and msn beta I get: 65.54.188.83 (can't find associated domain)
So we can tell that at least this result wasn't stolen from Google.
No we can't, and if you had read the article, you would have known that. They don't steal the results directly from google, but instead they have their spider indexing links which are found from Google.
I found a great use for an old discarded 486 laptop running DOS. It is now dedicated to writing C64 disks thanks to my X1541 cable:-)
Funny, I use an old discarded 486 laptop running DOS to write C64 disks too. The only difference is that I use XE1541 cable:-). The only problem is that the display died the other day.. luckily I have an extra monitor.
Almost all digital camera store EXIF metadata in their jpegs, which contains, among other things, the date the picture was taken. It also contains things such as shutter speed, apature, and whether or not the flash was used. The full spec is available on exif.org here
And from the patent claims:
6. A method according to claim 5, wherein the digitally-encoded time information comprises information recorded according to an EXIF standard.
I suppose this basically means that all our base are now belong to Microsoft.
Most of the space was taken up by getting a good 3 tone palette, where the first was yellow, second orange, and the third red. All of which was discontinuous in the first derivative (thus meaning, you couldn't lump it into one single linear function)
I kind of though so..:-) I also tried to make a nice looking palette, but it always took out a lot of space, so I decided that it was not worth it.
But, this is the world I lived in. OBTW, using hand assembly, I could get 2 bytes out of the code that was machine assembled. I don't know exactly WHY... *shrug*
Interesting. Surely you could take a look at what you did in a different way? My guess is that the machine assembler added some zeros somewhere (in the end maybe, or as a padding?)
I can't measure the quality of the signal on the cable with tcpdump.
This is true, but actually you can't do that on any other software sniffing tool either.
But for dumping raw IP packets and see what's going on at IP or TCP/UDP level, it's excellent.
This is a little bit of understatement. tcpdump is not only excellent on IP or TCP/UDP level, it is also excellent on ethernet and application levels as well. It can print ethernet headers, and it also understands several application level protocols, e.g. SNMP.
What kind of problems are you talking about? On ethernet level? On IP level? On application level?
They all have different approaches, and all have different tools.
Except for tcpdump, which is great on all of those levels.
It was slashdotted BEFORE it appeared on the main page.
No it wasn't. I have not subscribed, and thus could read the story only after it appeared on the main page. I could check the index page and two images before the slashdot effect killed the site.
On the Windows XP Network Client.
Start | Printers and Faxes | Add a Printer | Next | A Network Printer, or Printer attached to another computer | Browse for a Printer
Select the machine the printer is on, select the printer.
Driver get's installed automatically, test page prints, and it just f*ing works.
Err... no. At least not if the Windows XP Network Client is XP Home, which it would be if the user is Aunt Tillie. Believe me, I've been there and done that. Here is what happens:
Drivers get's installed automatically, test page prints, and just f*ing does not work. The test page prints ok, but nothing else. At least if you are using a postscript printer. For some weird reason, the driver does not work if it is installed for a network printer. I don't remember anymore what woodoo I did to make it work, but I'm quite sure Aunt Tillie could not have done it.
I guess I should have mentioned that I almost always run "unstable". I've always been imnpressed with its stability! I've had a down day once in about 10 years due to a bad Debian package.
As Debian turns 10 years next month, I just have to wonder: Have you had your first "down day" yet?
Completely useless marketing crap. Why not at least make it amusing, and set the base really really low. E.g. the Athlon 40,000,000+, where the baseline is an Intel 8086 running at 4Mhz.
Have you ever really tried overclocking an Intel 8086 to 3Ghz? It actually is pretty fast, but as it does not have any protected modes as they arrived in the 386, the only OS it can run is DOS. The dir command however is pretty fast.
I'm migrating the IIS setup to Apache and I see a few differences. With samba shares, it's almost as easy to open a site for editing (\\server\site) but not as intuitive as FrontPage extensions (http://server/site).
Well, FrontPage extensions are available for apache. You can edit the pages using the intuitive http://server/site addresses. So what exactly is your point?
And the difference between the above and an apache box which also serves up its content by samba is? Each "site" has a samba share with appropriate permissions and then your apps can edit the content and save it back up. Best thing is no passwords prompts once you are logged in properly.
