, sad kind than the more typical American "that's so cool" violence.
I always try to point out to my boss when we're paying for something that Microsoft has no obligation to deliver. It never works though. Everybody always assumes that Microsoft will release something and that the release will actually be worthwhile. Really though, mostly our NT4 servers are fine and stable as they are, and there's almost no business case for spending 100 grand to replace servers as needed to move to 2000. Yet we're doing it anyway. Apparently an upgrade never needs to be justified, no matter how much it costs or how little it adds.
Somebody needs a dictionary. Here's a sample (Merriam-Webster's unabridged):
1 a : the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it b : an instance of such an act
If you want to help the copyright industry modify the definition of the word "theft" by improper usage, go right ahead, but there will always be a meaning of the word "theft" that _doesn't_ include "partaking of culture in such a way that is not approved by a large corporation, whether or not such action impacts the revenue of said corporation"
I don't see how you can come to the conclusion that the GPL requires the licensor to "waive rights" where the BSD does not. Can you give some sort of rational explanation for what you said?
In the meantime -- the GPL doesn't require you to waive rights, as it doesn't prevent you from doing anything with the work (licensing under other terms, etc). And if people under 18 can't waive their rights to SOME extent then it's not legal for them to distribute their works at all (which makes the copyright pretty pointless...)
My understanding is that the Apple thing came about because someone who is 18 cannot enter into a legally binding contract, and therefore they could not agree to _Apple's_ license.
That equation doesn't give a correct answer for watts when used on AC circuits with inductive loads (like computers). With AC all Amps * Volts gives you is Volt-Amps (VA) which is going to be higher than the real draw in watts. I don't know a simple way to measure watts (I'm no electrician either)
Certainly the software that plays Go is probably not as good as it could be on the given hardware, but it's hard to say how much better it could be. It's a very hard problem to solve. If you haven't played Go you should try it out sometime, and you might understand this better. Basically though, the main object of Go is to secure territory for yourself. When a game is completely finished, it's fairly simple for a computer to count the empty spaces that are surrounded by different pieces. However when a game is only partly through most territory is not secure and instead the players are fighting for vague spheres of influence. And there are a large number of variables that determine the value of that influence -- how secure it is, where it is on the board, whether it can be used to stage an invasion, whether it's surrounded (or could be easily surrounded) by opposing pieces, whether it can be used to support another territory in case of enemy invasion, etc. In other words a computer cannot look at a board and tell who is winning; in chess, the problem is much simpler (even just calculating the "points" gives a reasonable idea in many games, and the other criteria are generally easily stated.
Not quite right. Even *Deep* Blue couldn't map out an entire game, or even all possibilities in its 25(?) moves ahead. That would constitute perfect play, which is totally beyond the capability of any computer that we could currently conceive of being built. It would stop processing a line of possibility if it looked too bad (like "hmm, if I make this move I lose my queen and two rooks, so let's stop worrying about that one).
I don't understand what you mean by saying that the hard part is writing a random number generator. Random number generation it itself doesn't have anything to do with much. The question is the algorithms used to find the more likely moves.
As for Go needing 10 times as much storage, you are so far off that I worry that you don't know the meaning of the number 10! Each chess move gives about 35 legal options. A player in a Go move has about 200 possible moves on average (the number starts at 361 and mostly goes down from there). After five moves from each player there are about 1.8 billion possible positions in chess -- and 64 trillion for Go. That's a factor of 32,000 more positions, and that's only five moves in. Go games usually have more moves than chess games.
It is really laughable to even suggest that all the possible moves in Go will be stored in a computer within the next 500 years. Though that isn't necessary to beat a human shodan (as I mentioned, chess programs don't evaluate ALL of the possible positions). What's really necessary to beat a human master at Go is to be able to make some judgement on the relative value of different positions. Computers can't currently do that properly, so while a chess computer searches for that perfect move that forces checkmate, the computer playing Go has a hard time understanding what it's supposed to be searching for.
Uh, this case would be Microsoft asking google to remove a _Microsoft-owned_ page from the cache, and has no correlation to the Scientology effort to remove other people's pages.
