Re:2.0.38? What happened to the 2.2 tree?
on
Kernels Galore
·
· Score: 3
There are hermits among us, my boy, who are very slow to jump on the latest kernel for our servers. And, it's not just because we have impressive uptime to consider, either! We have predictable and adequate behavior in an older kernel running on a dedicated machine and we want to change as little as possible. A new 2.0 kernel with minor refinements and bug fixes isn't likely to break anything. The wonderful world of Linux works here too! Ain't it grand?
heh. Me too... but 2.2 or 2.4(?) will be on my next machine. It will probably be my first SMP PC! I really should start saving money now for gobs of memory.;)
I wonder if they took his extension cord as "evidence" also... The floppies and writable CD's I can understand their taking in order to determine whether they contain evidence, but *cables*??
Apparently anything even vaguely "computer" is fair game when searching the lair of a "hacker". I wonder if they take the car-vac along with the car when they bust a getaway car driver.;)
Your first paragraph is an economic argument -- not a racial one. You are making the mistake of equating correlation with causation.
The subject of your first paragraph could be black, white, hispanic, or asian, etc. Using racial instead of economic methods to identify such an economic situation is simply racist.
The reality of the situation is that the net is, at least until we hook up cameras to each PC, colorblind. I respectfully suggest that that is a Good Thing.
By "...reflexually registering domain names left and right which have anything..." to do with your work, aren't you committing the same offense -- or at least, having the same effect -- as those you argue against? Shouldn't you simply pick the single, most appropriate, domain and let others, with their legitimate interests, have the others?
Yep, the Celeron 300A and above all have 128 K of L2 cache running at full core speed.
However, for SMP purposes, the cache size matters a lot. Since the two CPU's are sharing the memory bus, every cache miss means potential contention. Running large memory intensive programs on both CPU's simultaneously would almost certainly show significantly lower performance than same-clocked PII's with their 512K caches and much higher cache hit rate.
That is, in single CPU comparisons, the doubled speed of the Celeron almost makes up for the reduced cache hit rate relative to the PII. However, in dual-CPU configurations, the decreased cache hit rate of the Celerons carries the additional penalty of increased memory bus contention....But I'm still gonna make one!;)
Remember, the people building SMP systems out of Celerons are generally hackers trying to build the maximum computer on a shoestring. This enables Intel to sell them two processors instead of one, which undoubtedly offsets the other considerations. I'm considering building a dual-Celeron system myself. However, if they disable SMP, I'll just build a single Celeron machine. They certainly won't be getting any extra revenue from me by killing SMP!
Unfortunately, excluding evidence illegally obtained often has the effect of punishing society rather than the perpetraters. Perhaps what is needed is some form of direct punishment for officials who overstep the bounds of their authority and infringe the rights of people -- while not excluding the evidence in cases where the violation didn't directly lead to the discovery of the evidence.
I, too, find the ? marks irritating. Jon, cut it out! If you must use MS tools to create your documents, at least you could clean them up before posting them on Slashdot. Otherwise, I'll be forced to change my vote on the next "dump Katz" vote.;)
heheh! But, seriously, while you're clearly being sarcastic, reread your argument and consider it coming from another perspective. With a few words changed to switch the genders, the last half of your post sounds like you're making fun of official affirmative action itself!
However, while your logic clearly argues against affirmative action, I'm left unsure whether or not you support it, at least in this case. [Ed. note: "affirmative action" is used here to mean any unequally applied effort to recruit or assist one gender/race/ethnic group over another.]
Hmmm... I'm having trouble distinguishing between your argument and that of the other AC. Care to post some evidence yourself rather than just pointing out that the other AC didn't?
It'll be much harder for folks to ignore the evidence if you'll post it!;)
In that case the key management problem is even worse, don't you think? That old annoying secure channel paradox: You need a totally secure channel to exchange the key. However, if you have a totally trusted secure channel you don't need encryption at all.
