Apparently, 1 and 2-character identifier names are all the rage in China.
Actually, it's more that they're all the rage in specifications for hashes. RTFRFC.
What does the call to macro 'F' do?
By convention, the permutations in a hash or cipher are given single-letter names beginning with F (for 'Function'). If you ever decide to implement a crypto suite you get used to names like F, G, H (permutations), or X0[19] (cell 19 of section 0 of the primary execution context).
How about the call to 'RR'?
It performes a Rotate Right on the word it's called on. (((x) >> (y)) | ((x) << (32 - (y)))) is a right circular shift of the word X by Y places. RL is a Rotate Left, or left circular shift.
As a final caveat, that implementation of RR and RL is faulty for general values of X and Y but works within the constraints of the program.
You can charge whatever you want for a GPL'd program. You can charge a million dollars if you want to. You don't have to offer your GPL'd program for free download. You just have to offer the source to anyone who gets your binary, and not restrict their rights to alter or redistribute. That's it.
What they are doing is shutting down a conduit for the organization of groups whose purpose it is to kill civilians, disrupt society, and bring down the current government.
Yeah, and they're also shutting down one of our best sources of intel on an organization of groups whose purpose it is to kill civilians, disrupt society, and bring down the current government. So you'll forgive me if I'm not applauding this. (There's a saying about counterterrorism: every time there's a cheer in the J Edgar Hoover building, there are groans in Langley and Ft. Meade. I don't know if that's true in England, but I can imagine so, especially if they're doing stuff like this.)
Funny, isn't it? There's actually currently no "supported" SQL server for Windows 2003 Server. They say Windows is ready for the enterprise, and they don't even have a database server?...
Well, it wasn't paased because that's not a word. It was, however, passed by Congress and signed by the President. It was also written by the Direct Marketing Association and basically gives big spam houses a carte blanche, which is why we in the online marketing industry call it the, "yes, you CAN SPAM" act.
My boss once said "the staff will never be able to learn to use Linux", to which I replied, "of course not, and they've never learned to use Windows, either."
People don't know how to use Windows: they learn (painfully) the 5 or 6 tasks they need to do in their job and they do them by rote. It took them about a week to learn in Windows; it would take them about a week to learn the analogous tasks in Linux (I mean, is there *really* a difference between MS Office and OpenOffice to the average user, other than being able to click a single button to save a PDF or SWF in OOo?). I've just never seen this alleged "learning curve" be much of a problem for either OS; there's little actual learning going on in either case.
theres one major whole... you have to remember the exact command all the time
Huh? Get a shell with tab-completion. I can't remember the last time I typed the full name of a command that was longer than two letters, or the full name of any file.
I am the most productive when I'm using GNUStep/Windowmaker and doing most of my work on terminals -- it's simple ergonomics. Fewer gestures, and almost all of them with my fingertips.
1: NIC's aren't all alike. 2: Even if they were, GP's point that computer hardware isn't a Smithean Free Market is still true for other reasons: supply and demand curves are not independent, the supplies are not fungible across the market, etc.
Actually, as best as I can tell that's not what TFA meant; he meant that access to default POP3 or IMAP servers was not allowed and you have to check your email over port 80 (be that via web mail or via changing the ports on your mail server and mail client).
No, but if you are sending e-mail to someone on a different network from you, you are using the Internet. And since individual networks have now almost universally adopted Internet protocols, even on a local network you are sending mail as if it were on the Internet.
I don't know why they allow DNS to the internet, though, because when you connect, it sets their DNS server using DHCP.
Port 53 is the outgoing port your computer uses (by default) to query a DNS server. Even if you accept their DNS servers from the DHCP server you still have to talk to them to resolve addresses. So, they have to allow port 53 out (unless there are DNS servers on the same networks as the wifi clients, which is not likely).
Umm... for that matter, why not set up an SSH server using port 80, since you know they let that through? There's nothing "magic" about the number 443 that makes its traffic encrypted, or about the number 80 that makes its traffic unencrypted.
As long as you have enough servers of your own you can set up any service you want over port 80: POP, SMTP, HTTPS, DNS, SMB, VNC, X11, blah, blah, blah.
Windows NT has had a journalling filesystem since Linus was tinkering in his mother's basement.
Actually, as much as I hate Windows they got some things right with NTFS (and some things monstrously wrong).
