Hey I'm allowed to plug my TOTALLY OPEN AND FREE library which people seem to use [otherwise they wouldn't download version x, then version x+1 when it comes out, etc...]
Sure I admit it was a bit of a shameless plug but quite frankly my math lib is a HECK OF A LOT faster than the bignum code in WASTE.
Point in case, I offer Comba multipliers and optimal sliding window exponentiation. Those two alone will make my lib [which is pure ISO C] considerably faster.
Not only that but did I mention my lib IS FREE AND TOTALLY OPEN SOURCE?
Maybe you did but even back in my day [which was only a decade ago] when I ran a BBS if we passed more than 1MB of fidonet/transcan/etc mail a day [pak'ed that is] that was "alot".
Nowadays PS and PDF are popular specially for scientific documents where even the simplest 20 page PS file can run you around 300KB. In a day of research I may download say 10 to 15 papers of that size looking for something I need. I can definitely say that having a cable modem makes that much easier than compared to a 56K connection [let alone 300 baud].
I never put much stock into benchmarks. One test says one thing another something else.
All this proves is that a benchmark is a highly isolated incident of observable performance.
For example, most charts I see rate the P4 as "faster than the Athlon" at the same clock rate. Yet when I benchmarked my bignum math code I found that the Athlon completely kicked the P4s ass
[K7] http://iahu.ca:8080/ltm_log/k7/index.html
[P4] http://iahu.ca:8080/ltm_log/p4/index.html
Does this single test prove the athlon is faster than the P4? Hell no. It proves that using portable ISO C source code todo bignum math is faster on an Athlon. If I used SSE2 the P4 would probably smoke the Athlon, etc...
Can we stop putting stock into this BS?
For the record I have a Ti200. Its decently fast [50fps at 1280x1024 in UT2] and there are no visible artifacts or other "cheats". It works nicely. So if nVIDIA cheated to make their 3dmark score better all the power to them. Screwing around with meaningless benchmarks is a good way to discredit them.
Speaking as someone who has used both Linux (RH 7/8, Gentoo) and Windows I have to say I prefer Windows to Linux for the sole reason that
a) stuff works quicker in windows. Sure you can configure Linux up the wazoo but often you have to actually edit text files for various things...e.g. to load say a bttv module you have to edit a resource file in the/etc/ dir...
b) tons of shit for windows exists. Including OSS/GNU based software [which I use daily]
c) Games.
d) When it boils down to it Windows [when updated properly] is really not that bad of an OS.
Nobody is forcing people to use MS. Now MS is just playing level. They give their shit out [or at extreme cut] it means OSS has to be *that much better* to win over users.
Too bad smoking is *not* a right in either Canada or the US.
Personally I'd love nothing better than junk food and such to be heavily regulated and actively discouraged. For example, most schools have cafeterias that server junk crap for lunches. That should be strictly prohibited.
You want to kill yourself? Do it on your own dime.
How many solidiers freak on the field or coward in fear?
I'd say the training doesn't get "everyone" ready for combat. In fact quite a few come home scarred for life from the experience.
Suffice it to say I have this stand point on the issue. Those violent games are ok, provided you play other games too.
That is if all you play is GTA3 for your entire life then yeah you will probably be hell bent on violence....
However, as a kid I remember playing the good old "analogue" games like tag, soccer, teather-ball, etc....
Its all about diversity. The way you keep a kid from going to one extreme or another is to expose them to things. As an air cadet, scout, etc... I've done plenty of cool shit from canoeing, sailing, hiking, camping [in all sorts of things], play games with real humans, flown planes, taught classes, etc....
So instead of getting a PS2 babysitter, get your kid a PS2 [or better yet get your kid to buy one themselves like my parents did to me] and force them todo other things too.
I love how everyone seems to ignore the fact that huge OSes like windows typically work in conjunction with third-party software.
While a good OS should protect against anything that isn't always possible because occasionally buggy-like behaviour is warranted. For example, you may want a thread to hog cpu time from everything including the gui. [e.g. making a BSP based map or something, want it to finish quickly].
However, that could just as easily be a run-away thread that isn't supposed to run.
And to those that think this is Windows only try writing a 1GB file from memory in linux kernel 2.4.20 [or so]. And watch as the system crawls to a halt as the cache is emptied...
Yeah so what? At the time programs were not that complicated. Recall that MDA displays were very common. So when you have a mono 80x25 screen with no sound, often no mouse, etc... do you really need 16MB of ram?
I mean that's like saying "1GB ought to be enough for a desktop" [which it really is more than enough] than pointing out 22 years later that "oh you're stupid!"
