There is common mother to us all and there is a common father to us all but the two have never met. The genetic Adam is younger than half the age of genetic Eve. And both are a lot younger than first humans around.
Yes, I'm confused about that one too. However, assume that transition to machine is slow and progressive. Nanobots replace parts of your brain slowly, something like a neuron a second, with machine equivalents while you are conscious. Also assume nowhere in the process you can tell some of your brain function is no more meat-based, including the final straw. Some day, doctor tells you that your brain is now purely a machine. Would you feel you are still the same person, just with different physical processes realising your mind or just a copy, while the original is long dead? What is the qualitiative difference when the transfer happens in an instantant rather than during 40 years?
It sounds a lot like what UAE, the Amiga emulator, has been doing for ages. Identifying blocks of code, and translating all of them at once is the only way to get decent emulation speed. AFAIK the original JIT compiler author never got around to write an optimizer for blocks of code (since the emulator was already faster than any AMiga ever built) ut it should not be too hard. IOW, the EL technolgy you speak of is far from unique, it even made its way into a open source emulator some time in the early 2000s.
I must have misled you there. What actually happens is not that kernel forbids debug doing certain things, but debug is working in an emulated environment. Kernel just doesn't get the values of the emulated environment and forward it to real system. That is why I wanted you to restart cmd before checking whether the value has indeed changed.
Since you have admin privilidges (and can install drivers), all is not lost. run debug with http://www.beyondlogic.org/porttalk/porttalk.htm
By the same line of reasoning, given that typical condoms last four years and even less when carried in a wallet, I don't see how you can justify carrying one.
Notebooks usually have somewhat non-standard BIOSes. But Thinkpads are from IBM, original designers of the PC BIOS, so probably it will corrupt the BIOS checksum just fine. Try to change something in the bios and check if the XX value changes too.
I don't know what thinkpads do in case of a corrupted checksum. Most desktops just reset the CMOS. Even if they do something else, YOU can manually reset CMOS and get a valid checksum back. But you probably can't manually reset Thinkpad's CMOS. I don't think trying the procedure is a good idea until you have information about Thinkpads' behavior in case of a corrupt CMOS.
It shouldn't work. Not as in it destroys your thinkpad, but 2k won't allow debug to access real ports to change the value there.
Try this, which has no side effect, to make sure:
debug
-o 70 2e
-i 71
It will give you some number XX, that is the correct value. Write it down.
-o 70 2e
-o 71 ff
If kernel allowed you to write to that port you now have overwritten 2e.
Exit cmd. Restart cmd.
debug
-o 70 2e
-i 71
Now the output should be XX if NT does the right thing and ff if it doesn't. To get your right value back
-o 70 2e
-o 71 XX
I'm not sure (never used PC ports much) but it seems it overries MSB of BIOS checksum with 0xff. With any luck, 0xff is not the right value and BIOS will complain with corrupt checksum on next boot and allow you to change values.
using debug on hardware ports doesn't usually work under NT series, hence XP should be immune to that.
I love supposedly 'password protected' Linux user login directories are wide open for the viewing in windows as long as file system is ext2 or ext3. Thanks windows!
The original SETI never searched for accidental leakage from random wavelengths in the first place. The idea was once you were advanced enough, you would put a "We are here." bacon at a wavelength that makes cosmic sense. I don't see how Dyson could have misrepresented his (even if only partially his) brainchild.
I don't know specifics of TSCP and I'm too lazy to check the source, but chess programs typically are very branch intensive. I don't know about ubench, but super_pi and primegen should have no branches except for loops.
Well, there is no way to measure average (or minimum, maximum whatever) temperature of a motherboard either. The thermal diode of the CPU is embedded and literally in the CPU. Thermally speaking, CPU can be approximated as a single homogenous temperature device (at least in the plane perpendicular to CPU to heatsink direction) with its small dimensions and the main mode of heat transfer being conduction.
OTOH for motherboard and case there is just one sensor, located somewhere on the motherboard, poking outward, measuring the temperature around it. The whole structure is too big to have a homogenous temperature distribution. I don't know the location of the sensor for his particular board, it may be located just over some heat generating device like a harddisk or a specific hot chip soldered on the board and his uncalibrated readings can be indeeed correct and overshooting the average case temp. However, in all likelihood, the sensor is strategicly placed to give a more or less good reading of the average case temperature.
