I was less than impressed getting a refurbished drive back from WD on a drive that's less than 6 months old - I'm sticking to Maxtor / Seagate from now on.
Careful how you use that wide angled brush, my friend.
I recently examined a dead Maxtor that had been refurbished not once, but twice.
What's more offensive; refurbished, or re-refurbished?:)
'Tis the problem with faster and bigger drives.
I mean, a one year waranty nowadays, It's a joke.
You should look into the Western Digital Special Edition drives. 8MB cache, fast as snot (Western Digitals seem to be kicking the rat dander out of most every other ATA drive manufacture nowadays, with or without the cache boost), and best of all, three year warranty!
40GB Western Digital Special Edition drive == $116CDN. The full warranty makes them a steal.
Speaking of fiascos {cough} Remember that Fujitsu fiasco not so long ago? Yeah yeah, we're still getting them in (two today alone). See, it's a lot easier selling these 40GB drives at $116 when people are able to RMA their 20GB Fujitsu and get a $118 cheque in return. Costs them all of $12 for a box, packing material, and shipping costs. So a brand-new drive with warranty costs them a whopping $10.
The sad part, however, is that I've had so much practice I've become good at telling customers their data is gone. {sigh}
In fact, I'd apply this standard to myself: If my life's work was attacked this way and I would not fight to protect it, then I would have no life's work.
There's another line of thought that goes; if you defend yourself against such an attack, you acknowledge its validity.
Since you asked, for the last four years I've served as a senior software developer as a contractor for the US Air Force. That portion of my life's work is protecting your sorry ass right now. So Fuck Off.
Your "life's work" is also being used to bomb civilians in foreign nations.
Oh, I don't know, become one of thousands of zombies using your bandwidth to DDoS the root nameservers or any number of other sites around the Internet, including hapless home DSL/Cable users who piss off those who control said zombies?
It's great that you're putting, effectively, a loaded weapon live on the Internet. Way to be responsible.
Heh, I got one of those a couple of weeks after I stuck my win2k box back on the net. I laughed for about 20 minutes, then I turned of windows messaging service and went about my business. I couldn't believe the guy wanted 20$ for that.
The great irony of it all, you realize, is that everybody who reads your post will be laughing at you.
You're aluding to being technically savvy, yet you put a fresh Win2k install live on the Internet without hardening it or using even a basic $50 SOHO firewall?
There's nothing illegal about Bonzi or Gator. The internet is about a free exchange of information.
What it comes down to is deceit and false advertising. Using something akin to the schoolyard tant "Your epidermis is showing!" to fool people into needlesly purchasing a product is illegal. Installing apps on people's computers with the deliberate goal of hiding themselves from all but the skilled users and with the sole intent of invading their privacy is already illegal.
Just because it's on "The Internet" doesn't remove it from the laws that already bind our respective countries.
>>I wouldn't call MS IE a standard just because most people are too lazy to download and install an alternative.
Please replace "are too lazy" with "have no reason".
I dare say you're looking for "don't know they have a good reason to... are too lazy to do legwork to look for an alternative."
People will spend weeks deliberating over purchase of items they'll use every day, but will happily plop themselves in front of a PC day in, day out at work and at home alike and never consider that there may be something out there that does the job just that much better than their current tool.
Hitting a web page and being innundated by upwards of 100 pop-up / pop-under (onload / onexit) adverts alone would find me running screaming for another browser. (No, you don't even have to be looking for porn; www.whitehouse.org (in its former state), www.britnyspears.com, et al. will do just nicely)
Or, every time somebody showed me a link saying "Use IE? Click here for a neat trick!" (or worse; automatic re-directs) only to find myself staring at a blue screen.
If you want to completely ignore the surface problems, what about finding out that you're actually not supposed to trust software that's digitally signed by Microsoft, because that'll allow people to gain access to your computer through a web page? Or any number of ActiveX controls that install to the local security zone and then proceed to wreak havoc on your PC?
I see these problems all the time (a side effect of working in a retail PC sale/service outlet), yet some people as much as get offended if I suggest an alternate. Outlook seems to be the stickiest subject; I wrote a little blurb (2/3 down) about my experience in that regard.
There are plenty of reasons not to use IE, and there are plenty of good reasons to use an alternate browser. Tabbed browsing, pop-up blocking, image controls, javascript limitations, integrated download manager, etc. Personally, I find myself apalled whenever I'm forced to use IE, and I'm sure others would feel the same way if they'd try an alternative, even for one week of regular surfing. You know what they say; you'll never know until you try.