I seriously doubt Gates meant "640KB will be enough forever". I think he was justifying the IBM XT design of the time were MS-DOS ran on.
Recall that as low as MS-DOS v5.00 himem and emm386 were added which extended the amount of memory available. Even early editions of windows could use extended memory.
But, at the time in the early 80's more than a few hundred KB was excessive.
I don't see other OSes as particularly immune to idiots running viruses. recall the biggest problem is people *actually do* run those cute.exe flashes and such they get in emails
[my mother is one of them which is why my drives are not set to share write access:-)]
Also most newbs are likely to run linux like OSes in root mode [I know when I was new to it I did] since its much easier to install/configure as root.
Again your example plays into my view on it. By running an HTTP server without password authentication you are saying that people may make HTTP connections.
Its like if McDonalds left the formula for the secret sauce on a table in plain view in the restaurant. By the protocol of business you are allowed in the restaurant.
To clarify my line of thinking...
If you follow the standard protocol [whether HTTP, FTP or guidelines for watering plants] than it cannot be unauthorized access since you are willingly serving them.
However, if you have to break the standard [e.g. exploit a flaw, break a lock, etc.] then that's quite obviously unauthorized. This "they should have patched" retort is not an excuse.
You missed my point I think. My point is by providing a service [or explicit access] such as a HTTP server [or a neighbours key] you're expliciting granting reasonable access.
In the case of a HTTP server by being open to the public you are saying "you may access the server within the scope of a valid HTTP session". If the person didn't want that they would either not run a server or password protect it.
If on the otherhand you exploit a flaw and go outside a valid HTTP session then that would be unauthorized access.
As per another comment... While I agree everyone should patch up their servers I don't agree tjat the burden is on the server admin to make sure they are not broken into. Just because a flaw exists does not give you permission to exploit it.
Yahoo for instance doesn't really say "you specifically may use our email services". If I find your email server via google can I now use it?
Also the "should I be doing this?" question comes down to what someone would rationally think.
Generally I'd define "unauthorized access" as circumventing an open protocol. E.g. if I have an FTP open and you hack it to get more access that's unauthorized. However, if I have an open FTP [e.g. no password] and you steal all my files [say I work for some R&D company] than that's not unauthorized.
If people are too stupid *not* to open themselves up to the outside world [e.g. setting up insecure FTP/HTTP/etc servers] than its their own damn fault when people who follow the protocols get access to stuff.
Consider watering plants for a neighbour on vacation. You need access to their home so they give you a key. Suppose though they have a chest which is locked and they didn't give you a key. In this analogy walking into their home would be authorized but breaking the lock on the chest would be unauthorized.
Now replace "walk into house" with "log into server" and "breaking the lock" with "exploiting a flaw" and you're talking digital.
This whole "hacker lifestyle genre" thingy is a bit too dramatizied by the geek wannabes. Go out and actually try to write software that must be supported and updated. That's hardly "movie-worthy" lifestyles that people think is useful.
Put it this way. If I were in a position to hire people I'd only hire those that look down on hackers for the sole reason hackers are not responsible software developers.
TeX and notepad solve different problems you idiot.
TeX is meant for TYPESETTING documents. E.g. papers, books, etc. In those situations you really want to invest the 8 seconds to get it working. BTW the usual way to edit TeX files is to have the tex file open in a text editor and a DVI previewer open as well. Most [yap for instance] will re-draw when the.dvi changes so all you have todo is run tex or latex and voila. TextPad allows shortcuts so all I do is hit CTRL+4 then ALT+TAB and I'm set.
Notepad is meant for quickly typing out text without much care for formatting.
Why not next tell us how Quake 3 is a really horrible CD burning suite?
Slashdot Mirror
What's worse though is with this quick "progress" you can't buy those more rugged 10/20 GB drives any more that seem to last forever...
Yeah progress!
Tom
Meh, I'm far too busy [writing a book] to patch their software. Plus I scored 3000 hits to the site today. All in all cool.
Tom
Hey I'm allowed to plug my TOTALLY OPEN AND FREE library which people seem to use [otherwise they wouldn't download version x, then version x+1 when it comes out, etc...]
Sure I admit it was a bit of a shameless plug but quite frankly my math lib is a HECK OF A LOT faster than the bignum code in WASTE.
Point in case, I offer Comba multipliers and optimal sliding window exponentiation. Those two alone will make my lib [which is pure ISO C] considerably faster.
Not only that but did I mention my lib IS FREE AND TOTALLY OPEN SOURCE?
Tom
Actually Detective Green,
there is a method. Simply make up different cards and use each one at a different restaurant...