That doesn't make any sense. The number is roughly equal to 2^100. If every electron cannot assume about 2^95 distinct and detectable spin states, I think we are grossly misunderstanding the word "implict" in the original.
He must have gained faith very recently because he said about a decade ago that he doesn't believe a god exists.Either that or you don't want truth to ruin a good joke.
Once you use a dual cpu machine, you never want to go back to single cpu.
Hmmm, isn't it a bit too far-fetched? What's the advantage of dual cpu machine for Internet browsing? Or editing files? Or for gaming (decent video card is more important here)?
He doesn't say a dual cpu box is optimal, he say you don't want to go back, which, IMHO, is very true. I have used a few single cpu computers faster than mine but none have the same fluidity and responsiveness of my dual athlon mp box. This is purely a perception thing. Many GUI and IO operations use 100% of CPU time for short burst intervals. On a single CPU system, you notice unresponsiveness. A faster CPU just makes that time shorther. On a SMP system, as long as not all CPUs are pegged - which doesn't happen all to often- you don't notice that.
You are a member of a minority who won't use IE no matter what. The three percent figure pertains to a bigger group of people, who doesn't use IE by default. While the three percent figure will keep increasing, I doubt that number of diehard non-IE users will increase at all. As long as numer of Windows users does not decline, IE will be a readily available option to use with sites not compatible with their favorite browser.
This is somewhat more fun: http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a =411
Re:Difficulties for beginning programmers
on
Hacking Quartz
·
· Score: 1
The problem is that capabilities of computers grew while the compilers and libraries didn't get any wiser.
20 years ago, there was nothing you couldn't do with enough patience, an empty notebook, a pencil, a mnemonics table, a memory map and a little hex loader hacked in basic in thirty seconds. You could learn everything there was to learn about your (home) computer in a few months, tops, and you could hack right away. Now this is impossible and that is good. It means that computers are a lot more configurable, both in terms of hardware and software, and it means your computer is no more an isolated island. However that you can no longer learn all there is to learn about your computer in a few months shouldn't also mean you should have to spend much more time than whay you would have 20 years ago. It is what computer languages, libraries, compilers and IDEs are about. VCL+Object Pascal+Delphi was much easier to use than OWL+Pascal+BP IDE, although capabilities were about the same (and in VCL's favor.) There is a performance penalty to pay to use those newer libraries and programming environments. Problem is we (:everybody) don't and we (:users) can't pay enough. Environments aren't smart enough to make things simple as 20 years before.
35 is indeed lower than grandparent, but how about "10 cls 0" (Locomotive Basic 1.x)? Or if you want to set resolution, pen color and background color too "10 paper 0:mode 0:pen 7"? This code not only sets the correct res and colors, it also NEVER fails, so no error checking is necessary.
You couldn't really set any resolution possible with with the basic commands, nor you could use an arbitrary palette but if you wanted to do just use what was available in BASIC, without going into programming hardware yourself, you could get away with just a few lines.
In Turkey most people use cybercafes for gaming, not surfing. However, that also means you have share all bandwidth of a cafe with just a few people if you do really surf. I've never used a cybercafe for surfing porn but I'm not aware of any laws against that either. Perhaps minor's exposure to porn could be a problem at some places (you don't have much piracy.) At the very least, I'm sure you can download your stuff and have the cafe burn it to a CD for you.
I think we owe the cheapest access to the fact that almost all software is pirated and 1MBits is considered a luxury.
How about a demonstration? Delete glibc and reboot. Since it is statically linked, you shouldn't have any problems with absence of libc until you compile something.
I would like to see the demonstration performed not by the obvious troll AC but idiot mod who gave a +1 Informative to that.
A typical linux system has a few things statically linked to glibc (stuff under/sbin and few others) but everything else is dynamically linked. I've heard some brain-dead distros dynamic link even sbin! Whether a given package manager is staticaly or dynamicly linked is irrelevant as there is bound to be some program dynamicly using glibc at that instant and this upgradability is not glibc specific.
How long do you think the fibers in rope are? I can guarantee that that 50 ft cotton rope does not have 50 ft long fibers.
Sure, but nobody says the tensile strength of a cotton rope is almost the same as a cotton fiber.