If you design a website according to spec, you're going to have close to 95% (i.e. IE users) of web browsers incorrectly displaying the website.
Then you're selecting the wrong standards. First thing's first; you can't reasonably expect any browser, letalone all browsers to properly support all bleeding-edge standards. Your best bet is to select a baseline standard you're going to use, be it one, two, or three year old standards and use those. Find the most current set that all major browsers (IE, Mozilla/Gecko, Opera) support to your satisfaction and use it. All the web design I do works just fine between all major (and even most of the minor) browsrs and it all validates with the W3.
Pooling spam to teach isn't such a good idea. The problem you might run into is that some people, like say a plastic surgeon, might get many emails that have words like penis, vagina, sex, larger, etc.
While I do agree with you, for the most part, it would be plausible to include such e-mails as "wet horny teen sluts want to cum for you" et al.
I have to say that I did notice Mozilla picked up some mail as SPAM right out of the gate. The unfortunate part was; it picked up several false positives. It was a real bitch going through my mailing list archives and de-SPAM-ifying dozens of messages. But alas, all that done and it's now reliably picking out the SPAM from the regular mail, with false positives and misses declining ever more with each new SPAM I receive.
It's weird, but this new filter actually makes me WANT to post my e-mail address publically; I want to feed it more and watch it grow!
So come get me, spammers, my filter's almost perfect and the irony of it all is; you're only helping it get better! C'mon, teach the lizard a lesson and ask me about my penis!
Hiding linux partions from 98 is about posistion of partions if a linux partion is in front of a windows partion windows will not look past the linux partion for a windows one so the partion is missing this is in extended partions.
It is correct that Win'9x will not 'play nice' in extended partitions, however it will completely ignore other primary partitions and install to the first available primary of an acceptable type.
Trick to create a partion with fdisk under linux as you have to play guess the type. If you get it wrong strange things will happen.
I'm going to have to defer you to RTFM. For that matter, when you press 't' (change 't'ype) in fdisk, it quite clearly tells you that you can 'L'ist partition types. I call shenanigans. Sorry.:)
Debian is the only Linux with a package management system? This state ment is wrong and right at the same time.
I'm afraid you are completely incorrect WRT the state of package management systems in modern Linux distributions. I'll ask that you do some modicum of research before perpetuating more (false) Debian propaganda.
zcat is a old hapid that dies hard tar did not always have internal compression and the flags sometimes change from version to version. Basicly the fool proff way of doing it is using zcat and gzip.
Firstly, she only started using *n?x in '94, at which point the GNU tools were already reasonably mature. Moreover, if she's going to selectively provide context, she should reconsider publishing articles on IBM's website.
Further, the 'z' option to decompress gzipped archives is quite old, and quite standard, but I'd have to check the documentation to determine the date of implementation.
Disable encrypted network passwords in Windows? Required with samaba depending on the version of windows and the version of samaba
Again, incorrect. I have been using Samba with encrypted passwords on networks comprised of any combination of Windows'95, 98, ME, NT4, 2000, and XP for a number of years without fail. The correct procedure is to enable encrypted passwords in Samba itself. Her advise on this matter is just plain bad.
Explicitly set all NICs to 100TX This is required with some 100 speed cards
This advise was reckless, without context or explanation, and carries the potential to cause more harm than good. In any case where users are running a combination of 10MBit and/or half-duplex bridge/repeater/switching hardware, this will most certainly lead to enhanced signal degredation and packet loss.
The article focuses mainly on installing multiple OSs with Grub as the boot loader. This information is widely available (and without registration). The section I was interested in was on Samba. Which it doesn't talk about except to say "here's a tutorial, because I don't feel like writing about this stuff."
I found it mostly a vanity piece, really. Much of the advice she gave was quite frankly wrong, silly, or unclear (ie; could have used context).
Examples;
Hiding Linux partitions from Win'98? Why?
How is it "tricky" to create a Windows partition with Linux's fdisk? (It's no more/less complicated than creating a Linux Swap partition, FYI).
Debian is the only Linux with a package management system? ("Everyone except Debian users must unpack the tarball")
zcat and pipe a tar.gz through tar?
GRUB can only be installed from floppy?!?
Disable encrypted network passwords in Windows?
