It said 12,800 years ago Earth cooled down, and that lasted for 1,300 years.
Just a thought, but what happened after the cold period? Population started to grow (right?!). If we would/could compare populations figures "then" with "now" we would probably see a big diffrence (in growth).
Theoretically Earth can't produce enough food for how big of a population [in detail: there aren't enough atoms to go around for everyboy, after a certain amount of people, to sustain (our) life].
Now, we've seen bacteria/micro-organisms/etc etc flurish in "warm contitions", and vise versa in "colder contionions". And frankley we (humans) as orgonisms are somewhat dependent on warmth (I know I am:)). As such does our "food" (crops & lifestock) too [or it won't grow].
So if we enter a long period of coldness our "food" supplies we start to minimize. Either population starts to decline to compensate, or we either (1)have to find some new food source(s) or (2)turn ourself into "Duracell bunnys" that run much longer on the same amount of energy *the matrix déjà vu* [I mean, start being more "energy aware", eg. Why use a regular 60W lamp that produces ~710 Lumens when a lowenergy 15W lamp produces ~900 Lumens (where Watt is energy and Lumens is light). Same applies to us humans...].
[End]
[Personaly I see us humans as a virus-like organism that instead of improving itself improves by occuping a new teritorium. Where do we go if earth's full? Haven't you been following? Mars - here we come to suck the life out of you too - and move onto the next planet... but that's just me picture of humanity...]
*hum, all those alien movies where they try to invadade us, wasn't about us at all, but of them - ooohboy, we gonna get killed in this process* well well, you try stopping a bull rampage towards you....ol'e said the matador *hehe*
It just accured to me that these "printed images" on the rest of the free space could be used to copyprotect a cd; (now avalible ) for us plain-users *that is*.
The images gets burned outside the TOC, so when you read (copy) the cd all other info outside the TOC gets left out.
Add a little "protection app" to the cd, make the cd-rom[s] execute the app. Where the apps look "in a certian place" for the right bit burnt in the right places. [Don't forget that you most likely have to encode the data of the cd; so, that only the little app that gets executed upon insertion can read&decode the contet (only IF! it finds the right bits&bytes on the cd)].
And Voul'a a copy protected cd.
*hum* upon more thought, You could do this with a regular cdburner too *you just need someone (or yourself) to code the right app for this certian scheme:)*. Maybe someone will start a new opensource project *hehe*
A few years ago, I thought I would have to live with them for the rest of my life *grin & spit*.
SMS, (the new) MMS and what else features the mobile cellphone had had never made me use one.
I can and could use all cellphone features thru my PC but the thing [for me] is I can do a ton more things on/thru my PC then I could ever on even the fanciest cellphone money can by.
But recently with all these wireless (802,11a & b, or what the future may hold..) access points popping up here and there everyday everywhere, I start to see a diffrent picture emerge.
[First]-(Pre wireless 802,11...)
We have got to get one thing strait, and that is that both the PC net (the one we call InterNet) and the Cellphone net (the mobile net) are basically doing the same thing, sending bits forth&back, but in diffrent manner[s]. * One is: Fix (the PC net), while the other is mobile * One is: Cheap, while the other is expensive (if you compare the two, sending 650 MByte of data : )) * One is: a lot more Feature Rich Per Cost, while the other is (somewhat) limited per cost * One is: High Bandwidth, while the other is low bandwidth * and One has: A high User Count, while the other is trailing behind
And many used both, but in diffrent places; at their job[s] the PC net, on the road the moblie net
[Now]-(Wireless 802,11 comes into our lifes and wanna' play...)
Now things start to change, both the PC net and the Cellphone net are still doing the same thing, sending bits forth&back, _but_ in the same manner[s].
Now: * Both are: mobile * One is: Cheap, while the other is expensive (if you compare the two, sending 650 MByte of data : )) * One is: a lot more Feature Rich Per Cost, while the other is (somewhat) limited per cost * One is: High Bandwidth, while the other is low bandwidth * and One has: A high User Count, while the other is trailing behind
One thing changed! Both got Mobile! Now one has to start comparing which one to use [to sum all the arguments I thought of, where I'm a bit late to an apointment, to write down right now]
* one that will cost you less money? or more?
* one High Feature Rich per cost? or Low?
I say good byebye to the cellphone [not that I've really _ever_ used one].