The Vanderwaals forces between the individual fibers, when acting over the whole length of the fibers, holds them together more strongly than the individual carbon-carbon bonds would.
If your point is when fibers are strongly held together, the cable, rope, whatever is almost as strong as individual fibers even if fibers themselves are very short, I get it.
And why not build a space elevator to go down to the moon or the surface of Mars? No, I think it is possible to build those elevators with current technology. However first step to leaving Moon and Mars shall be reaching there. And once we do, we will probably use the technology we perfected getting there to leave there.
So how about instead of the space elevator coming to the ground, it just comes to 80,000 feet of the ground?
That makes little sense. 80000 feets is too little to make any difference (0.02% of the cable length). The only good that would come out of that will be better protection against sabotage and perhaps lightnings. On the bad side, you have to deal with docking at 80000 feet.
Slashdot Mirror
I find about two thirds of supposedly hillarious USE flags commentary serious, correct and insightful.
There is common mother to us all and there is a common father to us all but the two have never met. The genetic Adam is younger than half the age of genetic Eve. And both are a lot younger than first humans around.
Yes, I'm confused about that one too. However, assume that transition to machine is slow and progressive. Nanobots replace parts of your brain slowly, something like a neuron a second, with machine equivalents while you are conscious. Also assume nowhere in the process you can tell some of your brain function is no more meat-based, including the final straw. Some day, doctor tells you that your brain is now purely a machine. Would you feel you are still the same person, just with different physical processes realising your mind or just a copy, while the original is long dead? What is the qualitiative difference when the transfer happens in an instantant rather than during 40 years?
It sounds a lot like what UAE, the Amiga emulator, has been doing for ages. Identifying blocks of code, and translating all of them at once is the only way to get decent emulation speed. AFAIK the original JIT compiler author never got around to write an optimizer for blocks of code (since the emulator was already faster than any AMiga ever built) ut it should not be too hard. IOW, the EL technolgy you speak of is far from unique, it even made its way into a open source emulator some time in the early 2000s.
Since you have admin privilidges (and can install drivers), all is not lost. run debug with http://www.beyondlogic.org/porttalk/porttalk.htm
By the same line of reasoning, given that typical condoms last four years and even less when carried in a wallet, I don't see how you can justify carrying one.
Notebooks usually have somewhat non-standard BIOSes. But Thinkpads are from IBM, original designers of the PC BIOS, so probably it will corrupt the BIOS checksum just fine. Try to change something in the bios and check if the XX value changes too. I don't know what thinkpads do in case of a corrupted checksum. Most desktops just reset the CMOS. Even if they do something else, YOU can manually reset CMOS and get a valid checksum back. But you probably can't manually reset Thinkpad's CMOS. I don't think trying the procedure is a good idea until you have information about Thinkpads' behavior in case of a corrupt CMOS.
It shouldn't work. Not as in it destroys your thinkpad, but 2k won't allow debug to access real ports to change the value there. Try this, which has no side effect, to make sure: debug -o 70 2e -i 71 It will give you some number XX, that is the correct value. Write it down. -o 70 2e -o 71 ff If kernel allowed you to write to that port you now have overwritten 2e. Exit cmd. Restart cmd. debug -o 70 2e -i 71 Now the output should be XX if NT does the right thing and ff if it doesn't. To get your right value back -o 70 2e -o 71 XX
using debug on hardware ports doesn't usually work under NT series, hence XP should be immune to that.
I love supposedly 'password protected' Linux user login directories are wide open for the viewing in windows as long as file system is ext2 or ext3. Thanks windows!
The original SETI never searched for accidental leakage from random wavelengths in the first place. The idea was once you were advanced enough, you would put a "We are here." bacon at a wavelength that makes cosmic sense. I don't see how Dyson could have misrepresented his (even if only partially his) brainchild.
I don't know specifics of TSCP and I'm too lazy to check the source, but chess programs typically are very branch intensive. I don't know about ubench, but super_pi and primegen should have no branches except for loops.
OTOH for motherboard and case there is just one sensor, located somewhere on the motherboard, poking outward, measuring the temperature around it. The whole structure is too big to have a homogenous temperature distribution. I don't know the location of the sensor for his particular board, it may be located just over some heat generating device like a harddisk or a specific hot chip soldered on the board and his uncalibrated readings can be indeeed correct and overshooting the average case temp. However, in all likelihood, the sensor is strategicly placed to give a more or less good reading of the average case temperature.
