Bandwidth is expressed in units data per unit time. So megabits/second, bytes/minute, etc...
Welcome to the real world; here outside of SlashdotLand, people don't always spell out the entirety of "proper notation", instead referring to commonly used shorthand.
For a fun experiment; talk to someone from Sprint or QWest or AT&T and ask them for information on a "15 Megabit connection" and see if they look at you funny.
(Hint: Thousands of network administrators all around the world omit "per second" in thousands of conversations every day. Get used to it.)
Bits are a perfectly legitimate unit of data, and if you've ever bought ram then this should be really obvious to you.
I SELL RAM and I have no idea what you're getting at. If I tried to sell a "Two gigabit" stick of RAM to a customer my boss would have my head!
1) Who made this film? Can they be trusted? I know for a fact that several media conglomerates have profited quite heavily from secret alien technology and would be happy to go to extreme lengths to discredit proof that They have arrived.
2) Time-lapse, eh? What happened during the lapses? Did a qualified cerealogist examine the resulting circle to see if it was genuine? (i.e. made by The Visitors?)
LOL.. Ok, I know when I've been had. Good one. Touche.:)
All science needs is plausible answers now. They don't need any evidence.
It's like you're only reading every second sentence or something. I've seen time-lapsed photography of a group of three (perhaps four) men creating a 'crop circle' pattern in a field that, for the moment, I have no reason to doubt. It is a completely plausible scenario (not like time-lapsed photography of a person, say, climbing Everest inside of an afternoon, for example).
I do have to apologize, though, for one little detail; the show was aired on The Learning Channel, which is (as far as I know) a part of the "Discovery Network".
Get back under the bridge, troll. I know what has been revealed to me and you can't take that away.
You post as AC nothing more substantive than a denial of the sun hitting your face and I'M the troll?
Whatever helps you sleep at night, sparky.
Re:Not to be overly skeptical
on
Bigfoot A Hoax?
·
· Score: 2
But do you have any proof to back up your claims that humans made these circles? The burden of proof is on you, you know.
So I (re)present a perfectly plausible, realistic, down to Earth (if you'll pardon the pun) explanation of how crop circles can be created, even with reference to a location that has displayed this proof you seek, and I'm supposed to - what, perform the act of vandalism myself with a Hi-Eight at my side? Meanwhile, your fantastic notion of alien geography nuts is accepted by default?
Sorry if I sound incredulous, but that tends to happen to me in the face of rampant idiocy.
Mega Bit is an amount of information. Bandwidth is the amount of information per unit time.
When referring to bandwidth, bits are used as the form of standard notation. When speaking of volumes of data, bytes are used. Rarely are the two reversed.
When I say that I have a 3Mbit connection at work; I don't mean that I can only download 384Kilobytes in an alloted time period - I mean that I have a 3Megabit per Second connection. Unless otherwise specified, "per second" is implied.
Just look through these other posts in this thread.
I prefer to use industry, rather than Slashdot-Subscriber terminology.
I'm having trouble beliving anyone would pay $800 per megabyte per month!
Since you normally don't post sarcastically, I'm assuming this is just a small mis-conception on your part.
Mb stands for Mega Bit, which is usually indicative of bandwidth, not bytes transferred. $800/Month/Mb is about accurate, considering the price of a T1 is somewhere around that mark for 1.5Mbit right now.
The subject on your response would indicate Giga Bit per Month, which costs significantly more than $800, let me tell you.
BSD OSs are often used as production mail servers for small to large installations, including, more often than not, a majority of Windows clients. Sophos, IIRC, has the ability to scan mail and/or mail spools to detect and prevent the spread of these viruses to client machines.
My apologies; I'm guilty of the very same crime as Mr. Penfold. I didn't RTFA. A quote from the article describing the Sophos story;
Protecting a system against viruses is an important thing for every system administrator. Although there is no real threat from viruses on UNIX, some users may use Windows OS on their home PCs. What I am going to offer you in this article is a somewhat tricky installation of Postfix, Amavis and Sophos.