Explicitly set all NICs to 100TX?
Advice given by self-ascribed "gurus" should be taken with a suitable quantity of NaCL, in my humble opinion.
- clock in microwave
- clock in stove
- clock in fridge (soon to be common-place?)
My stove timers operate independant of the actual date/time, and my stove doesn't have or need a clock. Appliance clocks are a nice vanity, but far from critical. After a power outage, they get set when someone is staring at it and bored for ten seconds.
- clock in VCR
- clock in TV
- clock in bedroom TV
- clock in... clock (duh, you gotta wake up for work on time:)
The former three mostly set themselves, but I don't require television clocks since I've already got one on the VCR, cable box, etc. The latter has a 9V backup battery that'll hold the time, alarm time, and keep the alarm functional (read: "Going off") for several hours; days if I don't use the alarm.
- clock in computer (bios and os)
- clock in computer 2
- clock in switch
- clock in router
NTP.
- clock in wrist watch (nice sector for every day)
- clock in wrist watch (timex ironman for hiking/camping)
I set my watches exactly twice/year. Once when entering Daylight Savings and once when leaving. Modern watches even have knowledge of DST so that's no longer an issue.
Funny. I run Win2k on 6 machines at home, Professional as well as Server, and have never had any issues. I've never been hacked, cracked, trojaned or infected. I've never had compatability or stability issues.
Extending your own personal experience on an entire product line isn't terribly realistic. None of my cars have ever crashed, but cars do crash.
I think 9/10ths of the issues with Windows are moronic configuration issues.
Except for the dozens of reproducible errors that crop up per OS/Software revision, or the holes that go unpatched (the points in the article WRT Windows Updates failing, being down, giving a clean bill of health, or just providing the update-of-the-week are some likely factors), causing the backbone of the Internet (SQL Slammer) or millions of corporate and ISP mail servers (Melissa et al.) to be DDoS'ed time and time again.
It doesn't matter to me that it doesn't matter to you. So why did you have to post it on slashdot?
Well said!
If people don't like television shows being mentioned, disable the television category. It's one checkbox, people. Consider it a test of nerdiness; can you sucessfully edit preferences on an online news site? (Poll to be held next week. CowboyNeal can do it - can you?)
Yes, Buffy has geek appeal. Sci-Fi, monsters, babes, lesbians, magic, evil, the conquering of good over evil by way of Googling; it's fantastic. Is it for everyone? Hell no! But are Star Trek, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, etc. for everyone? Another hell no! So why is this even an issue? If you don't like it, don't watch it, just don't bug me about watching it, mmm-kay?
I wasn't suggesting it as a practical coin system. I was giving it a counter example to the greedy algorithm mentioned in the post I replied to. When you are giving a counter example it is common to give an extreme example to make the proof blatant.
Sorry I missed this part; but I do believe the "greedy algorithm" relies upon each coin being no less than double the value of the preceeding coin in order to function, therefore coming up with a 1,40,41 system does not fit the criteria, therefore does not counter the benefeits of the greedy algorithm.
That is circular logic. We use base-10 because is easy to think. Base-10 is easy to think because we use it.
I never said that. You appended the latter portion. I said we use it because it's easier to think in terms of base-10. Period.
Computers are entirely built on base-2, and this has lead to the use of base-8 and base-16. Computers can also be considered to work in base-256 (byte).
Computers use a binary (base-2) system because it simplifies required circuits. No other system makes sense when you consider the elegance of (1 == on == +5V) versus (0 == off == 0V).
There is absolutely nothing special about base-10.
Actually, there are atleast two things fundamentally special about base 10. Firstly, the fact that it's a mere matter of shifting a decimal point to increment numbers to the next or previous level. That makes percentages and accumulating values simpler. Secondly, we have ten fingers. It's easier to learn to use base 10 when you literally have it in front of you right from birth. It also gives us two, rather than three, four, or five one-digit numbers to contend with. Counting by 10 or 1/2 increments (5) will always end with a 0 or a 5, opposed to 3, 6, 9, 12. Sure, it's more difficult to deal in base-3 with a base-10 system, but converting to base-2 and back is simple.
If everyone learned base-12 in elementary school then that would be the easy and obvious system.
Correction; it would be easy for them to memorize based on the patterns they see unfolding, but less easy to understand. Base-10 is simple to understand, which makes it the most fluent system to adopt.
