One flaw I found in the article is that they say you need two drives, both containing an OS. Later they ask you to swap out one of them for another drive with an OS. That whole section sounds like smoke and mirrors. If this extra space really exists, why do you have to "trick" the OS into believing it is there? I was expecting some mention of a low level format at least, but there's no way this will work. I'll bet the didn't do any data integrity tests which would no doubt show right away the flaw in their system. Oh well, who needs proof if you're just storing appz and mp3s.
Specifically I'm referring to the business about every page Google has indexed necessarily being in memory simultaneously.
Assuming this information is close to what Google is running today, your suspicions are warranted:
Google's data structures are optimized so that a large document collection can be crawled, indexed, and searched with little cost. Although, CPUs and bulk input output rates have improved dramatically over the years, a disk seek still requires about 10 ms to complete. Google is designed to avoid disk seeks whenever possible, and this has had a considerable influence on the design of the data structures.
... This design decision was driven by the desire to have a reasonably compact data structure, and the ability to fetch a record in one disk seek during a search
... This batch mode of update is crucial because otherwise we must perform one seek for every link which assuming one disk would take more than a month for our 322 million link dataset.
Kodak's oldest patent in the matter was granted in 1991. The most recent, awarded in 2003, was for a device and method for capturing and selecting digital images to be printed.
When I first saw this story I thought "jeez, another idiotic patent was issued" but then I saw Kodak's patent (in the quote). WTF kind of patent is that? Sounds like they're having a "stupid patent" war, and the industry sure as hell won't win no matter what their settlement.
You don't have to be crass to be one who 'cuts the crap'. You don't have to build walls around your emotions and put on a fake toughness to be 'real'. You haven't answered for yourself why you don't care about love. You've never felt TRUE love if you feel like you don't need it. Or you've been badly hurt because of love. Talk to people and you'll find that your experience with your old friends is not uncommon: people grow apart. Find new friends. Anyway, what's wrong with compromise? Do you want a license to be a jerk? Or can you let people help you improve as a person? Dig down deep and ask lots of questions, talk to lots of people. What you've described on the surface - the picture you are trying to paint for us - is not the whole picture (not that it's our business). Everybody's needs are different, and if I came off sounding like everybody's needs should match mine, then let me correct that right now. This goes both ways, so don't label me someone who doesn't know what he wants just because I don't want what you want.
It doesn't work that way for some kids (or adults). They are not missing out on the particular social items you mention in the slightest - because they have no interest in them.
That's true, which is why I mention "Maybe you need a good friend to take you out on the town or out to a new group of friends." Sometimes you need someone to show you a good time so you know what you're missing. I realize it may not be that simple in your son's case, but I believe this generally applies to anyone.
You got drunk off 9 bottles of Coors Light? Do you have a liver disorder or something?
There's only one reasonable explanation I can think of: He must have funnelled all nine of them at once while spinning around and around right after hanging inverted for 30 minutes on a ship in rough seas.
Of course, he could have miscounted. I took out my calculator and _still_ got it fsckin wrong!
Sure you can get away with being a nerd/geek for a long time, but in the end a balanced life is the most sustainable. The hard part is, it's hard to actually have a balanced life. If you don't have a significant other, then that part is missing. If you don't have friends who like to do what you like to do, then that part is missing. If you don't have a job, same thing. Of course there are other areas you probably like to have.
So if you don't have a certain one of these things, then ask yourself why. Is there something you can do about it. Do you care. If not, why. If not, make sure it's not because you think you can't have one of those things. Once you decide you want to make a change, decide how. Is there something you can stop doing or start doing that will help make it happen. Or maybe you have to go somewhere like a (gulp) night club or gym or supermarket or just for a walk. Maybe you need to hang out with a new crowd. Maybe you need a good friend to take you out on the town or out to a new group of friends.
Anyhow, it's all out there. You just need to find your reason for doing something about it.
In some (or many?) places it is illegal to ride a bicycle with earphones on. Is there a safe and legal alternative besides fixating an open air personal stereo to your handlebars? I'd love to listen to music while I cycle.
The remaining larger manufacturers still design and develop new cars. Innovation still happens (e.g. hybrids).
I think you're missing the original argument. Only those with deep pockets (like Microsoft) could function with regulation. Now you're talking about huge car manufacturers with deep pockets. Car makers have been the target of huge class action lawsuits costing them hundreds of millions of dollars. How hard would it be for a small independent to start cranking out cars? Probably not too darn easy.