I'm posting this against my better judgement so I'm removing my +1. I can't tell if you're being serious or trolling.
How come? BSD can't get viruses.
Any operating system can get viruses. How the OS is designed and the installation configured to combat the spread of the virus is what makes BSD / UNIX / Linux based platforms undesireable targets for viral attack.
BSD OSs are often used as production mail servers for small to large installations, including, more often than not, a majority of Windows clients. Sophos, IIRC, has the ability to scan mail and/or mail spools to detect and prevent the spread of these viruses to client machines.
Re:Who said it was aliens?
on
Bigfoot A Hoax?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
From what I read, all that has been claimed is that it wasn't the so-called "hoaxers" that made these circles. Nobody has claimed it was aliens.
Perhaps you should extend your reading list some.
Nobody has been able to film them being made.
Discovery channel has aired film of the hoaxsters creating circles. It's been on television dozens of times.
The geometry has been proven to be beyond the ability of a normal IQ person.
Most people with a compass and protractor and an hour or two can make circle patterns on paper. Anybody who's taken a high school survey class can map those circles into a field.
Actual proof is not required for the popular belief in the fantastical Bigfoot, but 'convincing and specific' proof with 'photo graphic evidence' and maybe 'a diary or something' is needed to refute the existence of a hypothetical fairy tale creature.
I don't normally do this, but here goes; mod parent up! If I had mod points I'd do it myself, but sadly they expired a week ago.
This is exactly what I was thinking (and chuckling about) as I read the article.
I'm guessing you're not a college student...I'm certainly not "billy hardcore", but I personally have 16 gigs and counting worth of just mp3's, and I can guarantee you there's people around here with even more.
"A few dozen" - let's say two dozen @ 800MB/disc = 24*800 = 19.2GB. Let's assume three dozen = 36*800 = 28.8GB. Four dozen = 48*800 = 38.4GB.
Sorry, it's late and I got irked, but we're still not up at the.5TB range.
Just because people are not as educated on something as you, does not make them a moron.
I'm sorry, but what education does a person require to understand that they should not undertake complicated operations they don't understand? I understand that I can't replace my car's transmission - so guess what? I won't try!
When people do stupid things on their computers that they don't understand that break things, it's not Bonzi's fault, or IBM or Dell or Gateway or Compaq (HP), or DoubleClick or eBay's or anybody else - it's their own. If they want to know more about their computer, there are hundreds of available computer beginner's courses out there at accredited institutions they can take, some free (public education / public works, libraries, etc.) and some for a cost, whether nominal or grievous.
Long and short of it - people who make uninformed decisions and get burned by the results deserve what they get. QED.
Yep. Just the other day I watched a sysadmin talk down a user who was freaking out over his computer not being safe for the internet. It was quite sad.
I had to explain, very patiently, to a person that she could continue her research on old French poetry without having to worry about the 'error message' she saw in her web browser, and instruct her to ignore supposed error messages that popped into her browser window. She'd phoned the NOC in a panic, see, because 'her' Internet connection was not optimised, and this frightened her.
Of course, the fact that the connection belonged to the school (board) was of no consequence to her. Apparently it was urgent enough to interrupt me from doing ACTUAL work to calm her down (See, it was an emergency, I had to get there immediately because the computer wouldn't let her do research).
So consider this; the sysadmin who was "talking down to" this user - could it perhaps be the thirtieth user he'd had to calm down about his computer safety?
There are limits to the amount of human stupidity I can tolerate. Sorry. Companies and schools have computer use and security policies in effect; policies which are made available to the users often without them even having to ask. What do these users DO with these policies? They shove them
in a drawer, or as I've seen more often than not line a bird
cage with them (or circular-file them at the earliest possible convenience).