Conversions of weights and measures in base-10 (metric) is dead simple. Ask me how many metres in a kilometre is easy; I know that kilo represents thousand, therefore there are 1000 metres. How many yards to a mile, OTOH, must be memorized because there is no logical correlation between the "foot", the "yard", and the "mile". But I digress.
Factoring numbers in base-10 will always be easier than in base-12 or other systems because of the simple decimal place adjustment. I can multiply 1,000,000 by 1,000,000,000 (10^6 and 10^9, respectively) in a matter of a second or two (adjust the decimal place of the latter by the number of zeroes in the former), but 12^6 (2985984) by 12^9 (5159780352) will take monotonous calculation, baring any mnemonic devices one can pick up. (And don't try to tell me you figured those out without a calculator, or if so, in under ten seconds, letalone the product or sum!)
Re:I hate math...
on
Making Change
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If they were doing their job correctly, they shouldn't be baffled.
Have you been to a McDonald's recently? Them, donut shops, and any other minimum wage job tends to have a lot of "Tide me over through high school" students working for them who can't figure out change with or without a "Change due" amount in front of them.
You seperate that number into coins using the greedy algorithm they tought you in kindergarden.
This is making two very large assumptions;
Schools taught students properly
Students listened to and understood lessons
Sadly, in many cases neither of the above conditions can be relied upon, so we get kids (and adults) who don't understand how to make regular change (ie; with a single bill of a denomination larger than the order total), letalone convenient change (ie; a 20 and a single for an 11 dollar order), and get confused and often attempt to hand back the extraneous currency.
That is why cashiers are taught this in the first place.
You make it sound as if there's a course. I'd go so far as to say most cashiers are taught the specifics of the cash register at hand and are left to figure things out on their own. Stores / restaurants don't tend to spend time instructing 6.85'ers what is thought to be common knowledge (how to count, how to change a $20, how to combine small coins to make the change an even amount, etc.). In the cases where such skills are taught, many teenagers exhibit stereotypical symptoms and ignore the lessons because, hey, they know it all anyways.
Oh, I get it now, strict use of the "greedy" change method results in a poor return on what I think is a really poor combintion. I mean, 1,40,41? The vast majority of required amounts of change result in dozens of coins returned. Anything from 1-39 cents, for example, wheras most combinations of same in our present system can be created with 2-3 coins. Then anything above 40, again, requires many coins. 40+n = 1+n or 1+(n-1) coins returned, until you hit 80 cents, at which point it becomes 2+n or 2+(n-2).
I must have missed some thread progression, but was 1,40,41 ever actually a serious contender anywhere, or was it just hyperbole posted here?
Re: Penny minting - Inflation?
on
Making Change
·
· Score: 1
The penny is a very weird denomination. In Canada anyways, they cost more in materials than they're actually worth, and they don't stay in circulation. It's the only denomination that people would rather store in jars in the basement than spend. Since stores need them to make change, and the coins aren't going back into circulation, the mint has to keep cranking them out due to high demand. It got so bad that at one point, some banks actually paid people.05 cents on the dollar for pennies.
So you're saying I could help my economy by rolling up my 1KG-sized coffee tin worth of pennies et al. and deposit them to my bank account? Cool! Maybe I can use it to cover the extra cost of a tank of gas nowadays! Everybody wins!;)
I can't think of an example where that doesn't work in a 1,5,10,25 system, but it is definitely not a valid rule in general. For example in a 1,40,41 system you can give 80 cents change with two coins, but your method would use fourty coins.
I may be misunderstanding you, but in a 1,40,41 system, 39 cents would require 39 coins, whereas 80 cents would require two, so it's completely not practical. In a system that implemented an 18 cent piece, providing the 1 cent piece still existed, could give 40 cents in four coins, 80 cents would require eight coins (four 18 cent + four 1 cent), but both would be less practical and more confusing to cashiers - many of whom have trouble even understanding our rather simple base-10 system.
I believe the base-10 coinage system lasted due to its ties to the metric system, combined with the fact that base-10 is easy to think (it's base-1 with an additional 0 appended, making counting a matter of ten numbers - be it to 10, 100, 1,000, or 10^n).
How many times have you been in a McDonald's and watched the cashier struggle with changing a $20 bill for a $16.73 order?