Right: the journalling and rolling back Just Work. In years of managing Windows NT/2000/XP boxes I have not had any problems with whatever the Windows equivalent of fsck is -- proven by the fact that I can't even remember what that utility is called (chkdsk? fixdsk? something like that). Power off a Linux box without warning, though, and you have to go to the physical console, enter the root password, and manually fsck it (sometimes even if you have 0 0 in the last columns of fstab, and even with a journalling filesystem).
Wrong: the biggest, worst Wrong Thing with NTFS is its allocation algorithm. Fragments? wtf? is it 1982 again? How frigging hard is a "best fit" algorithm? Come on, people.
I know that's tech heresy but I think RAID isn't cost-effective. Spend the money you sould spend on RAID improving your backup and restore solutions.
Yes, 3 times out of 10 you can hot-swap a failed drive. The other 7 times, the controller itself goes, and 2 out of those 7 times it takes one or both drives with it.
If you think you can make a lucid case for congress not welding multiple topics into single bills/acts... have fun! That will never happen without an amendment
Huh? That's not amendment material. Permissible topics of bills and amendments are part of the Rules of the chambers and so are set by the House and Senate Rules Committees (except of course for the Constitutional limitations on what business the House and Senate can take up to begin with -- the rules committee couldn't let the Senate start a tax bill, or let either chamber make a law establishing a national religion, etc.).
There has been more or less discipline over the years on this subject. Every generation or so a reform-minded Congress sweeps in promising to stop log-rolling, pork, etc. (this trend goes back to at least 1820). Remember the Republican Revolution of 1994? They were promising to get rid of that kind of thing.
But pretty reliably, the rules never get changed and Congressmen get back into old habits. Still, it wouldn't take an amendment, just a change of rules.
What macroevolution have we *observed*? We have deduced it from evidence, but what new species did we observe?
An example of a new species was offered.
Now, from post 12529710:
This is still only evidence for speciation (microevolution). No observations of macroevolution have ever been made.
You are all pathetic lying scum who can't even be bothered to learn the basics of biology. Which is it? Is speciation micro or macro? Here's a thought: Why don't you define a quantity of allele shift (you do know what "allele" means, right? I sure hope so) that you consider to constitute "macroevolution". Come up with a quantity, and I'll show it to you.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, it's more that they're all the rage in specifications for hashes. RTFRFC.
By convention, the permutations in a hash or cipher are given single-letter names beginning with F (for 'Function'). If you ever decide to implement a crypto suite you get used to names like F, G, H (permutations), or X0[19] (cell 19 of section 0 of the primary execution context).
It performes a Rotate Right on the word it's called on. (((x) >> (y)) | ((x) << (32 - (y)))) is a right circular shift of the word X by Y places. RL is a Rotate Left, or left circular shift.
As a final caveat, that implementation of RR and RL is faulty for general values of X and Y but works within the constraints of the program.
If you RTFRFC you might notice that those are the variable and section names used in the algorithm specificaiton.
I don't see why this is so confusing to people.
You can charge whatever you want for a GPL'd program. You can charge a million dollars if you want to. You don't have to offer your GPL'd program for free download. You just have to offer the source to anyone who gets your binary, and not restrict their rights to alter or redistribute. That's it.
Now when they can mount it on the back of a shark, I'll be impressed.
Yeah, and they're also shutting down one of our best sources of intel on an organization of groups whose purpose it is to kill civilians, disrupt society, and bring down the current government. So you'll forgive me if I'm not applauding this. (There's a saying about counterterrorism: every time there's a cheer in the J Edgar Hoover building, there are groans in Langley and Ft. Meade. I don't know if that's true in England, but I can imagine so, especially if they're doing stuff like this.)
Funny, isn't it? There's actually currently no "supported" SQL server for Windows 2003 Server. They say Windows is ready for the enterprise, and they don't even have a database server?...
Ciscos have GUIs?
conduit permit tcp host blah blah blah...
I'm not sure how using a mouse is going to make that any easier. I feel the same way about iptables:
iptables -A input -p tcp --destination-port blah blah blah
I just don't see the need to make that, the simplest possible interface, any simpler.
Well, it wasn't paased because that's not a word. It was, however, passed by Congress and signed by the President. It was also written by the Direct Marketing Association and basically gives big spam houses a carte blanche, which is why we in the online marketing industry call it the, "yes, you CAN SPAM" act.
My boss once said "the staff will never be able to learn to use Linux", to which I replied, "of course not, and they've never learned to use Windows, either."