So no, I do not feel pity for the morons who've downloaded and installed this tripe. They've brought it on themselves for skimming EULAs, installing software they clearly know nothing about, and by holding out for the least expensive products and services including Information Technology - which has resulted in fewer employed knowledgeable sysadmins and more people who want to save a buck by doing "that computer stuff" by themselves, which only allows them to get bamboozled so bloody easily. Moreover, most users who contact network admins about these problems do so knowing full-well that they know MORE than (s)he does already, or they just brazenly go about doing something they don't understand without consulting anybody about it because, hey, they're smart enough to figure this out! Why on EARTH would someone be out to fool ME? The world is rosy and everybody's out to help their fellow man, after all.
Wake up, people, and welcome to the real bloody world. It's dank and people ARE out to get you. Corporations are not kind-hearted and selfless - you are but a number to them, and the only thing they want from that number is complacence and currency. The Internet is a big bad place full of crap, cruft, and do-evil types who will try to get ten year old girls to meet them for sexual purposes, who will try to get your bank account and credit card numbers from which to syphon money, and who will generally make your life a living hell. Why? Because they CAN and because that's human nature. Some people may be generally good, but a good bloody lot of them are BAD, and until people wake up to that fact we're going to see a lot more class-action suits designed to protect the willfully ignorant.
A note to every single person who's ever been taken advantage of, scammed out of money or personal information over the Internet because they didn't follow the same common-sense principles of keeping your personal information PRIVATE that people have been instituting in the "real world" for decades now;
GOOD ON YOU! I hope it HURT and I hope you HAVEN'T learned your lesson so that you KEEP getting screwed until it REALLY sinks in! I also hope that eventually you'll wake the hell up and realize that you NEED trained computer / network technicians because you don't understand the risks involved with the Internet and computer in general, or understand how to install, upgrade, or maintain one computer or a network full of computers.
You're like the people who have relatives who've died of lung cancer and mourned and greived your "loss" but decided to start smoking anyways, and perhaps held the tobacco companies at fault for your blatant stupidity. Or the people who've known people with, or who have died from AIDS or Syphyllis or any of the other hundreds of STDs out there today but who've decided that condoms are a waste of your time. Like the people who've thought they could fix their car in their driveway but have wound up paying a mechanic $2000 because you've so royally screwed your car beyond recognition - and I love it. The stupid deserve to be screwed over, not coddled. Coddling and protecting people is what CAUSES such rampant stupidity in the first place; people don't HAVE to think, because people around them will do it for them anyways.
www.interieur.gouv.fr [interieur.gouv.fr]. The page as is comes out minute, the 'printable' version is no better, but the text only one (which still has images, err...) seems to work OK.
Looks good to me (except that I can't understand French). You might want to try that 'minimum font size' setting (you'll find it in Edit -> Preferences -> Appearance -> Fonts -> Minimum font size. Mine's set to 12, not 13 as I'd thought, and the page you referenced and all of its sub-pages look fine.
Sure, but when people keep saying that Mozilla is the world's greatest browser, I think that the fact it doesn't work with a lot of sites (even if it is the webmasters' fault) is relevant.
Relevant, yes. Mozilla's fault, not in the slightest. If sites want to block by browser version, only allow Internet Explorer, or give different pages according to browser version that's their problem and one they should be made aware of. If your local mechanic only serviced GM cars - would you write angry letters about Ford, or would you complain to him and proceed to take your business elsewhere?
Just spent half an hour trying (unsuccessfully) to persuade Mozilla not to reduce all the pages on a French government site to 4 point text (why would this be a feature for anyone unless your name is Stuart Little?).
Mind sharing a URL? I've got a minimum font size of 13 configured (my eyes, well, suck.:/ ) and I haven't had many problems. ATI's site used to be horrendous in that regard (I swear they were using 2pt fonts!) but now the web is readable.
BTW - a lot of the sites that won't work with Mozilla are in such a state due to retarded webmasters who do browser-checks. For whatever reason, Sprint Canada has decided that "Netscape 7 is not supported", whereas Netscape Communicator is. Wait - scratch that. I seem to be able to browse their entire site using Phoenix and Mozilla 1.2. Ok, so they've fixed themselves.