Our system allows us two basic methods of couting out change; the 'trickle down' method whereby you start with one two-dollar pieces, a one-dollar piece, a 25-cent piece, and two 1-cent pieces. Continue giving the largest possible piece until what's left is a number lesser-than-or-equal-to $0.04 and give the remainder in 1-cent pieces. Changing the same order from a $100 bill is a mere extension of a 50-dollar piece, a 20-dollar piece, and a 10-dollar piece. The third method involves 'counting up' to the bill delivered by the customer, where I would add two one-cent pieces to equal $16.75, a 25-cent piece to equal $17.00, a 1-dollar piece ($18.00) and a 2-dollar piece ($20.00) at which point the order total and change are equal to the amount tendered. Both methods are simplified by only dealing with halves, quarters, tenths, and twentieth's of a centum unit.
Or just change to a pieces-of-five system so only four coins are necessary: 20, 40, 60, and 80 cents. No pennies.
If you can make that work with our (North America's) percentage-based sales tax system, I'd be all for it. I don't like having to change with nickels and pennies, and despise having to change "chump change" into larger denominations for people (eg; to use one of our Internet terminals that only accepts the loonie).
What I'm curious to know (I only skimmed the article; my higher math skills aren't exactly up to date) is why Canada would differ so greatly in its change distribution from America. We use the same denominations, with the exception that our one and two dollar pieces have been converted from bills to coins, but our system uses the penny ($0.01), nickel ($0.05), dime ($0.10), quarter ($0.25), dollar ($1.00), two, five, ten, twenty, fifty, and hundred dollar ($1.00 * n, respectively) pieces (plus the thousand dollar bill which is rarely, if ever seen by other than banks). Is it a difference in our taxation system? With 7% federal sales tax (Goods and Services Tax) and varying Provincial tax rates, does this make our system that much different as to warrant an 83 cent piece?
Re:Usefulness of a gun in the house
on
DVRs for Cop Cars
·
· Score: 1
A ragged stranger came to the door, wouldn't go away with a child at home alone?
Why, was he to assume that he'd rape you?
Have you ever needed food or water?
I feel sorry for you, and any countrymen you encounter in like fashion. Further responses will go ignored.
Re:Usefulness of a gun in the house
on
DVRs for Cop Cars
·
· Score: 1
I knew where they were, and never touched it except for once, when I was about 13 or so...home alone during the summer, and some bum came knocking on the front door,wanting some water...I had the gun in my hand safety off...told him to leave. He finally left...I put the gun back, and told my folks.
A disadvantaged compatriot came to your door asking for water and you pulled a gun on him? And you don't see anything wrong with that?
Slashdot Mirror
Careful how you use that wide angled brush, my friend.
I recently examined a dead Maxtor that had been refurbished not once, but twice.
What's more offensive; refurbished, or re-refurbished? :)
You should look into the Western Digital Special Edition drives. 8MB cache, fast as snot (Western Digitals seem to be kicking the rat dander out of most every other ATA drive manufacture nowadays, with or without the cache boost), and best of all, three year warranty!
40GB Western Digital Special Edition drive == $116CDN. The full warranty makes them a steal.
Speaking of fiascos {cough} Remember that Fujitsu fiasco not so long ago? Yeah yeah, we're still getting them in (two today alone). See, it's a lot easier selling these 40GB drives at $116 when people are able to RMA their 20GB Fujitsu and get a $118 cheque in return. Costs them all of $12 for a box, packing material, and shipping costs. So a brand-new drive with warranty costs them a whopping $10.
The sad part, however, is that I've had so much practice I've become good at telling customers their data is gone. {sigh}
Much as I hate to do it, you're the one defending your much touted "life's work" as a programmer, so here goes;
If you can't discern the difference between "to" and "too", I'm not particularly frightened by your m4d c0d1ng sk1llz. :)
There's another line of thought that goes; if you defend yourself against such an attack, you acknowledge its validity.
Your "life's work" is also being used to bomb civilians in foreign nations.
Perspective, my dear sir.
Oh, I don't know, become one of thousands of zombies using your bandwidth to DDoS the root nameservers or any number of other sites around the Internet, including hapless home DSL/Cable users who piss off those who control said zombies?
It's great that you're putting, effectively, a loaded weapon live on the Internet. Way to be responsible.
The great irony of it all, you realize, is that everybody who reads your post will be laughing at you.
You're aluding to being technically savvy, yet you put a fresh Win2k install live on the Internet without hardening it or using even a basic $50 SOHO firewall?