People don't know how to use Windows: they learn (painfully) the 5 or 6 tasks they need to do in their job and they do them by rote. It took them about a week to learn in Windows; it would take them about a week to learn the analogous tasks in Linux (I mean, is there *really* a difference between MS Office and OpenOffice to the average user, other than being able to click a single button to save a PDF or SWF in OOo?). I've just never seen this alleged "learning curve" be much of a problem for either OS; there's little actual learning going on in either case.
Huh? Get a shell with tab-completion. I can't remember the last time I typed the full name of a command that was longer than two letters, or the full name of any file.
I am the most productive when I'm using GNUStep/Windowmaker and doing most of my work on terminals -- it's simple ergonomics. Fewer gestures, and almost all of them with my fingertips.
1: NIC's aren't all alike.
2: Even if they were, GP's point that computer hardware isn't a Smithean Free Market is still true for other reasons: supply and demand curves are not independent, the supplies are not fungible across the market, etc.
Actually, as best as I can tell that's not what TFA meant; he meant that access to default POP3 or IMAP servers was not allowed and you have to check your email over port 80 (be that via web mail or via changing the ports on your mail server and mail client).
No, but if you are sending e-mail to someone on a different network from you, you are using the Internet. And since individual networks have now almost universally adopted Internet protocols, even on a local network you are sending mail as if it were on the Internet.
Don't you mean
?No, he means "I don't know much about the Internet and I think that 'Internet' means 'World-Wide Web'."
Port 53 is the outgoing port your computer uses (by default) to query a DNS server. Even if you accept their DNS servers from the DHCP server you still have to talk to them to resolve addresses. So, they have to allow port 53 out (unless there are DNS servers on the same networks as the wifi clients, which is not likely).
Umm... for that matter, why not set up an SSH server using port 80, since you know they let that through? There's nothing "magic" about the number 443 that makes its traffic encrypted, or about the number 80 that makes its traffic unencrypted.
As long as you have enough servers of your own you can set up any service you want over port 80: POP, SMTP, HTTPS, DNS, SMB, VNC, X11, blah, blah, blah.
Somebody's never heard of GNUStep / Windowmaker. Best dang GUI out there
Dag, what's taking him so long? The script's been on Gnutella for weeks!
Windows NT has had a journalling filesystem since Linus was tinkering in his mother's basement.
Actually, as much as I hate Windows they got some things right with NTFS (and some things monstrously wrong).
Right: the journalling and rolling back Just Work. In years of managing Windows NT/2000/XP boxes I have not had any problems with whatever the Windows equivalent of fsck is -- proven by the fact that I can't even remember what that utility is called (chkdsk? fixdsk? something like that). Power off a Linux box without warning, though, and you have to go to the physical console, enter the root password, and manually fsck it (sometimes even if you have 0 0 in the last columns of fstab, and even with a journalling filesystem).
Wrong: the biggest, worst Wrong Thing with NTFS is its allocation algorithm. Fragments? wtf? is it 1982 again? How frigging hard is a "best fit" algorithm? Come on, people.
But, you can remote OOo without a user being logged in. That's crucial to me and a "bell and/or whistle" that MS never seemed to bother putting in.
I know that's tech heresy but I think RAID isn't cost-effective. Spend the money you sould spend on RAID improving your backup and restore solutions.
Yes, 3 times out of 10 you can hot-swap a failed drive. The other 7 times, the controller itself goes, and 2 out of those 7 times it takes one or both drives with it.
Huh? That's not amendment material. Permissible topics of bills and amendments are part of the Rules of the chambers and so are set by the House and Senate Rules Committees (except of course for the Constitutional limitations on what business the House and Senate can take up to begin with -- the rules committee couldn't let the Senate start a tax bill, or let either chamber make a law establishing a national religion, etc.).
There has been more or less discipline over the years on this subject. Every generation or so a reform-minded Congress sweeps in promising to stop log-rolling, pork, etc. (this trend goes back to at least 1820). Remember the Republican Revolution of 1994? They were promising to get rid of that kind of thing.
But pretty reliably, the rules never get changed and Congressmen get back into old habits. Still, it wouldn't take an amendment, just a change of rules.
Or, to keep it simple, just Mac(h). Or Mach? for you regexp people...
Scum.
From post 12529332:
An example of a new species was offered.
Now, from post 12529710:
You are all pathetic lying scum who can't even be bothered to learn the basics of biology. Which is it? Is speciation micro or macro? Here's a thought: Why don't you define a quantity of allele shift (you do know what "allele" means, right? I sure hope so) that you consider to constitute "macroevolution". Come up with a quantity, and I'll show it to you.
I get so sick of you lying, pathetic scum.