The problem here is that what you were doing was not "desktop use", but for some reason you extend your experience to desktop use. What you were doing was clearly server administration. I don't hear anybody telling me that Windows isn't a good desktop OS because the DHCP Manager isn't intuitive (which it's not, unless you understand DHCP). Server administration is always going to require skills, and whatever other skills you may have you have no skills in Linux server administration.
As for your experience, you made a number of mistakes that anyone who knew what they were doing (as a Linux sysadmin would) would never make. First problem was thinking you should go to the wu-ftpd website and try to compile the software yourself. Unless you have some tremendous reason to do this, you need to go to your distributor in all cases, since their installations are customized in numerous ways that you have probably come to expect. Second mistake was expecting an RPM to restart the service for you (RPM's don't really go for pre/post-install scripts, see Debian for that).
The third mistake was the worst, as it totally ignores the whole purpose of your distributor. Development groups (like the wu-ftpd group) generally attach security and bug fixes to new versions, since they usually prefer to work on one codebase. However, your distributor should never upgrade you to a new version that changes any functionality unless you change the version of the distribution, since a given version is supposed to be stable. So, as every Linux sysadmin in the world knows, Red Hat doesn't just toss the thing into an RPM and throw it out there. Rather, they take their existing codebase (which as I said, is usually patched in several ways) and apply the security fixes to _that_. And everyone knows this because it is _clearly_ _documented_. If you are running a server (ftpd is not a desktop app) then you need to follow the security updates for your distro, which will quite clearly explain what patch level fixes what holes.
My advice to you is to either: remove all the server programs from your system and use it as a desktop user; hire a competent sysadmin; or spend the time yourself to become a competent sysadmin. Don't play end-user-with-a-server or you'll get burned, no matter the OS.
well, the predecessor to Deep Blue was called Deep Thought. "Deep Thought" is the name of the computer in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series who concluded after many years of processing that the answer to life, the universe, and everything was 42.
well, it is true that if you know the entire plaintext used in a OTP, you know the entire key. As dumb as that sounds I think it may be what he means. Since his key is supposed to be reusable and all.
Note everyone, that the MSDN subscription doesn't include license to use ANY of the products included for anything other than compatibility testing. If you're going to buy an MSDN subscription then illegally use the software in it, then you may as well just download warez.
Slashdot Mirror
I bought an IDE hard drive a couple months ago, and it works just fine. A friend of mine bought one, and that works too.
Everyone, notice how silly this comment sounds? That's because the only people ranting about hard drive quality are the people who have had problems. That's why the parent requested STATISTICS, and that's why your anecdotes are worse than useless.
Yeah, you sure do need a goddamned details designer to get lucky once in a universe of this size. I mean, there are only like nine planets! Amazing that it worked out.
It seems kind of ridiculous to me to consider the "idea" of a block copying utility to be more important than the implementation. You could say they got the idea for dd from Unix and I wouldn't mind, but it's not right to say they got the actual software from there. It's harder to write it then to think it up.
BSD didn't get their software from AT&T Unix either. I don't understand what you mean? I personally don't give a damn that there's this "BSD project" and this "GNU project" out there, since I can use software from both of them on my computer. I see the two as in collaboration rather than competition, since they both promote free Unix. It's not like Apple versus Microsoft, it's just different groups of people doing different parts of the same cause. Get over it.
Well, I could imagine that someone flying over Oklahoma could be considered to be really "in" Oklahoma. If they have an emergency, they'll land in an Oklahoma airport, or on a farm or something, and they'll need the services of the state. Or they could crash into something in Oklahoma.
Someone in the ISS is totally detached from Oklahoma, since it's not exactly possible for them to reach Oklahoma just because they're over it, I guess.
Pain is essentially signals transmitted through neurons. I don't attach extra importance to neurons themselves, or to certain signals.
A human's pain is attached to a complicated emotional system, memory system, reasoning system, etc. When a chicken's nerves report pain, it's something that is acted upon in certain instinctual ways because their nervous system is wired to do these certain things. A human's pain has an entirely different, deeper meaning. Just because they both use the same general devices (neurons and such) or because they both scream or whatever doesn't make them equally important. There is a difference between a calculator and a Cray. What makes a human's pain important is not the fact that its nerves end in a bundle of neurons. It's the depth of meaning that those neurons have. A chicken doesn't have the resources to even understand, much less communicate, anything even as simple as "could you toss me a napkin? thanks."