What it comes down to is deceit and false advertising. Using something akin to the schoolyard tant "Your epidermis is showing!" to fool people into needlesly purchasing a product is illegal. Installing apps on people's computers with the deliberate goal of hiding themselves from all but the skilled users and with the sole intent of invading their privacy is already illegal.
Just because it's on "The Internet" doesn't remove it from the laws that already bind our respective countries.
I dare say you're looking for "don't know they have a good reason to ... are too lazy to do legwork to look for an alternative."
People will spend weeks deliberating over purchase of items they'll use every day, but will happily plop themselves in front of a PC day in, day out at work and at home alike and never consider that there may be something out there that does the job just that much better than their current tool.
Hitting a web page and being innundated by upwards of 100 pop-up / pop-under (onload / onexit) adverts alone would find me running screaming for another browser. (No, you don't even have to be looking for porn; www.whitehouse.org (in its former state), www.britnyspears.com, et al. will do just nicely)
Or, every time somebody showed me a link saying "Use IE? Click here for a neat trick!" (or worse; automatic re-directs) only to find myself staring at a blue screen.
If you want to completely ignore the surface problems, what about finding out that you're actually not supposed to trust software that's digitally signed by Microsoft, because that'll allow people to gain access to your computer through a web page? Or any number of ActiveX controls that install to the local security zone and then proceed to wreak havoc on your PC?
I see these problems all the time (a side effect of working in a retail PC sale/service outlet), yet some people as much as get offended if I suggest an alternate. Outlook seems to be the stickiest subject; I wrote a little blurb (2/3 down) about my experience in that regard.
There are plenty of reasons not to use IE, and there are plenty of good reasons to use an alternate browser. Tabbed browsing, pop-up blocking, image controls, javascript limitations, integrated download manager, etc. Personally, I find myself apalled whenever I'm forced to use IE, and I'm sure others would feel the same way if they'd try an alternative, even for one week of regular surfing. You know what they say; you'll never know until you try.
Then you're selecting the wrong standards. First thing's first; you can't reasonably expect any browser, letalone all browsers to properly support all bleeding-edge standards. Your best bet is to select a baseline standard you're going to use, be it one, two, or three year old standards and use those. Find the most current set that all major browsers (IE, Mozilla/Gecko, Opera) support to your satisfaction and use it. All the web design I do works just fine between all major (and even most of the minor) browsrs and it all validates with the W3.
Dork. :)
While I do agree with you, for the most part, it would be plausible to include such e-mails as "wet horny teen sluts want to cum for you" et al.
I have to say that I did notice Mozilla picked up some mail as SPAM right out of the gate. The unfortunate part was; it picked up several false positives. It was a real bitch going through my mailing list archives and de-SPAM-ifying dozens of messages. But alas, all that done and it's now reliably picking out the SPAM from the regular mail, with false positives and misses declining ever more with each new SPAM I receive.
It's weird, but this new filter actually makes me WANT to post my e-mail address publically; I want to feed it more and watch it grow!
So come get me, spammers, my filter's almost perfect and the irony of it all is; you're only helping it get better! C'mon, teach the lizard a lesson and ask me about my penis!
It is correct that Win'9x will not 'play nice' in extended partitions, however it will completely ignore other primary partitions and install to the first available primary of an acceptable type.
I'm going to have to defer you to RTFM. For that matter, when you press 't' (change 't'ype) in fdisk, it quite clearly tells you that you can 'L'ist partition types. I call shenanigans. Sorry. :)
I'm afraid you are completely incorrect WRT the state of package management systems in modern Linux distributions. I'll ask that you do some modicum of research before perpetuating more (false) Debian propaganda.
Firstly, she only started using *n?x in '94, at which point the GNU tools were already reasonably mature. Moreover, if she's going to selectively provide context, she should reconsider publishing articles on IBM's website.
Further, the 'z' option to decompress gzipped archives is quite old, and quite standard, but I'd have to check the documentation to determine the date of implementation.
Again, incorrect. I have been using Samba with encrypted passwords on networks comprised of any combination of Windows'95, 98, ME, NT4, 2000, and XP for a number of years without fail. The correct procedure is to enable encrypted passwords in Samba itself. Her advise on this matter is just plain bad.
