You could get the same result by putting a malloc or fork call in a while(1) loop
No you could not. First of all, malloc does not reserve any memory, until you USE that memory. You can happily malloc in a while loop and no one would notice. Finally the malloc would fail when your process had requested the maximum amount of memory allowed for a single process
What if you used that memory in a while loop as well? That would be slightly worse: This time the memory would be really reserved and after a while you would run out of memory. However, this is not really a problem, unless you are using a buggy v2.4 kernel. Your process just gets killed, that's all.
Forking however can bring your machine down, at least for a short while.
The power regulation of the 2.4GHz band in Europe is severely limiting the growth of community access wireless networks[1]. The UK currently has additional regulation[2] which also disallows ISPs from making commercial use of the band.
Yes, you are right about the fact that this system would be illegal in Europe. However, I'd like to point out that there are restrictions in the US as well. The limit there is 1 W if I recall it correctly; It's a lot more than in Europe, but it's a limit anyway...
Sure OpenSSH will protect you when you log into your *nix box. But what happens when you go to get your POP mail from your ISP? You send out your password in plaintext and then your mail is completely vulnerable.
What? You STILL use unencrypted POP mail? I think all the major mail servers support POP/IMAP over SSL. Get it now.
You can easily cut your response time down by holding the second button half way down until the color changes and then letting the button up. I got.16 in just a couple tries. The button event is registered on mouseup.
Or simply by pressing the button on random times. I clicked on it a few times, and got 0.029 seconds:-)
System Bandwidth 3200: 11.2 Gigabytes/sec 3400: 44.8 GB/sec 3800: 716 GB/sec ...methinks they skipped a decimal point here.
No they haven't. See: 3200 has max 2 processor bricks, 5.6GB/sec, 2-4 processor each. 3400 has max 8 such bricks, which gives 44.8 GB/sec. 3800 can have 128 such units, which sums up to 716.8 GB/sec.
And they certainly won't stop using them while driving.
Actually, here in Finland people just might stop using them while driving, or at least reduce using them. There is a new law coming which will make it illegal to use a mobile phone while driving if it doesn't have the "hands free" option. Of course, not everyone obeys laws...
Go ahead and check the web page of the project - it seems quite dead.
It was definitely not a success, the challenge obviously never even took place! That's quite sad actually, It would really be entertaining watching those bots chatting..
in fact, I have my own issue with that code. The for loop should read: for(i = 0; i < count; ++i)
Yep. The original coder probably thought that using ++i instead of the "standard" i++ would somehow magically make the increase happen before the loop and the test.
There are some phones which allow you to do that. Nokia Communicator is one of those if I remember right. One dude had a yell as his ring tone, freely translated as "Come on you fucking dork, answer the phone!":-) --
isn't Linux much better than BSD? Plus, this is a Linux site. Let the BSD guys get their own forum...if there are enough of them.
This sounds like a troll, but what the heck, I don't have anything else to do so I'll reply..:-) Since when has Slashdot been "a Linux site"? Slashdot is "news for nerds" imho. Linux is just a part of it.
Or at least that they would say in the README file what libraries and versions the software needs. IT really stinks that they only say "Red Hat 6.0". And the player says "segmentation fault". Argh. --
Why must you assume that GUI configuration is mutually exclusive with manually editable configuration files? It seems to me that if the program can read its configuration from a text file, it ought to be able to properly write to it. Yes, that definitely ought to be the case. It just happens to be so that it isn't:-/ If the programs used for the configurations were the same as the ones using the configurations everything would work (imho). Unfortunately the software which are used for configuration (those GUIs that is) are rarely 100% aware of every little thing that can be done in the configuration files. --
Well, we both know what most Linux users (yes, me included) thinks about this, so I'm not going to even start about this;-)
2. GUI configuration of system.
This would probably be good for novice users. Fortunately there are some utils to do this (take a look at the current distributions). Unfortunately they usually don't know everything; if I make some modifications on the configuration files myself, they won't work any longer as they are supposed to. I think it's good to have manually editable configuration files; what will happen if my monitor explodes and I only have some dumb terminal to use for configuring?
3. Target audience for most apps.
Working on this:-P
1. First, it is fine to have different window managers. Just make them at least independently consistent. The obvious example - cut and paste, different in every situation and exteremely frustrating and inefficient.