If you don't like the fact that a site doesn't work in a standards-compliant browser like Mozilla, complain to the webmaster not Slashdot.
See the problem? No matter how much memory you have, it uses it all. Pretty simply page - 100 elements. As far as I know, this affects every version of IE running under Windows 9x. Pretty major bug if you ask me, but Microsoft refuses to fix it:)
I have to say, wow. Phoenix got bit by this page, too. Regular memory usage of around 30-40MB (quite large for a 'scaled down Mozilla', but I digress) jumped significantly;
PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND 26035 blackdea 14 0 85464 81M 12564 S 7.0 32.4 2:10 phoenix-bin
I don't get it. Why give every app have a half-assed window manager with its own quirky UI rather than making the system window manager usable?
Remember that Mozilla is in use across many OSs, each with their own quirks when it comes to window managers. It makes Mozilla more streamlined across all of them; configuring the same profile across Linux, FreeBSD, Win'98, Win2k, WinXP, OS/2, etc. I get the exact same UI. Besides that; tabs are way more convenient than new windows. New windows = more clutter on your desktop and taskbar (very important for those of us who perpetually have a dozen or two windows open), more clutter on your desktop itself ('How many layers deep is Mozilla window eighteen of thirty?'), and having short summaries of each tab right in front of my face is extremely convenient. It's not replicating a window manager's functionality because it's only one window.
To summarize (and support) what others here have been saying; you don't know how nice tabbed browsing is until you've tried it. I used to be skeptical myself until I started using it, now I hate browsing without it.
(For fun; use tabbed browsing, disable pop-ups and most of the annoying JavaScript functionality and use Mozilla exclusively for a month or two, then use IE. If you don't want to claw your eyes out within the first ten minutes, I'll mail you $20 of your country's currency)
You're not actually blind enough to think that linux is "first class with a large user base" are you? Linux still is a "tiny OS".
You're not actually silly enough to think the end-(l)user base is the only market that defines an OS's userbase, are you? Why is Microsoft so afraid of our "tiny OS"?
Yes there IS software that is secure... 100% secure like my example above.
I believe your parent posters' example was a tad short-sighted (it's the typical cliche people use when referring to software, mostly to Microsoft vs. OSS I've found).
In reality, as the complexity of an application increases, so does the potential for overflows and security vulnerabilities. It's a simple proportionality based on several factors, including (but not limited to);
Human (programmer) error
Unaccounted program (user) input (see #1)
Vulnerabilities present in included libraries (reference; recent mod_ssl exploit)
etc. ad nauseum. Incidentally, you forgot to initialize integer 'z' before you used it. Sorry, but that's a potential exploit.;)
The long and short of it is, programmers need to pay much more attention to the code they produce. Large-scale applications should be heavily modular, and more auditing should take place (did you check that buffer before allocating it? Did you free all your buffers before you ended your routine?)
After I read an interview with Linus where he was asked about the current Linux kernel versus new BSD and XP features, he said something to the effect of "I haven't really looked much at BSD or XP, but I don't see much of value there".
Did you ever think it could be Linus not seeing anything in BSD or XP that he didn't already have under Linux? After all, he's the creator and the guy who came up with the framework.
If you build your own car to suit your needs; why would you want to drive the latest [Ford/GM] incarnation?
Besides that, with all the hub-bub about Billy Gee running his 'switch' campaign on FreeBSD servers, can you imagine if the father of Linux were caught running the OS of one of his "nemeses"?
I've been hearing about bad ATI drivers since the days of the 80386. I've had some severe problems with ATI drivers myself, and needed to call ATI tech support. My impression is that the company should not allow receptionists to write drivers when they are not answering phones.