The exception, of course, is if you have a secure channel at one point in time for key distribution and to establish a protocol for exchange of data at a later time... just don't run out of OTP key data! And, of course, now both the originator and the recipient of the data must securely store the OTP data... it certainly will be too long and random to memorize. I'm afraid OTP's are even less useful for secret data exchange than storage encryption.
...that to encrypt your hard drive, for example, you would need to retain a decryption key of exactly the same size as the encrypted chunk! While this may be useful for securely encrypting small, highly sensitive files, bulk encryption presents the rather massive problem of managing the key -- which is now as sensitive as the data encrypted.
Re:Amerika be damned. [Offtopic, please moderate]
on
U.S. Army Testing Jini
·
· Score: 2
Um, if Nobody cares, why are you posting about it? (Unless, of course, you are the "Nobody" referred to in your post.) Otherwise, why are you participating in this little shared piece of our culture? WTF?
Re:Java is the future! [Fool! C is the true path!]
on
U.S. Army Testing Jini
·
· Score: 2
Your arguments are true... but irrelevant. By extension of that logic everything would be written in assembly or C. However, while I'm truly a C bigot;), I do write many little administrative tasks as shell scripts. People actually use Perl (gasp!) in web server applications. Need I point out that Perl "will always be slow compared to native alternatives"?
Different tasks lend themselves to optimization for machine performance, speed of development, simplicity, manageability, executable size, portability, etc.
So, yes, Java will always be slow[er], but I guess I'm prepared to deal with it.;)
When the government starts coercing operating system companies into putting law enforcement back doors into their distributions, I'll be glad I'm running an open source OS.;)
Slashdot Mirror
There are hermits among us, my boy, who are very slow to jump on the latest kernel for our servers. And, it's not just because we have impressive uptime to consider, either! We have predictable and adequate behavior in an older kernel running on a dedicated machine and we want to change as little as possible. A new 2.0 kernel with minor refinements and bug fixes isn't likely to break anything. The wonderful world of Linux works here too! Ain't it grand?
heh. Me too... but 2.2 or 2.4(?) will be on my next machine. It will probably be my first SMP PC! I really should start saving money now for gobs of memory. ;)
I think I'll wait *3* years when these babies are obsolete and pick them up for $10 each! ;)
I wonder if they took his extension cord as "evidence" also... The floppies and writable CD's I can understand their taking in order to determine whether they contain evidence, but *cables*??
;)
Apparently anything even vaguely "computer" is fair game when searching the lair of a "hacker". I wonder if they take the car-vac along with the car when they bust a getaway car driver.
Your first paragraph is an economic argument -- not a racial one. You are making the mistake of equating correlation with causation.
The subject of your first paragraph could be black, white, hispanic, or asian, etc. Using racial instead of economic methods to identify such an economic situation is simply racist.
The reality of the situation is that the net is, at least until we hook up cameras to each PC, colorblind. I respectfully suggest that that is a Good Thing.
By "...reflexually registering domain names left and right which have anything..." to do with your work, aren't you committing the same offense -- or at least, having the same effect -- as those you argue against? Shouldn't you simply pick the single, most appropriate, domain and let others, with their legitimate interests, have the others?
I got the same error... but kept trying and got in. Try it again, just like with Win95. ;)
Yep, the Celeron 300A and above all have 128 K of L2 cache running at full core speed.
...But I'm still gonna make one! ;)
However, for SMP purposes, the cache size matters a lot. Since the two CPU's are sharing the memory bus, every cache miss means potential contention. Running large memory intensive programs on both CPU's simultaneously would almost certainly show significantly lower performance than same-clocked PII's with their 512K caches and much higher cache hit rate.
That is, in single CPU comparisons, the doubled speed of the Celeron almost makes up for the reduced cache hit rate relative to the PII. However, in dual-CPU configurations, the decreased cache hit rate of the Celerons carries the additional penalty of increased memory bus contention.