Days like this I wish I was head cop guy instead of unemployed compu-geek crypto-nerd.
Tom
Oh darn. Looks like they used some homebrew crap for their bignum stuff.
Common LibTomMath is like a billion times faster [not to mention very well tested]....
Plug plug plug!
http://math.libtomcrypt.org
Tom
Maybe you did but even back in my day [which was only a decade ago] when I ran a BBS if we passed more than 1MB of fidonet/transcan/etc mail a day [pak'ed that is] that was "alot".
Nowadays PS and PDF are popular specially for scientific documents where even the simplest 20 page PS file can run you around 300KB. In a day of research I may download say 10 to 15 papers of that size looking for something I need. I can definitely say that having a cable modem makes that much easier than compared to a 56K connection [let alone 300 baud].
Tom
Yeah but you also didn't try to download 300KB PS files and such....[citeseer ho!]
Tom
I never put much stock into benchmarks. One test says one thing another something else.
All this proves is that a benchmark is a highly isolated incident of observable performance.
For example, most charts I see rate the P4 as "faster than the Athlon" at the same clock rate. Yet when I benchmarked my bignum math code I found that the Athlon completely kicked the P4s ass
[K7]
http://iahu.ca:8080/ltm_log/k7/index.html
[P4]
http://iahu.ca:8080/ltm_log/p4/index.html
Does this single test prove the athlon is faster than the P4? Hell no. It proves that using portable ISO C source code todo bignum math is faster on an Athlon. If I used SSE2 the P4 would probably smoke the Athlon, etc...
Can we stop putting stock into this BS?
For the record I have a Ti200. Its decently fast [50fps at 1280x1024 in UT2] and there are no visible artifacts or other "cheats". It works nicely. So if nVIDIA cheated to make their 3dmark score better all the power to them. Screwing around with meaningless benchmarks is a good way to discredit them.
Tom
Speaking as someone who has used both Linux (RH 7/8, Gentoo) and Windows I have to say I prefer Windows to Linux for the sole reason that
/etc/ dir...
a) stuff works quicker in windows. Sure you can configure Linux up the wazoo but often you have to actually edit text files for various things...e.g. to load say a bttv module you have to edit a resource file in the
b) tons of shit for windows exists. Including OSS/GNU based software [which I use daily]
c) Games.
d) When it boils down to it Windows [when updated properly] is really not that bad of an OS.
Tom
Nobody is forcing people to use MS. Now MS is just playing level. They give their shit out [or at extreme cut] it means OSS has to be *that much better* to win over users.
Is that not competition?
Tom
Too bad smoking is *not* a right in either Canada or the US.
Personally I'd love nothing better than junk food and such to be heavily regulated and actively discouraged. For example, most schools have cafeterias that server junk crap for lunches. That should be strictly prohibited.
You want to kill yourself? Do it on your own dime.
Tom
WTF?
No stupid. Unless you got oodles of bandwidth and money you don't put audio in a lossless format on a site.
Of course they could charge for DVDs full of samples in FLAC format I suppose....
about the military comment....
How many solidiers freak on the field or coward in fear?
I'd say the training doesn't get "everyone" ready for combat. In fact quite a few come home scarred for life from the experience.
Suffice it to say I have this stand point on the issue. Those violent games are ok, provided you play other games too.
That is if all you play is GTA3 for your entire life then yeah you will probably be hell bent on violence....
However, as a kid I remember playing the good old "analogue" games like tag, soccer, teather-ball, etc....
Its all about diversity. The way you keep a kid from going to one extreme or another is to expose them to things. As an air cadet, scout, etc... I've done plenty of cool shit from canoeing, sailing, hiking, camping [in all sorts of things], play games with real humans, flown planes, taught classes, etc....
So instead of getting a PS2 babysitter, get your kid a PS2 [or better yet get your kid to buy one themselves like my parents did to me] and force them todo other things too.
Tom
I love how everyone seems to ignore the fact that huge OSes like windows typically work in conjunction with third-party software.
While a good OS should protect against anything that isn't always possible because occasionally buggy-like behaviour is warranted. For example, you may want a thread to hog cpu time from everything including the gui. [e.g. making a BSP based map or something, want it to finish quickly].
However, that could just as easily be a run-away thread that isn't supposed to run.
And to those that think this is Windows only try writing a 1GB file from memory in linux kernel 2.4.20 [or so]. And watch as the system crawls to a halt as the cache is emptied...
Tom
Yeah so what? At the time programs were not that complicated. Recall that MDA displays were very common. So when you have a mono 80x25 screen with no sound, often no mouse, etc... do you really need 16MB of ram?
