... and readeth ye not a manpage, nor HTML, nor a PDF. But the righteous among you shall only RTFM with this bizarre curses console app I bequeath to thee, which ye shall know as "info".
That's tiny compared to the Wall of China (4000) and just slightly longer than the West German Wall (800).
The Great Wall of China was designed to protect against organized horseback raids, not individuals sneaking in. It took centuries to build, cost about 1 million lives of construction workers, and it wasn't even all that effective.
The German wall was not impenetrable, and the effectiveness it had was the result of East Germany's willingness to gun down hundreds of unarmed civilians in cold blood. Since few Americans and even fewer people in other countries would find that strategy to be ethical, that option would not be politically tenable.
a gas cloud who was irradiated until recently by a now dead quasar.
a gas cloud who was irradiated until 650 million years ago by a now dead quasar.
That depends on the frame of reference of the observer. For example, from the point of view of the actual photons we're receiving (which travel at the speed of light), the same instant they get emitted from the gas cloud they slam into our telescopes. For them, there is no delay at all between the two events.
Like maybe the SR-71 "Blackbird"...which certainly looked stealthy, although in reality wasn't.
It was about as stealthy as you could get designing with pencils and drafting paper. They did try to make it hard to detect (which is one reason it looked so strange), and it did much better at that goal than probably any other plane of the era.
I heard that Google and Microsoft agreed to carve up the territory by division, and MS will get control of AFC payments. This is looking like it's going to be just another duopoly like cable vs. DSL providers.
Where did I say they couldn't set the rules? All I said is that with rules like those, you should choose to patronize them only if you're a meek follower, too timid and incompetent handle actual computer programs.
And in the 1 in a (number-greater-than-all-atoms-in-the-universe)^2 chance Apple does something that boneheaded I won't use Apple.
How boneheaded? I was commenting on the laundry list of Micky Mouse rules that they're *already* enforcing. Rules worse than anything that IBM was doing with the PC in 1984, when Apple was glad to use hyperbole to compare IBM to a totalitarian government. (In contrast, I merely compared Apple to the rather less malevolent Disney World.) The irony here seems to be totally lost on you.
You want historic highs? I remember a DRAM crunch in the 1980s when prices spiked at about $1000 per megabyte. (That's about 150,000 times more costly per bit than current prices.)
So you view decades by 01-10? and not 00-09? The first decade of 2010 ended one year ago.
Decades numbered from 01-10 are technically more correct. This unfortunate situation is due to the fact that the monk Dionysius Exiguus was definitely not a C programmer.
I recently scanned a large number of slides my parents shot over the decades. All the Kodachrome slides looked like brand new when directly viewed. However, the dyes used in the film interact with scanner sensors to give a very heavy blue cast to the results that need to be fixed up with post processing.
In my case, most of the Ektachrome slides taken before the mid 1960s were heavily faded to a muddy brown, and a few were almost unviewable. Ektachrome slides taken in the mid 1960s and later generally looked good, and didn't have the strange color interactions with the scanner. Kodak must have significantly improved their Ektachome process at some point in there.
You're putting the cart before the horse. Here's a deal: FIRST, you get the system completely changed over to your pie-in-the-sky libertarian telco fantasy. (Good luck with that.)
AFTER that has been accomplished, and only after, then we can talk about leaving them unregulated. Until, then, go back to reading your Ayn Rand novels.
If you somehow think that a laissez-faire telco oligopoly would let you use the Internet in the way you wish, I've got a bridge to sell you in New York.
The.NET framework is probably more complex than an ARM kernel, and it's peppered with patents. Microsoft will undoubtedly add a bunch of tablet-related patents to the mix. The basic Windows kernel has also already been cloned (WINE). The scenario I described probably isn't significantly more or less cloneable than what they're going to do.
And good luck with getting manufacturers to make ARM drivers, I think they'll be needing it.
They shouldn't even need to bother doing that. They'd be better off if they get with the program: Slap their user space on top of the Linux kernel (which already has all the ARM drivers). That's what Google did with Android.
All the old x86 Win32 API apps won't run on ARM anyway, so the Windows kernel won't enable their traditional strategy of leveraging the installed software base. Instead, Microsoft should just port their.NET runtime onto an ARM Linux kernel and call it a day. A lot of modern Windows software would run on this environment without too much modification, and Microsoft's development and vendor relations costs would be a fraction of that required to develop and distribute a custom kernel.
Of course, hell will freeze over before they go this route.
You have been stuck somewhere before Perl 4. Try Perl 5.12.2 with Moose for OO-programming.
Optional OO add-ons == FAIL. If different projects use different incompatible class systems from random 3rd party libraries they downloaded off the web, they may as well not even be written in the same language. They won't interoperate.
Off the top of my head: How about no visibly defined function parameters; object oriented features are stuck on with duct tape; you have to have a deep understanding of the language to understand what's really going on when someone assigns between variables that have different sidgils; huge numbers of built-in magic 2-character variable names that you can't remember without a cheat sheet.