This advise was reckless, without context or explanation, and carries the potential to cause more harm than good. In any case where users are running a combination of 10MBit and/or half-duplex bridge/repeater/switching hardware, this will most certainly lead to enhanced signal degredation and packet loss.
I found it mostly a vanity piece, really. Much of the advice she gave was quite frankly wrong, silly, or unclear (ie; could have used context).
Examples;
Advice given by self-ascribed "gurus" should be taken with a suitable quantity of NaCL, in my humble opinion.
My stove timers operate independant of the actual date/time, and my stove doesn't have or need a clock. Appliance clocks are a nice vanity, but far from critical. After a power outage, they get set when someone is staring at it and bored for ten seconds.
The former three mostly set themselves, but I don't require television clocks since I've already got one on the VCR, cable box, etc. The latter has a 9V backup battery that'll hold the time, alarm time, and keep the alarm functional (read: "Going off") for several hours; days if I don't use the alarm.
NTP.
I set my watches exactly twice/year. Once when entering Daylight Savings and once when leaving. Modern watches even have knowledge of DST so that's no longer an issue.
BTW - you forgot clocks in car stereos.
Extending your own personal experience on an entire product line isn't terribly realistic. None of my cars have ever crashed, but cars do crash.
Except for the dozens of reproducible errors that crop up per OS/Software revision, or the holes that go unpatched (the points in the article WRT Windows Updates failing, being down, giving a clean bill of health, or just providing the update-of-the-week are some likely factors), causing the backbone of the Internet (SQL Slammer) or millions of corporate and ISP mail servers (Melissa et al.) to be DDoS'ed time and time again.
Well said!
If people don't like television shows being mentioned, disable the television category. It's one checkbox, people. Consider it a test of nerdiness; can you sucessfully edit preferences on an online news site? (Poll to be held next week. CowboyNeal can do it - can you?)
Yes, Buffy has geek appeal. Sci-Fi, monsters, babes, lesbians, magic, evil, the conquering of good over evil by way of Googling; it's fantastic. Is it for everyone? Hell no! But are Star Trek, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, etc. for everyone? Another hell no! So why is this even an issue? If you don't like it, don't watch it, just don't bug me about watching it, mmm-kay?
Sorry I missed this part; but I do believe the "greedy algorithm" relies upon each coin being no less than double the value of the preceeding coin in order to function, therefore coming up with a 1,40,41 system does not fit the criteria, therefore does not counter the benefeits of the greedy algorithm.
I never said that. You appended the latter portion. I said we use it because it's easier to think in terms of base-10. Period.
Computers use a binary (base-2) system because it simplifies required circuits. No other system makes sense when you consider the elegance of (1 == on == +5V) versus (0 == off == 0V).
Actually, there are atleast two things fundamentally special about base 10. Firstly, the fact that it's a mere matter of shifting a decimal point to increment numbers to the next or previous level. That makes percentages and accumulating values simpler. Secondly, we have ten fingers. It's easier to learn to use base 10 when you literally have it in front of you right from birth. It also gives us two, rather than three, four, or five one-digit numbers to contend with. Counting by 10 or 1/2 increments (5) will always end with a 0 or a 5, opposed to 3, 6, 9, 12. Sure, it's more difficult to deal in base-3 with a base-10 system, but converting to base-2 and back is simple.
Correction; it would be easy for them to memorize based on the patterns they see unfolding, but less easy to understand. Base-10 is simple to understand, which makes it the most fluent system to adopt.
Conversions of weights and measures in base-10 (metric) is dead simple. Ask me how many metres in a kilometre is easy; I know that kilo represents thousand, therefore there are 1000 metres. How many yards to a mile, OTOH, must be memorized because there is no logical correlation between the "foot", the "yard", and the "mile". But I digress.
Factoring numbers in base-10 will always be easier than in base-12 or other systems because of the simple decimal place adjustment. I can multiply 1,000,000 by 1,000,000,000 (10^6 and 10^9, respectively) in a matter of a second or two (adjust the decimal place of the latter by the number of zeroes in the former), but 12^6 (2985984) by 12^9 (5159780352) will take monotonous calculation, baring any mnemonic devices one can pick up. (And don't try to tell me you figured those out without a calculator, or if so, in under ten seconds, letalone the product or sum!)
Have you been to a McDonald's recently? Them, donut shops, and any other minimum wage job tends to have a lot of "Tide me over through high school" students working for them who can't figure out change with or without a "Change due" amount in front of them.