Actually, you have a wrong question. The correct one is: "What is the difference between the above and an apache box running moddav?"
Dav allows website editing directly with Microsoft Office, and it also allows website editing directly with just about anything. It is actually created for that purpose. And it is a lot easier to set up and use than samba.
Not that it really matters, we've all said silly things in the past, and relative to 64K, 640K wasn't so bad. Plus there were little utilities that gave you an extra 100-150K, as long as you didn't have a Hercules card or a bulky (IBM) BIOS. This was useful if you used one of those pre-emptive multitasking programs, you could run your BBS in 200K, a DOS shell in 16K, and leave the rest for applications and TSRs.
Did you ever try that? I did, and I can tell you that there just simply was not enough memory to run a BBS, a DOS shell and some applications. You could run a BBS and have a separate DOS shell running, but hardly any applications (I don't think edlin is an application). And what exactly can you do with a dos shell if you can't run any applications with it?
The machine I used for my experiments at that time was a 286 with 1 MB of memory.
Exactly. There's no way I'm going to put this kind of software to my machine without the source available. Not that I would read through the entire source if it was available, but the fact that it isn't makes me think they have something to hide. Perhaps it's a DDOS tool? Perhaps it gives them shell access to my computer?
They say they haven't had TIME to release the source! That's the lamest excuse I've ever heard!
Slashdot Mirror
How did he unpack the gnu tar distribution? *grin*
As you should know, GNU Tar comes in a gzipped shell archive, so tar is not needed for unpacking it. He had to know how to use gunzip though...
Before Google I used Yahoo mostly. AltaVista is much harder to type and Yahoo and Google only need 3 letters to type vs 6.
Actually, AltaVista wins this competition easily: Only two letters are required (a and v).
Using something like FlashBlock will stop this ad from loading. Kill two annoying birds with one stone.
I tried that. The popup window still appears, even thouhg FlashBlock is enabled. Next idea?
Nearly 4.5 years ago I downloaded the boot floppies for Debian Sarge 2.2
No you did not. Debian Sarge has not been released yet. Debian 2.2 was called potato.
and msn beta I get: 65.54.188.83 (can't find associated domain)
So we can tell that at least this result wasn't stolen from Google.
No we can't, and if you had read the article, you would have known that. They don't steal the results directly from google, but instead they have their spider indexing links which are found from Google.
You flip the lenses up.
And look completely ridiculous :-)
I found a great use for an old discarded 486 laptop running DOS. It is now dedicated to writing C64 disks thanks to my X1541 cable :-)
Funny, I use an old discarded 486 laptop running DOS to write C64 disks too. The only difference is that I use XE1541 cable :-). The only problem is that the display died the other day.. luckily I have an extra monitor.
Almost all digital camera store EXIF metadata in their jpegs, which contains, among other things, the date the picture was taken. It also contains things such as shutter speed, apature, and whether or not the flash was used. The full spec is available on exif.org here
And from the patent claims:
6. A method according to claim 5, wherein the digitally-encoded time information comprises information recorded according to an EXIF standard.
I suppose this basically means that all our base are now belong to Microsoft.
Most of the space was taken up by getting a good 3 tone palette, where the first was yellow, second orange, and the third red. All of which was discontinuous in the first derivative (thus meaning, you couldn't lump it into one single linear function)
I kind of though so.. :-) I also tried to make a nice looking palette, but it always took out a lot of space, so I decided that it was not worth it.
But, this is the world I lived in. OBTW, using hand assembly, I could get 2 bytes out of the code that was machine assembled. I don't know exactly WHY... *shrug*
Interesting. Surely you could take a look at what you did in a different way? My guess is that the machine assembler added some zeros somewhere (in the end maybe, or as a padding?)
I personally though, did write a fire program that fit into 220 bytes
You lose. I wrote a BBS ad that fit into 194 bytes. It included a fire effect and some BBS advertising info in text form. :-)
I can't measure the quality of the signal on the cable with tcpdump.
This is true, but actually you can't do that on any other software sniffing tool either.
But for dumping raw IP packets and see what's going on at IP or TCP/UDP level, it's excellent.
This is a little bit of understatement. tcpdump is not only excellent on IP or TCP/UDP level, it is also excellent on ethernet and application levels as well. It can print ethernet headers, and it also understands several application level protocols, e.g. SNMP.