~$ dd --version
dd (fileutils) 4.1
Written by Paul Rubin, David MacKenzie, and Stuart Kemp.
Copyright (C) 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
It doesn't "just happen to be" in Linux. It's not like they got a copy of dd from AT&T or something, you know. They wrote their own, just like with everything else.
I didn't know I had to make an argument to be an omnivore. But really, I care about as much about the "pain" of a ball of instincts as I would care about a computer programmed to squeal if you formatted the hard drive. I don't decide the value of things based on how similar they are to me. I'm not exactly the shiznit.
Police. Or some form of law enforcement, anyway, if the owner refuses to comply with the law.
Playing CD's in your store is definitely considered public performance by the law, and you need a special license to play it. Even funeral homes that play copyrighted music that the families bring in at ceremonies are required to have that yearly license. The law is very clear on this and law enforcement will definitely go after it as copyright violation is criminal for some reason that I've never understood.
Even if he did say it for some reason his saying of it would be entirely irrelevant. The original PC chips, that IBM decided to put in, had a total addressing space of 1024K. 384K of that addressing was used for BIOS and adapters (which were obviously needed) leaving 640K of user addressing space.
In other words it wasn't Bill's decision. Now, what can be argued is whether it was appropriate of Microsoft to essentially ignore the 386 until 1995.
Yeah, that's why nearly all engineering in 2002 is still using Newtonian mechanics, right?
Don't you think you wouldn't need a "backup face" since your DNA wouldn't change in an accident (if it did, you have more serious problems). So you could just grow the face on an as-needed basis.
Of course if they manage to start growing human organs from human DNA, being able to replace faces would be the least of the boons.
What you say is often true but an interesting exception is American Beauty where smoking pot out back is cool and the coolest character is a drug dealer. There is a little bit of violence but it's more the unhappy, sad kind than the more typical American "that's so cool" violence.
You've got the wrong book.
"The Fountainhead" mostly praises individualism and creativity.
The one you want is "Atlas Shrugged".
I always try to point out to my boss when we're paying for something that Microsoft has no obligation to deliver. It never works though. Everybody always assumes that Microsoft will release something and that the release will actually be worthwhile. Really though, mostly our NT4 servers are fine and stable as they are, and there's almost no business case for spending 100 grand to replace servers as needed to move to 2000. Yet we're doing it anyway. Apparently an upgrade never needs to be justified, no matter how much it costs or how little it adds.
Somebody needs a dictionary. Here's a sample (Merriam-Webster's unabridged):
1 a : the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it b : an instance of such an act
If you want to help the copyright industry modify the definition of the word "theft" by improper usage, go right ahead, but there will always be a meaning of the word "theft" that _doesn't_ include "partaking of culture in such a way that is not approved by a large corporation, whether or not such action impacts the revenue of said corporation"
I don't see how you can come to the conclusion that the GPL requires the licensor to "waive rights" where the BSD does not. Can you give some sort of rational explanation for what you said?
In the meantime -- the GPL doesn't require you to waive rights, as it doesn't prevent you from doing anything with the work (licensing under other terms, etc). And if people under 18 can't waive their rights to SOME extent then it's not legal for them to distribute their works at all (which makes the copyright pretty pointless...)
My understanding is that the Apple thing came about because someone who is 18 cannot enter into a legally binding contract, and therefore they could not agree to _Apple's_ license.
That equation doesn't give a correct answer for watts when used on AC circuits with inductive loads (like computers). With AC all Amps * Volts gives you is Volt-Amps (VA) which is going to be higher than the real draw in watts. I don't know a simple way to measure watts (I'm no electrician either)
Good point. I'm sorry.
The page is not owned by Microsoft, rather it's _copyrighted_ by Microsoft. Must always remember the difference.
Certainly the software that plays Go is probably not as good as it could be on the given hardware, but it's hard to say how much better it could be. It's a very hard problem to solve. If you haven't played Go you should try it out sometime, and you might understand this better. Basically though, the main object of Go is to secure territory for yourself. When a game is completely finished, it's fairly simple for a computer to count the empty spaces that are surrounded by different pieces. However when a game is only partly through most territory is not secure and instead the players are fighting for vague spheres of influence. And there are a large number of variables that determine the value of that influence -- how secure it is, where it is on the board, whether it can be used to stage an invasion, whether it's surrounded (or could be easily surrounded) by opposing pieces, whether it can be used to support another territory in case of enemy invasion, etc. In other words a computer cannot look at a board and tell who is winning; in chess, the problem is much simpler (even just calculating the "points" gives a reasonable idea in many games, and the other criteria are generally easily stated.