As far as safety concerns, I'm pretty sure there *are* laws in place for critical systems which could affect people's safety and lives. Notice how some software says "not to be used for mission critical tasks such as military, medical, a nuclear reactor, etc..."?
In other words, if my instant messenger crashes, big deal. I'll find another one if I have to. If my car's braking system fails, well that's another thing altogether.
Re:Prediction about "social network software"
on
ICQ Universe
·
· Score: 1
My hunch is that the more people know about each other, the less they will care about that information.
A person can only intake so much information. Desensitization will play a factor in people caring less about other's raw data. Maybe it will help us look at each other in a different light: what has this person accomplished with their life and who has this person helped or hurt? Rather than do they drink a 12 pack twice a week or speed sometimes being used to paint a picture of the person. On the other hand, maybe it would inspire a new one-upmanship amongst people who want attention. It could raise the bar on what you need to do to get attention in all that data.
It occurs to me that Linux's major sore points have to do mostly with input and output. A computer's purpose is to process information. To do that, you need to get the data in. After processing, you want to get the information out. In = keyboard, scanner, digital camera, sound card, etc. Out = printer, fax, cdrw, and so on. Linux is lacking in easy to use support for many input and output devices. Perhaps the problem is that most Linux developers are more concerned with what is already on the machine - the source code tree - than with actually doing something with their wonderful creation. If source code could only be compiled through a printer's CPU, you can bet there would be damn good printer support. If source code could only be tweaked using OCR'd text input from a scanner, you can bet there would be great scanner support. Think about it.
There's a lot of talk about 'information wants to be free' which is basically bullshit. Information doesn't actually want anything. It doesn't have the squishy bits made of meat that you need to be able to 'want' something.
They're constantly trying to talk you down on salary. The first communication he'll indicate the job is paying between $20 and $25 an hour based on relavant experience
Why not just specify how much money you want in your resume? That should help weed out low-ballers.
With all of the R&D monies and brainpower thrown at the scientific priciples behind something like splitting an atom, you'd like to think the same brilliance would be applied to it's applications.
When the phrase "we have confidence" or its variations are used in a public statement, I usually discount the rest of the statement as corporate BS. Of course they're going to say they are confident. But are they?
How about coming up with something a little less cut and dry and more off the cuff convincing like "we are unwavering in our committment to seeing this through. We have studied all of our options and we are throwing 100% of our weight behind this decision". Anyway, just a pet peeve.:)
It is the reason why even if we all fucked until we were all one color there would still be "hate crimes."
People hate each other over what brand of car they drive, which side of town they live on, their choice of text editor and their fasion sense.
And people will always find something else to differentiate themselves from others. Humans are great at categorizing things, but it also plays us against ourselves because we see differences and then try to fit ourselves into the range of things, good or bad. Everyone wants to feel good about themselves, perhaps superior to many. Categorization allows us to do that easily.
BUT.. notice when there is a huge disaster or a common enemy how we shift our categorical thinking. We re-categorize in light of what is important at that time. What people are wearing is irrelevant if someone is running after a crowd with a gun. But once that threat is gone, people automatically seek out new things. Perhaps it is nature's way of keeping us active. Maybe a way of introducing uniqueness and randomization into everyone's lives. The only way to randomize is from an outside source. But anyway...
It's just amazing how much space and matter is out there. Seeing these pictures makes me wonder, though, what would the universe look with 1000 times as wide of a picture? What if we could take that massive picture every hour and view it in high speed over a million year timeframe? Is there some much large system that all these galaxies are orbiting around?
in the solaris shop we had a dramatic failure of a storedge sena array. i called the sun support line and a guy in tweed jacket was at my door in 40 minutes...
in the linux shop i made a web support request for a very simple question... i logged that request twelve days ago and it's still listed as "awaiting technician".
You must admit that these two issues are *very* different in severity. Try logging a failure of a similar magnitude with Red Hat and report your results back for an apples to apples comparison.
Re:Only so much carbon...
on
Space Burial
·
· Score: 1
besides, everything gets recycled and churned in the Earth's core eventually anyway
Well, that's a mighty big "eventually". We're still digging up dinosaur bones from hundreds of millions or billions of years ago. How long will it take that layer to get into the core, if ever?