My computer has 20 Gigs of memory. Why is that funny? ;)
In light of his second career decision -- the one to go to work for the borg -- I'm don't believe he is the right person to head SGI either!
:)
I do wonder how exactly he meant the statement that he was going to work for a company that doesn't compete with SGI.
The C code that produced this is definitely not art! However, not all of my code is so artless. ;)
Seriously, I believe that code is art. At least some of it... and that has to include Linux!
Remember, the people building SMP systems out of Celerons are generally hackers trying to build the maximum computer on a shoestring. This enables Intel to sell them two processors instead of one, which undoubtedly offsets the other considerations. I'm considering building a dual-Celeron system myself. However, if they disable SMP, I'll just build a single Celeron machine. They certainly won't be getting any extra revenue from me by killing SMP!
Now, Toto, the nanobots can have a brain!
Unfortunately, excluding evidence illegally obtained often has the effect of punishing society rather than the perpetraters. Perhaps what is needed is some form of direct punishment for officials who overstep the bounds of their authority and infringe the rights of people -- while not excluding the evidence in cases where the violation didn't directly lead to the discovery of the evidence.
I, too, find the ? marks irritating. Jon, cut it out! If you must use MS tools to create your documents, at least you could clean them up before posting them on Slashdot. Otherwise, I'll be forced to change my vote on the next "dump Katz" vote. ;)
heheh! But, seriously, while you're clearly being sarcastic, reread your argument and consider it coming from another perspective. With a few words changed to switch the genders, the last half of your post sounds like you're making fun of official affirmative action itself!
However, while your logic clearly argues against affirmative action, I'm left unsure whether or not you support it, at least in this case. [Ed. note: "affirmative action" is used here to mean any unequally applied effort to recruit or assist one gender/race/ethnic group over another.]
Hmmm... I'm having trouble distinguishing between your argument and that of the other AC. Care to post some evidence yourself rather than just pointing out that the other AC didn't?
;)
It'll be much harder for folks to ignore the evidence if you'll post it!
In that case the key management problem is even worse, don't you think? That old annoying secure channel paradox: You need a totally secure channel to exchange the key. However, if you have a totally trusted secure channel you don't need encryption at all.
... it certainly will be too long and random to memorize. I'm afraid OTP's are even less useful for secret data exchange than storage encryption.
The exception, of course, is if you have a secure channel at one point in time for key distribution and to establish a protocol for exchange of data at a later time... just don't run out of OTP key data! And, of course, now both the originator and the recipient of the data must securely store the OTP data
hmmm... is your first string...
;)
"j=`K~8v]-2.D:&.6*i$_kQ\?,|)dE" by any chance?
No? Ok... must be a bug in my algorithm...
...that to encrypt your hard drive, for example, you would need to retain a decryption key of exactly the same size as the encrypted chunk! While this may be useful for securely encrypting small, highly sensitive files, bulk encryption presents the rather massive problem of managing the key -- which is now as sensitive as the data encrypted.
Um, if Nobody cares, why are you posting about it? (Unless, of course, you are the "Nobody" referred to in your post.) Otherwise, why are you participating in this little shared piece of our culture? WTF?
Your arguments are true... but irrelevant. By extension of that logic everything would be written in assembly or C. However, while I'm truly a C bigot ;), I do write many little administrative tasks as shell scripts. People actually use Perl (gasp!) in web server applications. Need I point out that Perl "will always be slow compared to native alternatives"?
;)
Different tasks lend themselves to optimization for machine performance, speed of development, simplicity, manageability, executable size, portability, etc.
So, yes, Java will always be slow[er], but I guess I'm prepared to deal with it.
... is a lot of fun. No deadlines, no pressures, no managers, and alas, no money. The biggest problem is having to have a real job as well. ;)
When the government starts coercing operating system companies into putting law enforcement back doors into their distributions, I'll be glad I'm running an open source OS. ;)
ummm... shouldn't that be 2038 (in yer sig)?