Are you aware that means either your case temperature reading or the cpu temperature reading is wrong? Fans are not heat pumps.
That doesn't make any sense. The number is roughly equal to 2^100. If every electron cannot assume about 2^95 distinct and detectable spin states, I think we are grossly misunderstanding the word "implict" in the original.
He must have gained faith very recently because he said about a decade ago that he doesn't believe a god exists.Either that or you don't want truth to ruin a good joke.
Hmmm, isn't it a bit too far-fetched? What's the advantage of dual cpu machine for Internet browsing? Or editing files? Or for gaming (decent video card is more important here)?
He doesn't say a dual cpu box is optimal, he say you don't want to go back, which, IMHO, is very true. I have used a few single cpu computers faster than mine but none have the same fluidity and responsiveness of my dual athlon mp box. This is purely a perception thing. Many GUI and IO operations use 100% of CPU time for short burst intervals. On a single CPU system, you notice unresponsiveness. A faster CPU just makes that time shorther. On a SMP system, as long as not all CPUs are pegged - which doesn't happen all to often- you don't notice that.
You are a member of a minority who won't use IE no matter what. The three percent figure pertains to a bigger group of people, who doesn't use IE by default. While the three percent figure will keep increasing, I doubt that number of diehard non-IE users will increase at all. As long as numer of Windows users does not decline, IE will be a readily available option to use with sites not compatible with their favorite browser.
This is somewhat more fun:a =411
http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?
20 years ago, there was nothing you couldn't do with enough patience, an empty notebook, a pencil, a mnemonics table, a memory map and a little hex loader hacked in basic in thirty seconds. You could learn everything there was to learn about your (home) computer in a few months, tops, and you could hack right away. Now this is impossible and that is good. It means that computers are a lot more configurable, both in terms of hardware and software, and it means your computer is no more an isolated island. However that you can no longer learn all there is to learn about your computer in a few months shouldn't also mean you should have to spend much more time than whay you would have 20 years ago. It is what computer languages, libraries, compilers and IDEs are about. VCL+Object Pascal+Delphi was much easier to use than OWL+Pascal+BP IDE, although capabilities were about the same (and in VCL's favor.) There is a performance penalty to pay to use those newer libraries and programming environments. Problem is we (:everybody) don't and we (:users) can't pay enough. Environments aren't smart enough to make things simple as 20 years before.
You couldn't really set any resolution possible with with the basic commands, nor you could use an arbitrary palette but if you wanted to do just use what was available in BASIC, without going into programming hardware yourself, you could get away with just a few lines.
I think we owe the cheapest access to the fact that almost all software is pirated and 1MBits is considered a luxury.
I would like to see the demonstration performed not by the obvious troll AC but idiot mod who gave a +1 Informative to that.
A typical linux system has a few things statically linked to glibc (stuff under /sbin and few others) but everything else is dynamically linked. I've heard some brain-dead distros dynamic link even sbin! Whether a given package manager is staticaly or dynamicly linked is irrelevant as there is bound to be some program dynamicly using glibc at that instant and this upgradability is not glibc specific.
Are NOT moderations available yet?
Sure, but nobody says the tensile strength of a cotton rope is almost the same as a cotton fiber.
The Vanderwaals forces between the individual fibers, when acting over the whole length of the fibers, holds them together more strongly than the individual carbon-carbon bonds would.
If your point is when fibers are strongly held together, the cable, rope, whatever is almost as strong as individual fibers even if fibers themselves are very short, I get it.
Let's see:
And why not build a space elevator to go down to the moon or the surface of Mars? No, I think it is possible to build those elevators with current technology. However first step to leaving Moon and Mars shall be reaching there. And once we do, we will probably use the technology we perfected getting there to leave there.
So how about instead of the space elevator coming to the ground, it just comes to 80,000 feet of the ground?
That makes little sense. 80000 feets is too little to make any difference (0.02% of the cable length). The only good that would come out of that will be better protection against sabotage and perhaps lightnings. On the bad side, you have to deal with docking at 80000 feet.