Slashdot Mirror
One flaw I found in the article is that they say you need two drives, both containing an OS. Later they ask you to swap out one of them for another drive with an OS. That whole section sounds like smoke and mirrors.
If this extra space really exists, why do you have to "trick" the OS into believing it is there? I was expecting some mention of a low level format at least, but there's no way this will work. I'll bet the didn't do any data integrity tests which would no doubt show right away the flaw in their system. Oh well, who needs proof if you're just storing appz and mp3s.
Assuming this information is close to what Google is running today, your suspicions are warranted:
Kodak's oldest patent in the matter was granted in 1991. The most recent, awarded in 2003, was for a device and method for capturing and selecting digital images to be printed.
When I first saw this story I thought "jeez, another idiotic patent was issued" but then I saw Kodak's patent (in the quote). WTF kind of patent is that? Sounds like they're having a "stupid patent" war, and the industry sure as hell won't win no matter what their settlement.
You don't have to be crass to be one who 'cuts the crap'. You don't have to build walls around your emotions and put on a fake toughness to be 'real'. You haven't answered for yourself why you don't care about love. You've never felt TRUE love if you feel like you don't need it. Or you've been badly hurt because of love. Talk to people and you'll find that your experience with your old friends is not uncommon: people grow apart. Find new friends. Anyway, what's wrong with compromise? Do you want a license to be a jerk? Or can you let people help you improve as a person? Dig down deep and ask lots of questions, talk to lots of people. What you've described on the surface - the picture you are trying to paint for us - is not the whole picture (not that it's our business).
Everybody's needs are different, and if I came off sounding like everybody's needs should match mine, then let me correct that right now. This goes both ways, so don't label me someone who doesn't know what he wants just because I don't want what you want.
It doesn't work that way for some kids (or adults). They are not missing out on the particular social items you mention in the slightest - because they have no interest in them.
That's true, which is why I mention "Maybe you need a good friend to take you out on the town or out to a new group of friends." Sometimes you need someone to show you a good time so you know what you're missing. I realize it may not be that simple in your son's case, but I believe this generally applies to anyone.
You got drunk off 9 bottles of Coors Light? Do you have a liver disorder or something?
There's only one reasonable explanation I can think of: He must have funnelled all nine of them at once while spinning around and around right after hanging inverted for 30 minutes on a ship in rough seas.
Of course, he could have miscounted. I took out my calculator and _still_ got it fsckin wrong!
Sure you can get away with being a nerd/geek for a long time, but in the end a balanced life is the most sustainable. The hard part is, it's hard to actually have a balanced life. If you don't have a significant other, then that part is missing. If you don't have friends who like to do what you like to do, then that part is missing. If you don't have a job, same thing. Of course there are other areas you probably like to have.
So if you don't have a certain one of these things, then ask yourself why. Is there something you can do about it. Do you care. If not, why. If not, make sure it's not because you think you can't have one of those things. Once you decide you want to make a change, decide how. Is there something you can stop doing or start doing that will help make it happen. Or maybe you have to go somewhere like a (gulp) night club or gym or supermarket or just for a walk. Maybe you need to hang out with a new crowd. Maybe you need a good friend to take you out on the town or out to a new group of friends.
Anyhow, it's all out there. You just need to find your reason for doing something about it.
In some (or many?) places it is illegal to ride a bicycle with earphones on. Is there a safe and legal alternative besides fixating an open air personal stereo to your handlebars? I'd love to listen to music while I cycle.
The remaining larger manufacturers still design and develop new cars. Innovation still happens (e.g. hybrids).
I think you're missing the original argument. Only those with deep pockets (like Microsoft) could function with regulation. Now you're talking about huge car manufacturers with deep pockets. Car makers have been the target of huge class action lawsuits costing them hundreds of millions of dollars. How hard would it be for a small independent to start cranking out cars? Probably not too darn easy.
As far as safety concerns, I'm pretty sure there *are* laws in place for critical systems which could affect people's safety and lives. Notice how some software says "not to be used for mission critical tasks such as military, medical, a nuclear reactor, etc..."?
In other words, if my instant messenger crashes, big deal. I'll find another one if I have to. If my car's braking system fails, well that's another thing altogether.
My hunch is that the more people know about each other, the less they will care about that information.
A person can only intake so much information. Desensitization will play a factor in people caring less about other's raw data. Maybe it will help us look at each other in a different light: what has this person accomplished with their life and who has this person helped or hurt? Rather than do they drink a 12 pack twice a week or speed sometimes being used to paint a picture of the person. On the other hand, maybe it would inspire a new one-upmanship amongst people who want attention. It could raise the bar on what you need to do to get attention in all that data.
