This compound is used in many areas where holding water is important. It's used in transport of seedlings to provide a water reservoir and keep them moist. It's used in diapers. It's used in many creative areas to absorb and hold water.
When TF2 has critical bugs that are still in it after 7 years and issues like the Strange PDA Engie Upgrade Bug that has been in the product for over a year, it amazes me that these guys are still going.
It just looks like they are running by the skin of their teeth since there are FREQUENT issues that are dangerous as hell or that stay in the product for ages.
Every new release of TF2 seems to add new bugs and they spend more time putting in new hats than fixing outstanding issues. This reeks of shitty software development.
That's actually why I decided to use it. Faster compile times.
OS X hits the disk so often, that I moved my user environment on to the RAM drive.
Even with 1066 MHz RAM, I would get instant build times as the swap files were now in RAM.
That when compared to 30 second build times are a trade off I'm willing to make.
And losing my contents? That's what rsync is for. And that's what back up batteries are for. My RAM drive is rsynched to an SSD partition. Happens in the background every 5 mins. I never see the impact.
So, yeah. Swap files on the RAM Disk. Insane speed as a result. Disk backed up to an SSD. Battery backup (laptops have batteries too, don't they?) Never a problem.
Well, shame on me. I've been doing it for 3 years on a daily basis.
I have my RAM drive rsynched to an SSD partition that is the same-ish size.
And here's one area where you're incorrect. Safari loads web pages. Each page loads javascript. Many of these leak over time or simply never purge their contents. I often end up with 8 GB used in Safari. Safari alone is a citizen that doesn't play by these rules because each page that loads is a prisoner of the javascript that loads and often doesn't handle memory freeing properly.
When I use my RAM as a drive, I get near INSTANT builds on OS X.
This matters to me more than your claims of "all modern operating systems taking full advantage of the RAM". If the operating system takes full advantage of the RAM, it may not be to my best benefit.
For example, Apple apps now by default do not quit when you close the last document. They merely stay in memory, hide the UI and then need to be relaunched to enable the UI again. Why does this matter? For TextEdit, if I want to open a document form the open menu if I close the last document and click elsewhere, this forces me to reopen the app because the OS fake closes the app (really only hiding the UI) while the rest of the app stays memory resident.
So, I have to relaunch the app. This takes more time and ONLY just renables the UI. How much memory does this save on my 32 GB machine? 1 MB. Now, that's certainly not taking full advantage of the RAM. It's a case of the OS designers thinking that "he wanted to quit the app, so we'll do it for him". But I didn't want to quit the app. The computer is not taking full advantage of the RAM in this case. That's not what I wanted it to do.
Maybe I have apps in the background that are doing stuff, but I want them to pause completely if another app is running in the foreground. Maybe I want ALL Safari pages to suspend their javascript when in the background, but the app still can still process downloads as if it's running at normal priority.
See, there are many cases where the computer's OS will not take proper advantage of the RAM and the processing power since it can not mirror the user's intentions. Even in cases where it tries to, it often gets them wrong. And in some cases where it does (Safari javascript), the computer ends up eating processing power and RAM for tasks that the user doesn't want it to be placing priority on. And in some of these cases, it can't allocate RAM and processing power properly, because it can't if it relies on other programmers writing their javascript competently and acting as good citizens.
I can cordon off a small chunk of my computer's RAM (since I have way more than enough) and direct it to do pretty damn much just want I want it to do.
That's why I bought it. I don't want the OS to prioritize things the way it wants to. I want to tell (parts of) the OS to prioritize things the way I want it to.
The problem with American TV is that it does nothing to help advance society in an interesting way. It's all about "look at this car crash/hillbilly! It's so terrible! Can you believe that?!"
Slashdot Mirror
The immensity of her forehead frightens me.
Holy shit. Whedon would have been beyond perfect.
That man is a genius and he is the genius we need for thie franchise.
This compound is used in many areas where holding water is important. It's used in transport of seedlings to provide a water reservoir and keep them moist. It's used in diapers. It's used in many creative areas to absorb and hold water.
That approach makes temp files pretty impossible to use.
My comment that addresses point B seems to be right below this one.
I vote B.
When TF2 has critical bugs that are still in it after 7 years and issues like the Strange PDA Engie Upgrade Bug that has been in the product for over a year, it amazes me that these guys are still going.
It just looks like they are running by the skin of their teeth since there are FREQUENT issues that are dangerous as hell or that stay in the product for ages.
Every new release of TF2 seems to add new bugs and they spend more time putting in new hats than fixing outstanding issues. This reeks of shitty software development.
As in subject.
doesn't mean that it will.
It's the same thing with the million monkeys concept. You're going to get a bunch of smashed keys and poop on the keyboard, not several great novels.
True randomness will not produce specified output. Sure, it "could", but in reality, it won't.
And it appears this happens every time Republicans get into office.
When will they learn that science research == business development?
that was published in 2010.
Look at the last link in the post. It's from March 9, 2010.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...
That's actually why I decided to use it. Faster compile times.
