The problems with this are in efficiency. Leaving the files in place would create fragmentation problems. Moving them to another part of the disk would result in a lot of unnecessary disk activity.
Periodic backups are a much better answer.
Schemes like this would also require the fs to delete old files when the space is needed, but this is what is done now. The data is still there until the space is used by something else (and even after that for all of you super security freaks). Given, the choice of what to delete could be made in a manner to use the least recently deleted space first, but this would again cause efficiency problems.
Who does the mpaa think they are protecting with this restriction? If the makers of the movie lose money on piracy, etc, they shouldn't send out the screeners. Why does the mpaa think they should get involved?
It may be a very basic introduction, but the statement that "anyone" knows this information is probably not true.
I would put template specialization in the same category as using a value as a template argument instead of a type ie. template. It is a feature that is very useful in some instances, but is rarely used even when useful and isn't taught in the majority of c++ classes.
Nothing like this will ever work for very long. The minute support for this type of emulation becomes usable, M$ will release an improved or upgraded driver framework.
One of the reasons many people are afraid of linux is driver availability. M$ has a vested interest in ensuring it stays that way.
If you are willing to spend a little extra money, I highly recommend Cisco Call Manager. It is a VoIP system that provides access to the pstn through voice gateways. It is a little more expensive than a classic PBX, but is VERY easy to configure and scales extraordinarily well.
I'm sceptical about Windows 2k also, but the Call Manager runs on 2k and we have never had a crash. The voice quality is supprisingly good also. The codec used is the best GSM standard (I forget the exact one). There are also options to use different(lower bandwidth protocols) depending on the source and destination of the call. Any feature you can think of is available, including unified messaging through Unity, which runs on top of Exchange.
A little costly, but well worth it if they are "growing" as you say.
Re:The problem with all these equations...
on
Rare Earth
·
· Score: 1
Some viruses have no dna, yet they are generally considered alive. (Just a technicality, since they have RNA.)
I don't agree that DNA is a requirement for life. There are MANY other ways that traits could be passed on from generation to generation. This passing of traits is probably a requirement for complex life, though. Without the passing of information concerning how to make a copy of one's self, there can be no reproduction. Without reproduction(or replenishment) life could not exist because all compounds degrade eventually, even under optimum conditions.
It is also improbably that non-carbon-based lifeforms would develop because of simple chemistry. Carbon forms complex molecules more easily than any other element. It is not a coincidence that we are based on carbon. Carbon forms strong bonds with hydrogen, the most abundant element in the universe. This allows it to store massive amounts of energy when bonded to other elements. Replace an C-O bond with a C-H bond and you liberate a LOT of energy(usually heat). Carbon is a perfect fit for the basis of life. Nothing else comes close.
Re:The problem with all these equations...
on
Rare Earth
·
· Score: 1
Your definition of alive would position every object in the universe(expecially individual atoms) as alive. Because of the Heisenberg uncertainty prinicple, we cannot predict the future behavior of ANYTHING. Admittedly, we can make very good approximations of well controlled events on a large scale, but even the path of a ballistic object in a vacuum cannot be known exactly before it happens.
Slashdot Mirror
The problems with this are in efficiency. Leaving the files in place would create fragmentation problems. Moving them to another part of the disk would result in a lot of unnecessary disk activity.
Periodic backups are a much better answer.
Schemes like this would also require the fs to delete old files when the space is needed, but this is what is done now. The data is still there until the space is used by something else (and even after that for all of you super security freaks). Given, the choice of what to delete could be made in a manner to use the least recently deleted space first, but this would again cause efficiency problems.
Who does the mpaa think they are protecting with this restriction? If the makers of the movie lose money on piracy, etc, they shouldn't send out the screeners. Why does the mpaa think they should get involved?
It may be a very basic introduction, but the statement that "anyone" knows this information is probably not true.
I would put template specialization in the same category as using a value as a template argument instead of a type ie. template. It is a feature that is very useful in some instances, but is rarely used even when useful and isn't taught in the majority of c++ classes.
Nothing like this will ever work for very long. The minute support for this type of emulation becomes usable, M$ will release an improved or upgraded driver framework.
One of the reasons many people are afraid of linux is driver availability. M$ has a vested interest in ensuring it stays that way.
If you are willing to spend a little extra money, I highly recommend Cisco Call Manager. It is a VoIP system that provides access to the pstn through voice gateways. It is a little more expensive than a classic PBX, but is VERY easy to configure and scales extraordinarily well.
I'm sceptical about Windows 2k also, but the Call Manager runs on 2k and we have never had a crash. The voice quality is supprisingly good also. The codec used is the best GSM standard (I forget the exact one). There are also options to use different(lower bandwidth protocols) depending on the source and destination of the call. Any feature you can think of is available, including unified messaging through Unity, which runs on top of Exchange.
A little costly, but well worth it if they are "growing" as you say.
Some viruses have no dna, yet they are generally considered alive. (Just a technicality, since they have RNA.)
I don't agree that DNA is a requirement for life. There are MANY other ways that traits could be passed on from generation to generation. This passing of traits is probably a requirement for complex life, though. Without the passing of information concerning how to make a copy of one's self, there can be no reproduction. Without reproduction(or replenishment) life could not exist because all compounds degrade eventually, even under optimum conditions.
It is also improbably that non-carbon-based lifeforms would develop because of simple chemistry. Carbon forms complex molecules more easily than any other element. It is not a coincidence that we are based on carbon. Carbon forms strong bonds with hydrogen, the most abundant element in the universe. This allows it to store massive amounts of energy when bonded to other elements. Replace an C-O bond with a C-H bond and you liberate a LOT of energy(usually heat). Carbon is a perfect fit for the basis of life. Nothing else comes close.
Your definition of alive would position every object in the universe(expecially individual atoms) as alive. Because of the Heisenberg uncertainty prinicple, we cannot predict the future behavior of ANYTHING. Admittedly, we can make very good approximations of well controlled events on a large scale, but even the path of a ballistic object in a vacuum cannot be known exactly before it happens.