I mean that's like saying "1GB ought to be enough for a desktop" [which it really is more than enough] than pointing out 22 years later that "oh you're stupid!"
I seriously doubt Gates meant "640KB will be enough forever". I think he was justifying the IBM XT design of the time were MS-DOS ran on.
Recall that as low as MS-DOS v5.00 himem and emm386 were added which extended the amount of memory available. Even early editions of windows could use extended memory.
But, at the time in the early 80's more than a few hundred KB was excessive.
Tom
I don't get the relevence of your signature line. 640K was probably more than enough in 1981. Recall applications were a few KB at most back then.
Tom
but what part did SCO take in writing linux?
As I understand it Linux was written by entirely by Linus originally. The OS uses the command set of unix but is not a copy of it....
Tom
I don't see other OSes as particularly immune to idiots running viruses. recall the biggest problem is people *actually do* run those cute .exe flashes and such they get in emails
:-)]
[my mother is one of them which is why my drives are not set to share write access
Also most newbs are likely to run linux like OSes in root mode [I know when I was new to it I did] since its much easier to install/configure as root.
Tom
Services in win2k/xp cannot be killed from a user level process at all. [which is annoying if you really want it to die].
So even if you did "kill pid" it won't work.
Tom
optical storage == no hobbyist developers.
:-)
Part of what makes the GBA/GBC/GP32 systems keen is that they use flash memories that hobbyists [a/k/a me] can program
Tom
Again your example plays into my view on it. By running an HTTP server without password authentication you are saying that people may make HTTP connections.
Its like if McDonalds left the formula for the secret sauce on a table in plain view in the restaurant. By the protocol of business you are allowed in the restaurant.
To clarify my line of thinking...
If you follow the standard protocol [whether HTTP, FTP or guidelines for watering plants] than it cannot be unauthorized access since you are willingly serving them.
However, if you have to break the standard [e.g. exploit a flaw, break a lock, etc.] then that's quite obviously unauthorized. This "they should have patched" retort is not an excuse.
Tom
You missed my point I think. My point is by providing a service [or explicit access] such as a HTTP server [or a neighbours key] you're expliciting granting reasonable access.
In the case of a HTTP server by being open to the public you are saying "you may access the server within the scope of a valid HTTP session". If the person didn't want that they would either not run a server or password protect it.
If on the otherhand you exploit a flaw and go outside a valid HTTP session then that would be unauthorized access.
As per another comment... While I agree everyone should patch up their servers I don't agree tjat the burden is on the server admin to make sure they are not broken into. Just because a flaw exists does not give you permission to exploit it.
Tom
Not so cut and dry.
Yahoo for instance doesn't really say "you specifically may use our email services". If I find your email server via google can I now use it?
Also the "should I be doing this?" question comes down to what someone would rationally think.
Generally I'd define "unauthorized access" as circumventing an open protocol. E.g. if I have an FTP open and you hack it to get more access that's unauthorized. However, if I have an open FTP [e.g. no password] and you steal all my files [say I work for some R&D company] than that's not unauthorized.
If people are too stupid *not* to open themselves up to the outside world [e.g. setting up insecure FTP/HTTP/etc servers] than its their own damn fault when people who follow the protocols get access to stuff.
Consider watering plants for a neighbour on vacation. You need access to their home so they give you a key. Suppose though they have a chest which is locked and they didn't give you a key. In this analogy walking into their home would be authorized but breaking the lock on the chest would be unauthorized.
Now replace "walk into house" with "log into server" and "breaking the lock" with "exploiting a flaw" and you're talking digital.
Tom
Admitedly I haven't RTFA but ...
This whole "hacker lifestyle genre" thingy is a bit too dramatizied by the geek wannabes. Go out and actually try to write software that must be supported and updated. That's hardly "movie-worthy" lifestyles that people think is useful.
Put it this way. If I were in a position to hire people I'd only hire those that look down on hackers for the sole reason hackers are not responsible software developers.
TeX and notepad solve different problems you idiot.
.dvi changes so all you have todo is run tex or latex and voila. TextPad allows shortcuts so all I do is hit CTRL+4 then ALT+TAB and I'm set.
TeX is meant for TYPESETTING documents. E.g. papers, books, etc. In those situations you really want to invest the 8 seconds to get it working. BTW the usual way to edit TeX files is to have the tex file open in a text editor and a DVI previewer open as well. Most [yap for instance] will re-draw when the
Notepad is meant for quickly typing out text without much care for formatting.
Why not next tell us how Quake 3 is a really horrible CD burning suite?
Tom