What on earth are you talking about? Using the middle button works in 99% of Linux applications (I just wish StarOffice starts supporting it), and it's a lot faster than the Microsoft way.
3. Linux developers target their apps for a Linux Savvy audience. Bugs are expected, bad interfaces with nasty widgets are expected and in most cases a compile is expected. Most computer users don't know what "compile" means.
I strongly disagree. Bugs are not expected. Hey, take a look at the MS world, and tell me, which MS software doesn't have bugs? I don't think Linux software is any worse (perhaps not any better too, but Open Sourcing help fixing those bugs faster). I also disagree on the interface thing. Could you give me a clue on what software are you talking about?. You're probably not surprised when I tell you that I disagree on the compilation thing too. First of all, most of the Linux software is nowadays available as precompiled binaries too. But hey, I don't use them anyway. Why? Because I like the fact that the software is compiled using the optimizations for MY hardware, not someone elses. Also I might not need every gadget that might be compiled in and bloats the software. If I could compile Netscape myself (hey, I can compile mozilla! ) I'd leave more than 50% out (if I could do that using the configure script). So: Compilation is not a bad thing, but it's not required any longer anyway
Try again... the access point is a layer 2 (MAC layer) bridge. Unless you want the access point to roam between IP subnets, you wouldn't load it with a Mobile IP client.
Exactly at which point did I say anything about loading the access point with a Mobile IP client? --
Some funky things also can be done with multiple access points, but I'm not quite sure what they are. I think they end up just being able to bridge together multiple wireless nets, which isn't a big deal if you are ok with changing your IP address when you roam from one net to another.
Repeat after me: M o b i l e I P, Mobile IP. Just install a good Mobile IP software to your "access points" and forget about the changing IP..
It's nice to have a survey which might be useful for someone every now and then. It's been a long time since the last one. Usually the questions / alternatives are at least nonsence, if not total garbage. This time all the questions were "answerable". There were only a small number of questions which didn't have enough choices (like the KDE / GNOME - hey, I don't use either one of them!). Anyway, the general feeling of this questionnaire was rather nice, and I'm glad if my answers can help Borland. Nice job, and it becomes nicer if they really can use the stats gathered. --
Of course viruses exist for Linux. Except they're called Trojans, and there are relatively easy ways to keep them out: check source, compile source especially for anything suid root. Or trust your distro.
Well, there you are wrong. There exist real viruses for Linux. They are not trojans and some of them even look for security holes in other computer so that they can break into them. Some links to the most "famous" ones: Bliss Staog
If I'm not mistaken I believe that even though the RSA patents expire later this year, the US export restrictions are still in effect. (However they did change them a month ago)
Yes, they are. And they still mean practically nothing. So, we living outside US must get our strong enctrypting plugins for netscape from somewhere else than US. So, we have to get our encrypting zip/unzip:s from outside US. Who cares? --
"Kevin Mitnick has been imprisoned by the U.S. Government for: 4 years, 11 months, 6 days, 12 hours, 12 minutes, 55 seconds Kevin Mitnick will be released from prison in: 11 months, 30 days, 19 hours, 14 minutes, 8 seconds" Y2K bug still alive and well huh?
Well, just take a look at the source.. It's a complete mess. I quess it would show the "right amount of time" about 50% of time.. --
Interestingly enough, the 150kbit/s stream (which actually seems to be 80kbit/s though;-) works just fine with me. Looks like that site has quite a good amount of bandwidth. --
As for the countries "at war" with the USA; no, I don't think that they care about US laws. However, American citizens *should* care about US laws. My point was that whether American citizens will be able to export encryption software to countries (whether the destination is a private citizen, a private corporation, but not a foreign government, as Fruan pointed out).
Well, at least there is one thing I agree with you: American citizens should indeed care about US laws, as everyone should care about the laws in their country. I'm just trying to say that US government has absolutely no way of controlling the crypto software used by other countries / individuals in other countries. The fact that Americans can't export crypto software has very little or no effect at all.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a cool graph and all. I see that longitude is the angular dimension, but can someone tell me what the radial dimension signifies?