OS X hits the disk so often, that I moved my user environment on to the RAM drive.
Even with 1066 MHz RAM, I would get instant build times as the swap files were now in RAM.
That when compared to 30 second build times are a trade off I'm willing to make.
And losing my contents? That's what rsync is for. And that's what back up batteries are for. My RAM drive is rsynched to an SSD partition. Happens in the background every 5 mins. I never see the impact.
So, yeah. Swap files on the RAM Disk. Insane speed as a result. Disk backed up to an SSD. Battery backup (laptops have batteries too, don't they?) Never a problem.
Well, shame on me. I've been doing it for 3 years on a daily basis.
I have my RAM drive rsynched to an SSD partition that is the same-ish size.
And here's one area where you're incorrect. Safari loads web pages. Each page loads javascript. Many of these leak over time or simply never purge their contents. I often end up with 8 GB used in Safari. Safari alone is a citizen that doesn't play by these rules because each page that loads is a prisoner of the javascript that loads and often doesn't handle memory freeing properly.
When I use my RAM as a drive, I get near INSTANT builds on OS X.
This matters to me more than your claims of "all modern operating systems taking full advantage of the RAM". If the operating system takes full advantage of the RAM, it may not be to my best benefit.
For example, Apple apps now by default do not quit when you close the last document. They merely stay in memory, hide the UI and then need to be relaunched to enable the UI again. Why does this matter? For TextEdit, if I want to open a document form the open menu if I close the last document and click elsewhere, this forces me to reopen the app because the OS fake closes the app (really only hiding the UI) while the rest of the app stays memory resident.
So, I have to relaunch the app. This takes more time and ONLY just renables the UI. How much memory does this save on my 32 GB machine? 1 MB. Now, that's certainly not taking full advantage of the RAM. It's a case of the OS designers thinking that "he wanted to quit the app, so we'll do it for him". But I didn't want to quit the app. The computer is not taking full advantage of the RAM in this case. That's not what I wanted it to do.
Maybe I have apps in the background that are doing stuff, but I want them to pause completely if another app is running in the foreground. Maybe I want ALL Safari pages to suspend their javascript when in the background, but the app still can still process downloads as if it's running at normal priority.
See, there are many cases where the computer's OS will not take proper advantage of the RAM and the processing power since it can not mirror the user's intentions. Even in cases where it tries to, it often gets them wrong. And in some cases where it does (Safari javascript), the computer ends up eating processing power and RAM for tasks that the user doesn't want it to be placing priority on. And in some of these cases, it can't allocate RAM and processing power properly, because it can't if it relies on other programmers writing their javascript competently and acting as good citizens.
I can cordon off a small chunk of my computer's RAM (since I have way more than enough) and direct it to do pretty damn much just want I want it to do.
That's why I bought it. I don't want the OS to prioritize things the way it wants to. I want to tell (parts of) the OS to prioritize things the way I want it to.
Cheers.
Then max out the RAM and create a RAM drive.
On my 2010 iMac, I have a 16 GB RAM drive that gets between 3 and 4 GB/s and still have 16 GB of RAM available for my apps.
Check this terminal command out before entering it just to be safe.
diskutil erasevolume HFS+ 'RAM Disk' `hdiutil attach -nomount ram://33554432`
Under Mac OS 10.6.8, and 10.9 the above creates a 17 GB RAM disk.
diskutil erasevolume HFS+ 'RAM Disk' `hdiutil attach -nomount ram://8388608`
This creates a 4.27 GB RAM disk. Enjoy the speed.
If I pay to be in an HOA, I wouldn't want to see that type of junk in front of a house in my neighborhood.
They might love it for all the world, but there's no guarantee that their neighbors would want to be seeing it, or even know what it is.
Because people are inherently tribal. We want to associate with our own group and exclude people we feel do not fit well within our group.
It's everyday* tasks, not every day tasks.
Everyday is an adjective meaning commonplace.
That's what makes it "compelling" TV people think there must be SOMETHING, what will these people find? Will they find it? Must tune in again!
That's what networks want more than anything.
Honestly, that's what I called it too.
The problem with American TV is that it does nothing to help advance society in an interesting way. It's all about "look at this car crash/hillbilly! It's so terrible! Can you believe that?!"
Haven't most all of the cable TV channels turned into pure sensationalist shit?
And the UI now looks like ass. Animated everything. Glaring colors. It's pretty terrible.
I hate what the Mac and iOS operating systems have become.
Jony Ive should never be allowed to touch a user interface ever again.
Do you also own cat?
You use *an* SSD.
the companies wouldn't have an incentive to do that.
Drobo?
I bought one, used it for a few years and then bought an enterprise version. Then I returned the enterprise version.
The only way I could sum them up is "slow-bo".
On my 4 drive Drobo, the transfer speed is a function of the speed of the speed of one of the drives divided by 4. It's pretty terrible.
You're only being a pedant if you're rubbing it in someone's face.
What you are doing is making sure that people's claims are accurate and that is a service to all involved in the discussion.
Why?
Can you explain this to me like I'm 5?