You need the most exact weight possible whenever accelerating and deflecting atoms - has use in particle physics, plasma physics, quantum mechanics even astrophysics - real life applications range from particle accelerators, mass spectrometers to refinement of uranium...
In that case, the atoms are going to deflect by discrete amounts depending on the exact isotope of each atom. None of the individual deflections are going to depend the average isotope distribution of the whole group, which is what this topic is about.
Then you get stupid password systems which state your password must be "at least 6 letters, including 1 upper case and 1 number", about 38 bits. Or even worse "between 6 and 8 characters".
Those systems are generally not trying to protect against people with direct access to the encrypted data files. Instead, they are *login* passwords for systems where attackers do not have direct access to the protected data.
In principle, each of those systems should detect repeat login failures and delay or deny further attempts. In that case, the attacker doesn't get to try countless thousands of guesses. Security holes are very common in those types of systems, but it's not necessarily just because the password is 8 characters long.
Think Win modems. Remember those? They didn't have their firmware permanently stored on the device. Rather, it was loaded onto the device from windows. It made them cheaper to produce.
Well, Linus allowed some similar binary firmware blobs into the kernel just for that purpose. They aren't drivers ( communication between hardware and the kernel), they're firmware ( software for the hardware to run itself).
I don't understand why this is a big deal to anyone. If the hardware OEM had shelled out 10 cents for a ROM chip and embedded the code on the card, then almost nobody would care about or even be aware of the proprietary embedded firmware. But if the exact same functionality gets stored external to the card, it now becomes an issue.
Nobody seems to be concerned that every X86 processor since the 80286 has come laden with a boatload of proprietary microcode hidden inside. Is the only thing making that OK the fact that it's not downloaded into the chip at boot time?
Slashdot Mirror
Penitent: Lord, have mercy upon me, a sinner.
GNU/God: RTFM.
... and readeth ye not a manpage, nor HTML, nor a PDF. But the righteous among you shall only RTFM with this bizarre curses console app I bequeath to thee, which ye shall know as "info".
That's tiny compared to the Wall of China (4000) and just slightly longer than the West German Wall (800).
The Great Wall of China was designed to protect against organized horseback raids, not individuals sneaking in. It took centuries to build, cost about 1 million lives of construction workers, and it wasn't even all that effective.
The German wall was not impenetrable, and the effectiveness it had was the result of East Germany's willingness to gun down hundreds of unarmed civilians in cold blood. Since few Americans and even fewer people in other countries would find that strategy to be ethical, that option would not be politically tenable.
Frankly, your "interactive" "prompts" scare me.
When I apply power to my computer, I am faced with 8 LEDs and 8 toggle switches, and I start keying in my familiar sheet of boot sequence opcodes.
I have not altered this default behavior in almost four decades, and to change it, ever, would would be bad.
If my car has only a thin, brittle piece of glass protecting it from being entered into and driven off without my consent, how angry can I be
Hmmm... In that case you should be pretty angry at your car's manufacturer, because apparently they neglected to include a keyed ignition switch.
a gas cloud who was irradiated until recently by a now dead quasar.
a gas cloud who was irradiated until 650 million years ago by a now dead quasar.
That depends on the frame of reference of the observer. For example, from the point of view of the actual photons we're receiving (which travel at the speed of light), the same instant they get emitted from the gas cloud they slam into our telescopes. For them, there is no delay at all between the two events.
Like maybe the SR-71 "Blackbird"...which certainly looked stealthy, although in reality wasn't.
It was about as stealthy as you could get designing with pencils and drafting paper. They did try to make it hard to detect (which is one reason it looked so strange), and it did much better at that goal than probably any other plane of the era.
I heard that Google and Microsoft agreed to carve up the territory by division, and MS will get control of AFC payments. This is looking like it's going to be just another duopoly like cable vs. DSL providers.
Where did I say they couldn't set the rules? All I said is that with rules like those, you should choose to patronize them only if you're a meek follower, too timid and incompetent handle actual computer programs.
And in the 1 in a (number-greater-than-all-atoms-in-the-universe)^2 chance Apple does something that boneheaded I won't use Apple.
How boneheaded? I was commenting on the laundry list of Micky Mouse rules that they're *already* enforcing. Rules worse than anything that IBM was doing with the PC in 1984, when Apple was glad to use hyperbole to compare IBM to a totalitarian government. (In contrast, I merely compared Apple to the rather less malevolent Disney World.) The irony here seems to be totally lost on you.
Choice is right: You can choose to ignore my advice and choose to be a sheep. I won't.
Geez, that stupid 1984 Mac ad gets more ironic every day.
If I really wanted to live under the protection of a Nanny Corporation like this, I'd just move myself into Disney World.
historic highs around $2.80
You want historic highs? I remember a DRAM crunch in the 1980s when prices spiked at about $1000 per megabyte. (That's about 150,000 times more costly per bit than current prices.)