And hello usual High Broadband, thou ya' ar't wireless
OK, lets say they'll be doing that!
switching to the x86 architecture
Why close it of? Use special moded CPU's with special motherboards...etc etc? Only to remain a
closed of platorm? In doing so, not letting users form doing what they what with a pice of hardware they bought (it really doesn't sound that attractive to switch to... more like they would be doing-a-$ms--thingie, "cough up the money, and WE'll control you! You can thurst us!")
All I _really!!!_ wish for in a computer, is that after I buy it, I may do what the heck I want to it, with it, on it! And run what software (OS) I want (may it be Linux, unix, Mac OS X, BeOS.. etc), and how I want it. And no further ridiculous cost like "to run that, you have to use exactly this, you may not/can't reuse your working-old-one".
Now that would be comprimized, if I bought "the new Apple AMD x86-64 MAC" and found that I can't play with it. Can't run my stuff, can't fiddle with the hardware, have to buy super-expensive-ultraDitt&datt-that-does-the-same- thing-as-the-lower-priced-PC does.
And as for the "porting Mac Os X software to the x86 architecture". It really would make this harder in the closed platform approach, cause it would make developers rewrite their software. On the other hand in an open platform, I think, the Mac would gain a lot (both in new avalible software choices & reuse of already cross platform avalible software). Take Adobe, (and x-other developers) already have almost all their
software running on both x86 and PPC, so it wouldn't bother them if Apple would switch. Maybe it would even cut cost for them (goodbye to the Apple PPC Mac-department:)...)
[The end]
Having 5 guys/girls doing the same thing, is both time & energy consuming.
Having 5 guys/girls cooperating on the same thing is less time cosuming and energy saving.
My experience says me that a logical solution (keep crackers away.. etc etc...), has another counter logical solution agaist it (a way to reverse it, to put in plain text: crack it..). Why?, because otherwise it wouldn't be "a logical solution" in the first place.
89 1 55 1 34 2 21 3 13 4 8 5
which number shouldn't be there? (that's right, these numbers are the result of some logic, except one... which, I ask : ))
(ps! Just becasue a logical solution maybe "simple", dosn't mean the counter logical solution should/would be the same)
(PS nr2!! The point I want to make?? (If you haven't figured it out). Well then, you have some thing to make sense of then : ))
"Apple announced the release of a free FireWire _SDK_ for embedded devices. The kit is not OS-dependent.", it didn't say nothing about
"Firewire Reference Platform" so I backed back when I pasted by and saw no SDK.
SCSI320:
SCSI at all is to expensive (IMHO), not the less, SCSI320 will force you to rob a small bank in order to afford it:)
I think before publishing material publicly, one should do some research and confirm sources/results with
other relevant people on that subject. (eg. confirm "hack[er|ing]/crack[er|ing]" with (a) guru[s] in computers, like ESR).
This goes aswell to the slashdot editors for their (subject)postings; and all other form of publishing (you know who you are).
You can/could boot x-diffrent bootdisk that you have spreaded over several floppys from one CDR[w] by the tip of your fingertips.
Heck, you could boot all of those OS's you mention from just one CDR[W]. Maybe even add several Linux and Unix distributions to the cd (note that, that this depeneds on the size of the windows:) ).
It Depends on your hardware, I would say. These days Optical drives are capable of multi-boot. So in a few steps one could setup a CDR[W] with all those needed boot disks.
...and while you are at it you notice that you could use one CDRW instead of all those floppys.
I mean, you can't buy a retail computer without an optical dirve these days. So, you can litterally carry that one CDRW with you where ever you go, and have acces to that data.
Ok, maybe you can't write to it from every compter (office..etcetc), but you can almost send an email from everywhere (note that I live in sweden, a broadband-hyped-country:) ).
I ditched my floppy about 3? years ago (maybe 4, maybe it's been so long ago that I don't even remember it).
And I do not miss it. Actually I rather love my all-in-one-CDRW-bootCD (with x-diffrent bootdisk options at my fingertips) I hacked-up for myself instead of those dreaded *damed* floppys that just gave me headaches:).
..and use some protocol or cdr[w] or HD! to satisfy my other needs when it comes to share/store those so-important-documents/files-of-mine:).
who *_REALY!_* needs a floppy these days? CDRWs are IMHO far more redundant, and can store a lot more.
Slashdot Mirror
It said 12,800 years ago Earth cooled down, and that lasted for 1,300 years.
:)). As such does our "food" (crops & lifestock) too [or it won't grow].
Just a thought, but what happened after the cold period? Population started to grow (right?!). If we would/could compare populations figures "then" with "now" we would probably see a big diffrence (in growth). Theoretically Earth can't produce enough food for how big of a population [in detail: there aren't enough atoms to go around for everyboy, after a certain amount of people, to sustain (our) life].