I've had countless problems with ATI drivers, to the point where I'll generally do everything possible to avoid installing the drivers that come on retail and/or OEM CDs, and instead download the latest drivers from their website. Heck, with some of their TV tuner cards they don't even seem to come with drivers but only the "MultiMedia Cent(er|re)" software, or if they do have drivers they're an absolute nightmare to find and install.
If cheapy-generic video chip makers like SiS, S3, and Trident can make drivers that are easily installed - and don't make the system as stable as a house built on a swamp - why in the Eff can't ATI manage to do the same?
Granted, nVidia's beta drivers have made a fair share of Win'** systems unstable, but again, they're beta drivers. ATI manages to press and ship a million CDs of unstable drivers.
Slashdot Mirror
For a fun experiment; talk to someone from Sprint or QWest or AT&T and ask them for information on a "15 Megabit connection" and see if they look at you funny.
(Hint: Thousands of network administrators all around the world omit "per second" in thousands of conversations every day. Get used to it.)
I SELL RAM and I have no idea what you're getting at. If I tried to sell a "Two gigabit" stick of RAM to a customer my boss would have my head!
LOL.. Ok, I know when I've been had. Good one. Touche. :)
I do have to apologize, though, for one little detail; the show was aired on The Learning Channel, which is (as far as I know) a part of the "Discovery Network".
You post as AC nothing more substantive than a denial of the sun hitting your face and I'M the troll?Whatever helps you sleep at night, sparky.
Sorry if I sound incredulous, but that tends to happen to me in the face of rampant idiocy.
When I say that I have a 3Mbit connection at work; I don't mean that I can only download 384Kilobytes in an alloted time period - I mean that I have a 3Megabit per Second connection. Unless otherwise specified, "per second" is implied.
I prefer to use industry, rather than Slashdot-Subscriber terminology.Mb stands for Mega Bit, which is usually indicative of bandwidth, not bytes transferred. $800/Month/Mb is about accurate, considering the price of a T1 is somewhere around that mark for 1.5Mbit right now.
The subject on your response would indicate Giga Bit per Month, which costs significantly more than $800, let me tell you.
This is exactly what I was thinking (and chuckling about) as I read the article.
Sorry, it's late and I got irked, but we're still not up at the .5TB range.
When people do stupid things on their computers that they don't understand that break things, it's not Bonzi's fault, or IBM or Dell or Gateway or Compaq (HP), or DoubleClick or eBay's or anybody else - it's their own. If they want to know more about their computer, there are hundreds of available computer beginner's courses out there at accredited institutions they can take, some free (public education / public works, libraries, etc.) and some for a cost, whether nominal or grievous.
Long and short of it - people who make uninformed decisions and get burned by the results deserve what they get. QED.
Of course, the fact that the connection belonged to the school (board) was of no consequence to her. Apparently it was urgent enough to interrupt me from doing ACTUAL work to calm her down (See, it was an emergency, I had to get there immediately because the computer wouldn't let her do research).
So consider this; the sysadmin who was "talking down to" this user - could it perhaps be the thirtieth user he'd had to calm down about his computer safety?
There are limits to the amount of human stupidity I can tolerate. Sorry. Companies and schools have computer use and security policies in effect; policies which are made available to the users often without them even having to ask. What do these users DO with these policies? They shove them in a drawer, or as I've seen more often than not line a bird cage with them (or circular-file them at the earliest possible convenience).
So no, I do not feel pity for the morons who've downloaded and installed this tripe. They've brought it on themselves for skimming EULAs, installing software they clearly know nothing about, and by holding out for the least expensive products and services including Information Technology - which has resulted in fewer employed knowledgeable sysadmins and more people who want to save a buck by doing "that computer stuff" by themselves, which only allows them to get bamboozled so bloody easily. Moreover, most users who contact network admins about these problems do so knowing full-well that they know MORE than (s)he does already, or they just brazenly go about doing something they don't understand without consulting anybody about it because, hey, they're smart enough to figure this out! Why on EARTH would someone be out to fool ME? The world is rosy and everybody's out to help their fellow man, after all.
