I haven't ever used Freenet, but even if it's got tons of stolen software, child porn, and radical Wahabi rants that wouldn't prove how many sources the stuff is coming from. It could be 5.9 billion people or 59 people.
And to the point of the GGGP's post, I'd bet that there is more unauthorized IP on any kind of file sharing network than child porn.
Schwarzenegger: "Da veedo games are bad. Dey are too violent and muzt be kept away from de impressionable youth". Parent: "If video games are bad, then what is good Mr. Schwarzenegger?" Schwarzenegger: "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women."
There's a child molester in every chat room. There's a terrorist in every van. Smoking a joint leads to crime, violence, and insanity. Copying a music file cripples our economy.
Oh, and drinking alcohol doesn't hurt you. Eating cheap processed chemicals doesn't hurt you. Polluting our air and water is worth it. Our climate is fine.
What do all these statements have in common? They are making some entrenched interest a lot of money.
I have it on good authority that the complete works of Shakespeare can be found at/dev/random. It was manually entered by an infinite number of monkeys.
I felt a great disturbance on Slashdot, as if millions of spelling nazis suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.
> Not everything Neitzsche said was all that great or well thought out.
I'm not relying on Neitzche's name or pedigree to make a point. The quote is thought provoking even if I didn't tell you who said it.
Every ranting lunatic in an asylum truly believes he is right. This extreme example illustrates that having enormous faith in something has no correlation to the objective truth of the belief. A less extreme example that is more familiar is the contradiction of many of the world's religions claim that only their followers are going to "heaven" and the rest don't or the rest go to a bad place. They can't all be right. It would be reasonable to argue that none of them are right.
Perhaps they are right on some fundamental issue but wrong in details, perhaps not. That is a different discussion.
My first reaction was that we should set up a huge department level bureaucracy, let's call it the "Department of HTTPD Security" (after the Apache server's process name HTTPD). This department will gets lots of funding and quickly hire many people. Due to the short time period these people will certainly not be the best, or even very good, at security, but this is an emergency so we'll gloss over that. The Department will subsume and take over several other large and already successful security agencies like CERT. From now on any code changes trying to enter or leave Apache or any other of a number of projects will be stopped by the Department, and be forced to be inspected by these inexperienced agents. No code blocks over 3.4K lines will be allowed in. Any archive files will need to be unzipped and displayed for the agent. The Department will also keep a list of first names of programmers who have had security problems and code from anyone matching this list will not be allowed. If any programmer complains about these rules that programmer will also be added to the list. If a programmer even jokes about Apache security or wears a T-Shirt with security exploits on it they will be added to the list.
That was just my first reaction, but then I realized that would be stupid, right?
The article's take-away that SSDs slow down over time may be right, however the reasoning behind the explanations doesn't even make sense.
> "Because they have a two-part write/erase cycle, unlike the single write cycle of mechanical hard drives, they wear out at least twice as fast as their spinning counterparts."
Umm, what? SSD writes are done in two stages, yes, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the way a traditional hard drive does writes. So how could you say SSD's wear out "twice" as fast as traditional drives because they have to write twice? It could be that an SSD could write a thousands times more or a thousand times less than a traditional hard drive before wearing out because they are completely different technologies.
> "This isn't helped by the architecture of most SSDs. Usually, data is laid down within a block of available memory, meaning that it might not take up all the available space--yet will still write to all of it"
Does the author think traditional hard drives write to byte-addressable boundaries? Hard drives write blocks and sectors too and have wasted slack space at the end of their blocks too.
> "Defragmenting or "defragging" a SSD takes up many write/erase cycles... which shortens the lifetime of an SSD, even if it's also cleaning up the drive."
No, defragging is not cleaning up an SSD drive. There is no reason to defrag an SSD because their is no latency getting to a further sector.
> "it's a delicate balance, how often you should defrag your SSD for optimum performance and lifetime"
That's not it at all. Unions don't need social skills.
Generally, IT people think differently. They (we) highly value efficiency and determinism in our algorithms and our lives. Unions are grossly inefficient and unfair. This rubs IT people the wrong way. In a perfect world we wouldn't have to create organizations whos purpose is to introduce inefficiency and obstacles. IT people don't LIKE the idea of unions. We create systems that work well because millions of parts cooperate well by agreeing to logical rules that streamline their interoperation. A union of small parts working in opposition to the larger system is anathema to our thinking.
It sucks that we *are* the small parts being taken advantage of in this example.
Slashdot Mirror
I haven't ever used Freenet, but even if it's got tons of stolen software, child porn, and radical Wahabi rants that wouldn't prove how many sources the stuff is coming from. It could be 5.9 billion people or 59 people.
And to the point of the GGGP's post, I'd bet that there is more unauthorized IP on any kind of file sharing network than child porn.
Schwarzenegger: "Da veedo games are bad. Dey are too violent and muzt be kept away from de impressionable youth".
Parent: "If video games are bad, then what is good Mr. Schwarzenegger?"
Schwarzenegger: "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women."
*bullshit*
Citation needed.
There's a child molester in every chat room.
There's a terrorist in every van.
Smoking a joint leads to crime, violence, and insanity.
Copying a music file cripples our economy.
Oh, and drinking alcohol doesn't hurt you.
Eating cheap processed chemicals doesn't hurt you.
Polluting our air and water is worth it.
Our climate is fine.
What do all these statements have in common?
They are making some entrenched interest a lot of money.
I have it on good authority that the complete works of Shakespeare can be found at /dev/random. It was manually entered by an infinite number of monkeys.
Yeah that's it... donors...