Now, we've seen bacteria/micro-organisms/etc etc flurish in "warm contitions", and vise versa in "colder contionions". And frankley we (humans) as orgonisms are somewhat dependent on warmth (I know I am
So if we enter a long period of coldness our "food" supplies we start to minimize. Either population starts to decline to compensate, or we either (1)have to find some new food source(s) or (2)turn ourself into "Duracell bunnys" that run much longer on the same amount of energy *the matrix déjà vu* [I mean, start being more "energy aware", eg. Why use a regular 60W lamp that produces ~710 Lumens when a lowenergy 15W lamp produces ~900 Lumens (where Watt is energy and Lumens is light). Same applies to us humans...].
[End]
[Personaly I see us humans as a virus-like organism that instead of improving itself improves by occuping a new teritorium. Where do we go if earth's full? Haven't you been following? Mars - here we come to suck the life out of you too - and move onto the next planet... but that's just me picture of humanity...]
*hum, all those alien movies where they try to invadade us, wasn't about us at all, but of them - ooohboy, we gonna get killed in this process* well well, you try stopping a bull rampage towards you....ol'e said the matador *hehe*
... where you could go and download those codes? *hum*
It just accured to me that these "printed images" on the rest of the free space could be used to copyprotect a cd; (now avalible ) for us plain-users *that is*.
:)*. Maybe someone will start a new opensource project *hehe*
The images gets burned outside the TOC, so when you read (copy) the cd all other info outside the TOC gets left out.
Add a little "protection app" to the cd, make the cd-rom[s] execute the app. Where the apps look "in a certian place" for the right bit burnt in the right places. [Don't forget that you most likely have to encode the data of the cd; so, that only the little app that gets executed upon insertion can read&decode the contet (only IF! it finds the right bits&bytes on the cd)].
And Voul'a a copy protected cd.
*hum* upon more thought, You could do this with a regular cdburner too *you just need someone (or yourself) to code the right app for this certian scheme
I wonder when will cellphones cease to exist!?
A few years ago, I thought I would have to live with them for the rest of my life *grin & spit*.
SMS, (the new) MMS and what else features the mobile cellphone had had never made me use one.
I can and could use all cellphone features thru my PC but the thing [for me] is I can do a ton more things
on/thru my PC then I could ever on even the fanciest cellphone money can by.
But recently with all these wireless (802,11a & b, or what the future may hold..) access points popping up
here and there everyday everywhere, I start to see a diffrent picture emerge.
[First]-(Pre wireless 802,11...)
We have got to get one thing strait, and that is that both the PC net (the one we call InterNet) and the Cellphone
net (the mobile net) are basically doing the same thing, sending bits forth&back, but in diffrent manner[s].
* One is: Fix (the PC net), while the other is mobile
* One is: Cheap, while the other is expensive (if you compare the two, sending 650 MByte of data : ))
* One is: a lot more Feature Rich Per Cost, while the other is (somewhat) limited per cost
* One is: High Bandwidth, while the other is low bandwidth
* and One has: A high User Count, while the other is trailing behind
And many used both, but in diffrent places; at their job[s] the PC net, on the road the moblie net
[Now]-(Wireless 802,11 comes into our lifes and wanna' play...)
Now things start to change, both the PC net and the Cellphone net are still doing the same thing,
sending bits forth&back, _but_ in the same manner[s].
Now:
* Both are: mobile
* One is: Cheap, while the other is expensive (if you compare the two, sending 650 MByte of data : ))
* One is: a lot more Feature Rich Per Cost, while the other is (somewhat) limited per cost
* One is: High Bandwidth, while the other is low bandwidth
* and One has: A high User Count, while the other is trailing behind
One thing changed! Both got Mobile! Now one has to start comparing which one to use [to sum all the
arguments I thought of, where I'm a bit late to an apointment, to write down right now]
* one that will cost you less money? or more?
* one High Feature Rich per cost? or Low?
I say good byebye to the cellphone [not that I've really _ever_ used one].
And hello usual High Broadband, thou ya' ar't wireless
OK, lets say they'll be doing that! switching to the x86 architecture
- thing-as-the-lower-priced-PC does.
:) ...)
Why close it of? Use special moded CPU's with special motherboards...etc etc? Only to remain a closed of platorm? In doing so, not letting users form doing what they what with a pice of hardware they bought (it really doesn't sound that attractive to switch to... more like they would be doing-a-$ms--thingie, "cough up the money, and WE'll control you! You can thurst us!")