Wake up, people, and welcome to the real bloody world. It's dank and people ARE out to get you. Corporations are not kind-hearted and selfless - you are but a number to them, and the only thing they want from that number is complacence and currency. The Internet is a big bad place full of crap, cruft, and do-evil types who will try to get ten year old girls to meet them for sexual purposes, who will try to get your bank account and credit card numbers from which to syphon money, and who will generally make your life a living hell. Why? Because they CAN and because that's human nature. Some people may be generally good, but a good bloody lot of them are BAD, and until people wake up to that fact we're going to see a lot more class-action suits designed to protect the willfully ignorant.
A note to every single person who's ever been taken advantage of, scammed out of money or personal information over the Internet because they didn't follow the same common-sense principles of keeping your personal information PRIVATE that people have been instituting in the "real world" for decades now;
GOOD ON YOU! I hope it HURT and I hope you HAVEN'T learned your lesson so that you KEEP getting screwed until it REALLY sinks in! I also hope that eventually you'll wake the hell up and realize that you NEED trained computer / network technicians because you don't understand the risks involved with the Internet and computer in general, or understand how to install, upgrade, or maintain one computer or a network full of computers.
You're like the people who have relatives who've died of lung cancer and mourned and greived your "loss" but decided to start smoking anyways, and perhaps held the tobacco companies at fault for your blatant stupidity. Or the people who've known people with, or who have died from AIDS or Syphyllis or any of the other hundreds of STDs out there today but who've decided that condoms are a waste of your time. Like the people who've thought they could fix their car in their driveway but have wound up paying a mechanic $2000 because you've so royally screwed your car beyond recognition - and I love it. The stupid deserve to be screwed over, not coddled. Coddling and protecting people is what CAUSES such rampant stupidity in the first place; people don't HAVE to think, because people around them will do it for them anyways.
That is all.
Please do pay attention.
BTW - a lot of the sites that won't work with Mozilla are in such a state due to retarded webmasters who do browser-checks. For whatever reason, Sprint Canada has decided that "Netscape 7 is not supported", whereas Netscape Communicator is. Wait - scratch that. I seem to be able to browse their entire site using Phoenix and Mozilla 1.2. Ok, so they've fixed themselves.
If you don't like the fact that a site doesn't work in a standards-compliant browser like Mozilla, complain to the webmaster not Slashdot.
To summarize (and support) what others here have been saying; you don't know how nice tabbed browsing is until you've tried it. I used to be skeptical myself until I started using it, now I hate browsing without it.
(For fun; use tabbed browsing, disable pop-ups and most of the annoying JavaScript functionality and use Mozilla exclusively for a month or two, then use IE. If you don't want to claw your eyes out within the first ten minutes, I'll mail you $20 of your country's currency)
In reality, as the complexity of an application increases, so does the potential for overflows and security vulnerabilities. It's a simple proportionality based on several factors, including (but not limited to);
etc. ad nauseum. Incidentally, you forgot to initialize integer 'z' before you used it. Sorry, but that's a potential exploit. ;)
The long and short of it is, programmers need to pay much more attention to the code they produce. Large-scale applications should be heavily modular, and more auditing should take place (did you check that buffer before allocating it? Did you free all your buffers before you ended your routine?)
If you build your own car to suit your needs; why would you want to drive the latest [Ford/GM] incarnation?
Besides that, with all the hub-bub about Billy Gee running his 'switch' campaign on FreeBSD servers, can you imagine if the father of Linux were caught running the OS of one of his "nemeses"?
If cheapy-generic video chip makers like SiS, S3, and Trident can make drivers that are easily installed - and don't make the system as stable as a house built on a swamp - why in the Eff can't ATI manage to do the same?
Granted, nVidia's beta drivers have made a fair share of Win'** systems unstable, but again, they're beta drivers. ATI manages to press and ship a million CDs of unstable drivers.