It seems to be the amount of peers the AS has. The big systems with a lot of peers are in the middle
You could get the same result by putting a malloc or fork call in a while(1) loop
No you could not. First of all, malloc does not reserve any memory, until you USE that memory. You can happily malloc in a while loop and no one would notice. Finally the malloc would fail when your process had requested the maximum amount of memory allowed for a single process
What if you used that memory in a while loop as well? That would be slightly worse: This time the memory would be really reserved and after a while you would run out of memory. However, this is not really a problem, unless you are using a buggy v2.4 kernel. Your process just gets killed, that's all.
Forking however can bring your machine down, at least for a short while.
The power regulation of the 2.4GHz band in Europe is severely limiting the growth of community access wireless networks[1]. The UK currently has additional regulation[2] which also disallows ISPs from making commercial use of the band.
Yes, you are right about the fact that this system would be illegal in Europe. However, I'd like to point out that there are restrictions in the US as well. The limit there is 1 W if I recall it correctly; It's a lot more than in Europe, but it's a limit anyway...
do I need to say more?
--
Sure OpenSSH will protect you when you log into your *nix box. But what happens when you go to get your POP mail from your ISP? You send out your password in plaintext and then your mail is completely vulnerable.
What? You STILL use unencrypted POP mail? I think all the major mail servers support POP/IMAP over SSL. Get it now.
--
You can easily cut your response time down by holding the second button half way down until the color changes and then letting the button up. I got .16 in just a couple tries. The button event is registered on mouseup.
Or simply by pressing the button on random times. I clicked on it a few times, and got 0.029 seconds :-)
--
System Bandwidth
...methinks they skipped a decimal point here.
3200: 11.2 Gigabytes/sec
3400: 44.8 GB/sec
3800: 716 GB/sec
No they haven't. See: 3200 has max 2 processor bricks, 5.6GB/sec, 2-4 processor each. 3400 has max 8 such bricks, which gives 44.8 GB/sec. 3800 can have 128 such units, which sums up to 716.8 GB/sec.
--
I'll write up and post instructions if anyone's interested in learning how to make them.
Come on, post the instructions already! One of those sure would look great on my desk.. :-)
--
And they certainly won't stop using them while driving.
Actually, here in Finland people just might stop using them while driving, or at least reduce using them. There is a new law coming which will make it illegal to use a mobile phone while driving if it doesn't have the "hands free" option. Of course, not everyone obeys laws...
--
The first telephone ever created was totally useless, and the second was only barely better.
However, at the same moment when the second telephone was made, the first one magically became useful. The same goes here too.
--
I wouldn't call the AI bots challenge a success.
Go ahead and check the web page of the project - it seems quite dead.
It was definitely not a success, the challenge obviously never even took place!
That's quite sad actually, It would really be entertaining watching those bots chatting..
--
> for(i = 0; i <= count; ++i) {
in fact, I have my own issue with that code. The for loop should read:
for(i = 0; i < count; ++i)
Yep. The original coder probably thought that using ++i instead of the "standard" i++ would somehow magically make the increase happen before the loop and the test.
--
There are some phones which allow you to do that. :-)
Nokia Communicator is one of those if I remember right.
One dude had a yell as his ring tone, freely translated as "Come on you fucking dork, answer the phone!"
--
isn't Linux much better than BSD? Plus, this is a Linux site. Let the BSD guys get their own forum...if there are enough of them.
This sounds like a troll, but what the heck, I don't have anything else to do so I'll reply.. :-)
Since when has Slashdot been "a Linux site"? Slashdot is "news for nerds" imho. Linux is just a part of it.
--
Or at least that they would say in the README file what libraries and versions the software needs. IT really stinks that they only say "Red Hat 6.0". And the player says "segmentation fault". Argh.
--
Why must you assume that GUI configuration is mutually exclusive with manually editable configuration files? It seems to me that if the program can read its configuration from a text file, it ought to be able to properly write to it. :-/ If the programs used for the configurations were the same as the ones using the configurations everything would work (imho). Unfortunately the software which are used for configuration (those GUIs that is) are rarely 100% aware of every little thing that can be done in the configuration files.
Yes, that definitely ought to be the case. It just happens to be so that it isn't
--
1. Interface consistency.
Well, we both know what most Linux users (yes, me included) thinks about this, so I'm not going to even start about this ;-)
2. GUI configuration of system.
This would probably be good for novice users. Fortunately there are some utils to do this (take a look at the current distributions). Unfortunately they usually don't know everything; if I make some modifications on the configuration files myself, they won't work any longer as they are supposed to. I think it's good to have manually editable configuration files; what will happen if my monitor explodes and I only have some dumb terminal to use for configuring?