All I _really!!!_ wish for in a computer, is that after I buy it, I may do what the heck I want to it, with it, on it! And run what software (OS) I want (may it be Linux, unix, Mac OS X, BeOS.. etc), and how I want it. And no further ridiculous cost like "to run that, you have to use exactly this, you may not/can't reuse your working-old-one".
Now that would be comprimized, if I bought "the new Apple AMD x86-64 MAC" and found that I can't play with it. Can't run my stuff, can't fiddle with the hardware, have to buy super-expensive-ultraDitt&datt-that-does-the-same
And as for the "porting Mac Os X software to the x86 architecture". It really would make this harder in the closed platform approach, cause it would make developers rewrite their software. On the other hand in an open platform, I think, the Mac would gain a lot (both in new avalible software choices & reuse of already cross platform avalible software). Take Adobe, (and x-other developers) already have almost all their software running on both x86 and PPC, so it wouldn't bother them if Apple would switch. Maybe it would even cut cost for them (goodbye to the Apple PPC Mac-department
[The end]
Having 5 guys/girls doing the same thing, is both time & energy consuming.
Having 5 guys/girls cooperating on the same thing is less time cosuming and energy saving.
Why not just put (add) "hdc=ide-scsi" to your Lilo (in the approprite place, ofcource).
and do the symlink:thinge?
My experience says me that a logical solution (keep crackers away.. etc etc...), has another counter logical solution agaist it (a way to reverse it, to put in plain text: crack it..). Why?, because otherwise it wouldn't be "a logical solution" in the first place.
89 1 55 1 34 2 21 3 13 4 8 5
which number shouldn't be there? (that's right, these numbers are the result of some logic, except one... which, I ask : ))
(ps! Just becasue a logical solution maybe "simple", dosn't mean the counter logical solution should/would be the same)
(PS nr2!! The point I want to make?? (If you haven't figured it out). Well then, you have some thing to make sense of then : ))
Some find this sort of activity as "fun".
"Apple announced the release of a free FireWire _SDK_ for embedded devices. The kit is not OS-dependent.", it didn't say nothing about
" Firewire Reference Platform " so I backed back when I pasted by and saw no SDK.
SCSI320: :)
SCSI at all is to expensive (IMHO), not the less, SCSI320 will force you to rob a small bank in order to afford it
cause I can't find other dev kits than for mac!
*or have I simply gone blind?*
Why do people pronounced it hack[er|ing], when it is spelled crack[er|ing]?
How has 'building|making' been/is confused/missused/associated with 'destroying|demolishing' things?
Case :
hack[er|ing] == building|making;crack[er|ing] == destroying|demolishing;
I think before publishing material publicly, one should do some research and confirm sources/results with other relevant people on that subject.
(eg. confirm "hack[er|ing]/crack[er|ing]" with (a) guru[s] in computers, like ESR).
This goes aswell to the slashdot editors for their (subject)postings; and all other form of publishing (you know who you are).
Reference :
http://www.tuxedo.org/jargon/
http://www.tuxedo.org/jargon/html/entry/hacker.ht
http://www.tuxedo.org/jargon/html/entry/hacker-et
http://www.tuxedo.org/jargon/html/entry/cracker.h
http://www.tuxedo.org/jargon/html/entry/cracking.
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=hacker
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=dark-sid
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=cracker
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~bh/hacker.html
http://home.planet.nl/~faase009/Ha_hacker.html
http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/faqs/hacker.html
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/sDefinition/
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/sDefinition/
You can/could boot x-diffrent bootdisk that you have spreaded over several floppys from one CDR[w] by the tip of your fingertips.
Heck, you could boot all of those OS's you mention from just one CDR[W]. Maybe even add several Linux and Unix distributions to the cd :) ).
(note that, that this depeneds on the size of the windows
It Depends on your hardware, I would say.
These days Optical drives are capable of multi-boot. So in a few steps one could setup a CDR[W]
with all those needed boot disks.
Ok, maybe you can't write to it from every compter (office..etcetc), but you can almost send an email from everywhere (note that I live in sweden, a broadband-hyped-country :) ).
And I do not miss it. Actually I rather love my all-in-one-CDRW-bootCD (with x-diffrent bootdisk options at my fingertips) I hacked-up for myself instead of those dreaded *damed* floppys that just gave me headaches :).
who *_REALY!_* needs a floppy these days? CDRWs are IMHO far more redundant, and can store a lot more.