What kind of problems are you talking about? On ethernet level? On IP level? On application level? They all have different approaches, and all have different tools.
Except for tcpdump, which is great on all of those levels.
It was slashdotted BEFORE it appeared on the main page.
No it wasn't. I have not subscribed, and thus could read the story only after it appeared on the main page. I could check the index page and two images before the slashdot effect killed the site.
On the Windows XP Network Client. Start | Printers and Faxes | Add a Printer | Next | A Network Printer, or Printer attached to another computer | Browse for a Printer Select the machine the printer is on, select the printer. Driver get's installed automatically, test page prints, and it just f*ing works.
Err... no. At least not if the Windows XP Network Client is XP Home, which it would be if the user is Aunt Tillie. Believe me, I've been there and done that. Here is what happens:
Drivers get's installed automatically, test page prints, and just f*ing does not work. The test page prints ok, but nothing else. At least if you are using a postscript printer. For some weird reason, the driver does not work if it is installed for a network printer. I don't remember anymore what woodoo I did to make it work, but I'm quite sure Aunt Tillie could not have done it.
Does this mean OpenOffice is possibly a violation of the DMCA?
It most definitely is. But then again, what isn't?
Hey - I use 1991 keyboard with my dual Opteron database server :)
My home server has 1987 keyboard :). It also has a floppy drive from the same year..
I guess I should have mentioned that I almost always run "unstable". I've always been imnpressed with its stability! I've had a down day once in about 10 years due to a bad Debian package.
As Debian turns 10 years next month, I just have to wonder: Have you had your first "down day" yet?
Completely useless marketing crap. Why not at least make it amusing, and set the base really really low. E.g. the Athlon 40,000,000+, where the baseline is an Intel 8086 running at 4Mhz.
Have you ever really tried overclocking an Intel 8086 to 3Ghz? It actually is pretty fast, but as it does not have any protected modes as they arrived in the 386, the only OS it can run is DOS. The dir command however is pretty fast.
I'm migrating the IIS setup to Apache and I see a few differences. With samba shares, it's almost as easy to open a site for editing (\\server\site) but not as intuitive as FrontPage extensions (http://server/site).
Well, FrontPage extensions are available for apache. You can edit the pages using the intuitive http://server/site addresses. So what exactly is your point?
And the difference between the above and an apache box which also serves up its content by samba is? Each "site" has a samba share with appropriate permissions and then your apps can edit the content and save it back up. Best thing is no passwords prompts once you are logged in properly.
Actually, you have a wrong question. The correct one is: "What is the difference between the above and an apache box running moddav?"
Dav allows website editing directly with Microsoft Office, and it also allows website editing directly with just about anything. It is actually created for that purpose. And it is a lot easier to set up and use than samba.
Not that it really matters, we've all said silly things in the past, and relative to 64K, 640K wasn't so bad. Plus there were little utilities that gave you an extra 100-150K, as long as you didn't have a Hercules card or a bulky (IBM) BIOS. This was useful if you used one of those pre-emptive multitasking programs, you could run your BBS in 200K, a DOS shell in 16K, and leave the rest for applications and TSRs.
Did you ever try that? I did, and I can tell you that there just simply was not enough memory to run a BBS, a DOS shell and some applications. You could run a BBS and have a separate DOS shell running, but hardly any applications (I don't think edlin is an application). And what exactly can you do with a dos shell if you can't run any applications with it?
The machine I used for my experiments at that time was a 286 with 1 MB of memory.
Now is certainly not the time to put WiFi in planes.
How come? How can they know that the stuff does not make them any money if they don't try it?
if you are paying for Star Office, why not pay for MS Office, especially if it runs on Linux ?
Because it's a lot more expensive? Because MS does not contribute anything to the open source community?
IceWM will do just fine on 2.2, and I think Opera will as well (but don't quote me on Opera).
I can confirm that Opera does indeed work just fine with a 2.2 series kernel. As does practically everything.
Where's the source, Luke?
Exactly. There's no way I'm going to put this kind of software to my machine without the source available. Not that I would read through the entire source if it was available, but the fact that it isn't makes me think they have something to hide. Perhaps it's a DDOS tool? Perhaps it gives them shell access to my computer?
They say they haven't had TIME to release the source! That's the lamest excuse I've ever heard!