3. Target audience for most apps.
Working on this :-P
1. First, it is fine to have different window managers. Just make them at least independently consistent. The obvious example - cut and paste, different in every situation and exteremely frustrating and inefficient.
What on earth are you talking about? Using the middle button works in 99% of Linux applications (I just wish StarOffice starts supporting it), and it's a lot faster than the Microsoft way.
3. Linux developers target their apps for a Linux Savvy audience. Bugs are expected, bad interfaces with nasty widgets are expected and in most cases a compile is expected. Most computer users don't know what "compile" means.
I strongly disagree. Bugs are not expected. Hey, take a look at the MS world, and tell me, which MS software doesn't have bugs? I don't think Linux software is any worse (perhaps not any better too, but Open Sourcing help fixing those bugs faster). I also disagree on the interface thing. Could you give me a clue on what software are you talking about?.
You're probably not surprised when I tell you that I disagree on the compilation thing too. First of all, most of the Linux software is nowadays available as precompiled binaries too. But hey, I don't use them anyway. Why? Because I like the fact that the software is compiled using the optimizations for MY hardware, not someone elses. Also I might not need every gadget that might be compiled in and bloats the software. If I could compile Netscape myself (hey, I can compile mozilla! ) I'd leave more than 50% out (if I could do that using the configure script). So: Compilation is not a bad thing, but it's not required any longer anyway
--
Try again... the access point is a layer 2 (MAC layer) bridge. Unless you want the access point to roam between IP subnets, you wouldn't load it with a Mobile IP client.
Exactly at which point did I say anything about loading the access point with a Mobile IP client?
--
Some funky things also can be done with multiple access points, but I'm not quite sure what they are. I think they end up just being able to bridge together multiple wireless nets, which isn't a big deal if you are ok with changing your IP address when you roam from one net to another.
Repeat after me: M o b i l e I P, Mobile IP.
Just install a good Mobile IP software to your "access points" and forget about the changing IP..
--
It's nice to have a survey which might be useful for someone every now and then. It's been a long time since the last one. Usually the questions / alternatives are at least nonsence, if not total garbage.
This time all the questions were "answerable". There were only a small number of questions which didn't have enough choices (like the KDE / GNOME - hey, I don't use either one of them!). Anyway, the general feeling of this questionnaire was rather nice, and I'm glad if my answers can help Borland. Nice job, and it becomes nicer if they really can use the stats gathered.
--
Of course viruses exist for Linux. Except they're called Trojans, and there are relatively easy ways to keep them out: check source, compile source especially for anything suid root. Or trust your distro.
Well, there you are wrong. There exist real viruses for Linux. They are not trojans and some of them even look for security holes in other computer so that they can break into them. Some links to the most "famous" ones:
Bliss
Staog
--
If I'm not mistaken I believe that even though the RSA patents expire later this year, the US export restrictions are still in effect. (However they did change them a month ago)
Yes, they are. And they still mean practically nothing. So, we living outside US must get our strong enctrypting plugins for netscape from somewhere else than US. So, we have to get our encrypting zip/unzip:s from outside US. Who cares?
--
"Kevin Mitnick has been imprisoned by the U.S. Government for: 4 years, 11 months, 6 days, 12 hours, 12 minutes, 55 seconds Kevin Mitnick will be released from prison in: 11 months, 30 days, 19 hours, 14 minutes, 8 seconds" Y2K bug still alive and well huh?
Well, just take a look at the source.. It's a complete mess. I quess it would show the "right amount of time" about 50% of time..
--
I got in!!! But only 30 KB/s
;-) works just fine with me. Looks like that site has quite a good amount of bandwidth.
Interestingly enough, the 150kbit/s stream (which actually seems to be 80kbit/s though
--
As for the countries "at war" with the USA; no, I don't think that they care about US laws. However, American citizens *should* care about US laws. My point was that whether American citizens will be able to export encryption software to countries (whether the destination is a private citizen, a private corporation, but not a foreign government, as Fruan pointed out).
Well, at least there is one thing I agree with you: American citizens should indeed care about US laws, as everyone should care about the laws in their country. I'm just trying to say that US government has absolutely no way of controlling the crypto software used by other countries / individuals in other countries. The fact that Americans can't export crypto software has very little or no effect at all.
--