This is making two very large assumptions;
Sadly, in many cases neither of the above conditions can be relied upon, so we get kids (and adults) who don't understand how to make regular change (ie; with a single bill of a denomination larger than the order total), letalone convenient change (ie; a 20 and a single for an 11 dollar order), and get confused and often attempt to hand back the extraneous currency.
You make it sound as if there's a course. I'd go so far as to say most cashiers are taught the specifics of the cash register at hand and are left to figure things out on their own. Stores / restaurants don't tend to spend time instructing 6.85'ers what is thought to be common knowledge (how to count, how to change a $20, how to combine small coins to make the change an even amount, etc.). In the cases where such skills are taught, many teenagers exhibit stereotypical symptoms and ignore the lessons because, hey, they know it all anyways.
Oh, I get it now, strict use of the "greedy" change method results in a poor return on what I think is a really poor combintion. I mean, 1,40,41? The vast majority of required amounts of change result in dozens of coins returned. Anything from 1-39 cents, for example, wheras most combinations of same in our present system can be created with 2-3 coins. Then anything above 40, again, requires many coins. 40+n = 1+n or 1+(n-1) coins returned, until you hit 80 cents, at which point it becomes 2+n or 2+(n-2).
I must have missed some thread progression, but was 1,40,41 ever actually a serious contender anywhere, or was it just hyperbole posted here?
So you're saying I could help my economy by rolling up my 1KG-sized coffee tin worth of pennies et al. and deposit them to my bank account? Cool! Maybe I can use it to cover the extra cost of a tank of gas nowadays! Everybody wins! ;)
I may be misunderstanding you, but in a 1,40,41 system, 39 cents would require 39 coins, whereas 80 cents would require two, so it's completely not practical. In a system that implemented an 18 cent piece, providing the 1 cent piece still existed, could give 40 cents in four coins, 80 cents would require eight coins (four 18 cent + four 1 cent), but both would be less practical and more confusing to cashiers - many of whom have trouble even understanding our rather simple base-10 system.
I believe the base-10 coinage system lasted due to its ties to the metric system, combined with the fact that base-10 is easy to think (it's base-1 with an additional 0 appended, making counting a matter of ten numbers - be it to 10, 100, 1,000, or 10^n).
How many times have you been in a McDonald's and watched the cashier struggle with changing a $20 bill for a $16.73 order?
Our system allows us two basic methods of couting out change; the 'trickle down' method whereby you start with one two-dollar pieces, a one-dollar piece, a 25-cent piece, and two 1-cent pieces. Continue giving the largest possible piece until what's left is a number lesser-than-or-equal-to $0.04 and give the remainder in 1-cent pieces. Changing the same order from a $100 bill is a mere extension of a 50-dollar piece, a 20-dollar piece, and a 10-dollar piece. The third method involves 'counting up' to the bill delivered by the customer, where I would add two one-cent pieces to equal $16.75, a 25-cent piece to equal $17.00, a 1-dollar piece ($18.00) and a 2-dollar piece ($20.00) at which point the order total and change are equal to the amount tendered. Both methods are simplified by only dealing with halves, quarters, tenths, and twentieth's of a centum unit.
If you can make that work with our (North America's) percentage-based sales tax system, I'd be all for it. I don't like having to change with nickels and pennies, and despise having to change "chump change" into larger denominations for people (eg; to use one of our Internet terminals that only accepts the loonie).
What I'm curious to know (I only skimmed the article; my higher math skills aren't exactly up to date) is why Canada would differ so greatly in its change distribution from America. We use the same denominations, with the exception that our one and two dollar pieces have been converted from bills to coins, but our system uses the penny ($0.01), nickel ($0.05), dime ($0.10), quarter ($0.25), dollar ($1.00), two, five, ten, twenty, fifty, and hundred dollar ($1.00 * n, respectively) pieces (plus the thousand dollar bill which is rarely, if ever seen by other than banks). Is it a difference in our taxation system? With 7% federal sales tax (Goods and Services Tax) and varying Provincial tax rates, does this make our system that much different as to warrant an 83 cent piece?
Why, was he to assume that he'd rape you?
Have you ever needed food or water?
I feel sorry for you, and any countrymen you encounter in like fashion. Further responses will go ignored.
A disadvantaged compatriot came to your door asking for water and you pulled a gun on him? And you don't see anything wrong with that?