Now, get off my lawn.
So you're claiming that the first decade only had 9 years?
So you view decades by 01-10? and not 00-09? The first decade of 2010 ended one year ago.
Decades numbered from 01-10 are technically more correct. This unfortunate situation is due to the fact that the monk Dionysius Exiguus was definitely not a C programmer.
I recently scanned a large number of slides my parents shot over the decades. All the Kodachrome slides looked like brand new when directly viewed. However, the dyes used in the film interact with scanner sensors to give a very heavy blue cast to the results that need to be fixed up with post processing.
In my case, most of the Ektachrome slides taken before the mid 1960s were heavily faded to a muddy brown, and a few were almost unviewable. Ektachrome slides taken in the mid 1960s and later generally looked good, and didn't have the strange color interactions with the scanner. Kodak must have significantly improved their Ektachome process at some point in there.
You're putting the cart before the horse. Here's a deal: FIRST, you get the system completely changed over to your pie-in-the-sky libertarian telco fantasy. (Good luck with that.)
AFTER that has been accomplished, and only after, then we can talk about leaving them unregulated. Until, then, go back to reading your Ayn Rand novels.
and how I wish to use the Internet
If you somehow think that a laissez-faire telco oligopoly would let you use the Internet in the way you wish, I've got a bridge to sell you in New York.
The .NET framework is probably more complex than an ARM kernel, and it's peppered with patents. Microsoft will undoubtedly add a bunch of tablet-related patents to the mix. The basic Windows kernel has also already been cloned (WINE). The scenario I described probably isn't significantly more or less cloneable than what they're going to do.
And good luck with getting manufacturers to make ARM drivers, I think they'll be needing it.
They shouldn't even need to bother doing that. They'd be better off if they get with the program: Slap their user space on top of the Linux kernel (which already has all the ARM drivers). That's what Google did with Android.
All the old x86 Win32 API apps won't run on ARM anyway, so the Windows kernel won't enable their traditional strategy of leveraging the installed software base. Instead, Microsoft should just port their .NET runtime onto an ARM Linux kernel and call it a day. A lot of modern Windows software would run on this environment without too much modification, and Microsoft's development and vendor relations costs would be a fraction of that required to develop and distribute a custom kernel.
Of course, hell will freeze over before they go this route.
You have been stuck somewhere before Perl 4. Try Perl 5.12.2 with Moose for OO-programming.
Optional OO add-ons == FAIL. If different projects use different incompatible class systems from random 3rd party libraries they downloaded off the web, they may as well not even be written in the same language. They won't interoperate.
Like what?
Off the top of my head: How about no visibly defined function parameters; object oriented features are stuck on with duct tape; you have to have a deep understanding of the language to understand what's really going on when someone assigns between variables that have different sidgils; huge numbers of built-in magic 2-character variable names that you can't remember without a cheat sheet.
You need the most exact weight possible whenever accelerating and deflecting atoms - has use in particle physics, plasma physics, quantum mechanics even astrophysics - real life applications range from particle accelerators, mass spectrometers to refinement of uranium...
In that case, the atoms are going to deflect by discrete amounts depending on the exact isotope of each atom. None of the individual deflections are going to depend the average isotope distribution of the whole group, which is what this topic is about.
Then you get stupid password systems which state your password must be "at least 6 letters, including 1 upper case and 1 number", about 38 bits. Or even worse "between 6 and 8 characters".
Those systems are generally not trying to protect against people with direct access to the encrypted data files. Instead, they are *login* passwords for systems where attackers do not have direct access to the protected data.
In principle, each of those systems should detect repeat login failures and delay or deny further attempts. In that case, the attacker doesn't get to try countless thousands of guesses. Security holes are very common in those types of systems, but it's not necessarily just because the password is 8 characters long.
Think Win modems. Remember those? They didn't have their firmware permanently stored on the device. Rather, it was loaded onto the device from windows. It made them cheaper to produce.
Well, Linus allowed some similar binary firmware blobs into the kernel just for that purpose. They aren't drivers ( communication between hardware and the kernel), they're firmware ( software for the hardware to run itself).
I don't understand why this is a big deal to anyone. If the hardware OEM had shelled out 10 cents for a ROM chip and embedded the code on the card, then almost nobody would care about or even be aware of the proprietary embedded firmware. But if the exact same functionality gets stored external to the card, it now becomes an issue.
Nobody seems to be concerned that every X86 processor since the 80286 has come laden with a boatload of proprietary microcode hidden inside. Is the only thing making that OK the fact that it's not downloaded into the chip at boot time?
Of course, nothing can touch the combination of mainframes and COBOL when it comes to processing millions and millions of records.
That sounds kind of like Dr. Evil:
"My mainframe computer is so powerful, it can process ... MILLIONS of records! Hahaha!"