Ha! You should see what happened when I put my /tinfoil hat/ in the microwave!
Every Xbox failure I've ever heard of or read about is a failure of the DVD drive.
I'm not surprised. I can't read half my blank CDs in the thing when trying to input music for the games. Not too good.
Re: hackability, I'm pretty sure the money Microsoft loses due to people hacking the box and not buying games is very negligible.
It occurs to me that Linux's major sore points have to do mostly with input and output. A computer's purpose is to process information. To do that, you need to get the data in. After processing, you want to get the information out. In = keyboard, scanner, digital camera, sound card, etc. Out = printer, fax, cdrw, and so on.
Linux is lacking in easy to use support for many input and output devices. Perhaps the problem is that most Linux developers are more concerned with what is already on the machine - the source code tree - than with actually doing something with their wonderful creation. If source code could only be compiled through a printer's CPU, you can bet there would be damn good printer support. If source code could only be tweaked using OCR'd text input from a scanner, you can bet there would be great scanner support. Think about it.
Could this be a sign of the beginning of the end of spam?
Could this be a sign of the beginning of the end of Sendmail? Not an easy answer, but worth thinking about.
If I were the ISP, I would just not keep logs. Then there's nothing to turn over, right?
As an ISP, you are required by law to keep all logs. If you don't, you're in (thick accent)"veddy veddy deep shit".
Try cAos. Basically Red Hat enterprise version but not built by Red Hat, if I understand correctly.
There's a lot of talk about 'information wants to be free' which is basically bullshit. Information doesn't actually want anything. It doesn't have the squishy bits made of meat that you need to be able to 'want' something.
Look up the word personification.
They're constantly trying to talk you down on salary. The first communication he'll indicate the job is paying between $20 and $25 an hour based on relavant experience
Why not just specify how much money you want in your resume? That should help weed out low-ballers.
With all of the R&D monies and brainpower thrown at the scientific priciples behind something like splitting an atom, you'd like to think the same brilliance would be applied to it's applications.
Well said!
When the phrase "we have confidence" or its variations are used in a public statement, I usually discount the rest of the statement as corporate BS. Of course they're going to say they are confident. But are they?
:)
How about coming up with something a little less cut and dry and more off the cuff convincing like "we are unwavering in our committment to seeing this through. We have studied all of our options and we are throwing 100% of our weight behind this decision". Anyway, just a pet peeve.
It is the reason why even if we all fucked until we were all one color there would still be "hate crimes."
People hate each other over what brand of car they drive, which side of town they live on, their choice of text editor and their fasion sense.
And people will always find something else to differentiate themselves from others. Humans are great at categorizing things, but it also plays us against ourselves because we see differences and then try to fit ourselves into the range of things, good or bad. Everyone wants to feel good about themselves, perhaps superior to many. Categorization allows us to do that easily.
BUT.. notice when there is a huge disaster or a common enemy how we shift our categorical thinking. We re-categorize in light of what is important at that time. What people are wearing is irrelevant if someone is running after a crowd with a gun. But once that threat is gone, people automatically seek out new things. Perhaps it is nature's way of keeping us active. Maybe a way of introducing uniqueness and randomization into everyone's lives. The only way to randomize is from an outside source. But anyway...
It's just amazing how much space and matter is out there. Seeing these pictures makes me wonder, though, what would the universe look with 1000 times as wide of a picture? What if we could take that massive picture every hour and view it in high speed over a million year timeframe? Is there some much large system that all these galaxies are orbiting around?
How you do anything is how you do everything
Do you wipe your ass as fervently as you make love to your wife?
in the solaris shop we had a dramatic failure of a storedge sena array. i called the sun support line and a guy in tweed jacket was at my door in 40 minutes ...
... i logged that request twelve days ago and it's still listed as "awaiting technician".
in the linux shop i made a web support request for a very simple question
You must admit that these two issues are *very* different in severity. Try logging a failure of a similar magnitude with Red Hat and report your results back for an apples to apples comparison.
besides, everything gets recycled and churned in the Earth's core eventually anyway
Well, that's a mighty big "eventually". We're still digging up dinosaur bones from hundreds of millions or billions of years ago. How long will it take that layer to get into the core, if ever?