"Doctor you did an amazing job, but why do I look like Chinese, and what is this number tattooed on the back of my new neck?"
I felt a great disturbance on Slashdot, as if millions of spelling nazis suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.
Isn't there a law that you cannot accurately determine both my speed and my location at the same time.
I hope the judge follows my reasoning.
> If you look at the invisibility cloak the wrong way, it kills you!
Those are Soviet invisibility cloaks.
EARTH HAS 4 CORNER SIMULTANEOUS 4-DAY TIME CUBE IN ONLY 24 HOUR ROTATION.
4 CORNER DAYS, CUBES 4 QUAD EARTH- No 1 Day God.
I just thought you'd like to know this.
That's really funny how you repeated his joke, but spelled it out for us dummies who didn't get it the first time.
Thanks.
> Not everything Neitzsche said was all that great or well thought out.
I'm not relying on Neitzche's name or pedigree to make a point. The quote is thought provoking even if I didn't tell you who said it.
Every ranting lunatic in an asylum truly believes he is right. This extreme example illustrates that having enormous faith in something has no correlation to the objective truth of the belief. A less extreme example that is more familiar is the contradiction of many of the world's religions claim that only their followers are going to "heaven" and the rest don't or the rest go to a bad place. They can't all be right. It would be reasonable to argue that none of them are right.
Perhaps they are right on some fundamental issue but wrong in details, perhaps not. That is a different discussion.
Whether it's better or not, just because you really want to believe something doesn't make it true.
As Neitzsche said, "A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything."
> At my place of employment we use TSP/PSP and we're expected to maintain 12-14 hours of 'on task time',
Yeah... Make sure you put the new cover sheets on your TPS reports. Mmmm That would be great.
Need Fritos, Tab, and Mountain Dew.
You kids with your fancy registers and interrupts. In my day we did:
ldx #$00 .text "Welcome"
loop lda message,x
sta #$0400,x
inx
cpx #$07
bne loop
rts
message
Hahaha defensive much?
Do you see any similarity between my description and any real life over-reactions?
Department of HTTPD Security. D.H.S.
A code audit would be a very good idea.
> And yet the iPhone was the best 'internet experience' mobile phone on the planet when it came out. In spite of the fact that it didn't have flash.
"These aren't the missing features you're looking for", Steve Jobs waves his hand.
My first reaction was that we should set up a huge department level bureaucracy, let's call it the "Department of HTTPD Security" (after the Apache server's process name HTTPD). This department will gets lots of funding and quickly hire many people. Due to the short time period these people will certainly not be the best, or even very good, at security, but this is an emergency so we'll gloss over that. The Department will subsume and take over several other large and already successful security agencies like CERT. From now on any code changes trying to enter or leave Apache or any other of a number of projects will be stopped by the Department, and be forced to be inspected by these inexperienced agents. No code blocks over 3.4K lines will be allowed in. Any archive files will need to be unzipped and displayed for the agent. The Department will also keep a list of first names of programmers who have had security problems and code from anyone matching this list will not be allowed. If any programmer complains about these rules that programmer will also be added to the list. If a programmer even jokes about Apache security or wears a T-Shirt with security exploits on it they will be added to the list.
That was just my first reaction, but then I realized that would be stupid, right?
How about Apple slipcovers for your crusty old Dell laptop?!
Now that would be posing!
Oh God no... I RTFA...
Do I get banned from Slashdot? Am I an outcast now?
(PS I was not criticizing you, just the linked to article)
Yes, yes I know:
s/their/there/
That article was low on logic and common sense.
The article's take-away that SSDs slow down over time may be right, however the reasoning behind the explanations doesn't even make sense.
> "Because they have a two-part write/erase cycle, unlike the single write cycle of mechanical hard drives, they wear out at least twice as fast as their spinning counterparts."
Umm, what? SSD writes are done in two stages, yes, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the way a traditional hard drive does writes. So how could you say SSD's wear out "twice" as fast as traditional drives because they have to write twice? It could be that an SSD could write a thousands times more or a thousand times less than a traditional hard drive before wearing out because they are completely different technologies.
> "This isn't helped by the architecture of most SSDs. Usually, data is laid down within a block of available memory, meaning that it might not take up all the available space--yet will still write to all of it"
Does the author think traditional hard drives write to byte-addressable boundaries? Hard drives write blocks and sectors too and have wasted slack space at the end of their blocks too.
> "Defragmenting or "defragging" a SSD takes up many write/erase cycles... which shortens the lifetime of an SSD, even if it's also cleaning up the drive."
No, defragging is not cleaning up an SSD drive. There is no reason to defrag an SSD because their is no latency getting to a further sector.
> "it's a delicate balance, how often you should defrag your SSD for optimum performance and lifetime"
How about "NEVER"?
> "Only defrag when necessary!"
Argh!
Hey that's a great idea. Let's call it "Java"...
That's not it at all. Unions don't need social skills.
Generally, IT people think differently. They (we) highly value efficiency and determinism in our algorithms and our lives. Unions are grossly inefficient and unfair. This rubs IT people the wrong way. In a perfect world we wouldn't have to create organizations whos purpose is to introduce inefficiency and obstacles. IT people don't LIKE the idea of unions. We create systems that work well because millions of parts cooperate well by agreeing to logical rules that streamline their interoperation. A union of small parts working in opposition to the larger system is anathema to our thinking.
It sucks that we *are* the small parts being taken advantage of in this example.
>> I stole one of our contractors employee's last week.
> You stole his what?
His "last week". Clearly he stole his [contrators employee]'s last week. Just took the week away from him.