Not quite right. Even *Deep* Blue couldn't map out an entire game, or even all possibilities in its 25(?) moves ahead. That would constitute perfect play, which is totally beyond the capability of any computer that we could currently conceive of being built. It would stop processing a line of possibility if it looked too bad (like "hmm, if I make this move I lose my queen and two rooks, so let's stop worrying about that one).
I don't understand what you mean by saying that the hard part is writing a random number generator. Random number generation it itself doesn't have anything to do with much. The question is the algorithms used to find the more likely moves.
As for Go needing 10 times as much storage, you are so far off that I worry that you don't know the meaning of the number 10! Each chess move gives about 35 legal options. A player in a Go move has about 200 possible moves on average (the number starts at 361 and mostly goes down from there). After five moves from each player there are about 1.8 billion possible positions in chess -- and 64 trillion for Go. That's a factor of 32,000 more positions, and that's only five moves in. Go games usually have more moves than chess games.
It is really laughable to even suggest that all the possible moves in Go will be stored in a computer within the next 500 years. Though that isn't necessary to beat a human shodan (as I mentioned, chess programs don't evaluate ALL of the possible positions). What's really necessary to beat a human master at Go is to be able to make some judgement on the relative value of different positions. Computers can't currently do that properly, so while a chess computer searches for that perfect move that forces checkmate, the computer playing Go has a hard time understanding what it's supposed to be searching for.
A good article I found and got some numbers from is http://www.anusha.com/times-go.htm.
Uh, this case would be Microsoft asking google to remove a _Microsoft-owned_ page from the cache, and has no correlation to the Scientology effort to remove other people's pages.
The problem here is that what you were doing was not "desktop use", but for some reason you extend your experience to desktop use. What you were doing was clearly server administration. I don't hear anybody telling me that Windows isn't a good desktop OS because the DHCP Manager isn't intuitive (which it's not, unless you understand DHCP). Server administration is always going to require skills, and whatever other skills you may have you have no skills in Linux server administration.
As for your experience, you made a number of mistakes that anyone who knew what they were doing (as a Linux sysadmin would) would never make. First problem was thinking you should go to the wu-ftpd website and try to compile the software yourself. Unless you have some tremendous reason to do this, you need to go to your distributor in all cases, since their installations are customized in numerous ways that you have probably come to expect. Second mistake was expecting an RPM to restart the service for you (RPM's don't really go for pre/post-install scripts, see Debian for that).
The third mistake was the worst, as it totally ignores the whole purpose of your distributor. Development groups (like the wu-ftpd group) generally attach security and bug fixes to new versions, since they usually prefer to work on one codebase. However, your distributor should never upgrade you to a new version that changes any functionality unless you change the version of the distribution, since a given version is supposed to be stable. So, as every Linux sysadmin in the world knows, Red Hat doesn't just toss the thing into an RPM and throw it out there. Rather, they take their existing codebase (which as I said, is usually patched in several ways) and apply the security fixes to _that_. And everyone knows this because it is _clearly_ _documented_. If you are running a server (ftpd is not a desktop app) then you need to follow the security updates for your distro, which will quite clearly explain what patch level fixes what holes.
My advice to you is to either: remove all the server programs from your system and use it as a desktop user; hire a competent sysadmin; or spend the time yourself to become a competent sysadmin. Don't play end-user-with-a-server or you'll get burned, no matter the OS.
well, the predecessor to Deep Blue was called Deep Thought. "Deep Thought" is the name of the computer in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series who concluded after many years of processing that the answer to life, the universe, and everything was 42.
well, it is true that if you know the entire plaintext used in a OTP, you know the entire key. As dumb as that sounds I think it may be what he means. Since his key is supposed to be reusable and all.
Note everyone, that the MSDN subscription doesn't include license to use ANY of the products included for anything other than compatibility testing. If you're going to buy an MSDN subscription then illegally use the software in it, then you may as well just download warez.