Actually, bittorrent is designed to permit serving of entire raw directory trees.
(In the directory tree case, instead of just a filename+size, the.torrent contains a description of the directory structure, individual checksums, and file sizes -- see the specification.)
The XUL engine uses Gtk for widget _rendering_ now on Unix platforms (as it uses Aqua on OS X, or the Win32 Appearance Manager on Windows), but that's it.
Actually, in the anaerobic environment of most landfills, even plain newsprint takes an obscenely long period of time to decompose.
Re:Why is NAT a "bad thing"?
on
The State of IPv6
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Because it's nice having globally unique addresses for your devices. The private IPs used with NAT are not globally unique.
Let's say you get a roommate and you want to put both your appliances on your LAN. Well, he's been using 192.168.0.x... and so have you. One of you is going to have to renumber, redo your DNS and anything else that used the IPs.
You just shouldn't have to do that.
Not such a big deal in a home environment, maybe, but similar scenarios on massively larger scales already happen with NAT after corporate mergers on a fairly regular basis, inflicting major pain on all concerned.
Substitute racist,sexist,homophobe etc for communist add 50 years and tell me how much "progress" we have made?
The McCarthy-era stuff was a lot worse than any of that now (so far). But in a way that relates to my point too -- people haven't fundamentally changed since then. We can expect the same or worse abuses now if things progress as they have.
How many of those people in the 50s you refer to were Communists or sympathisers? Soviet KGB documents released after our victory in the Cold War showed in many cases the "witch hunters" were right-Alger Hiss for example.
How many of those people in the 50s were actually comitting treason? Does it still make it okay that so many innocent people's lives were ruined?
Lenin Mao and Stalin certainly deserved to die as much as Hitler,Tojo,and Mussolini.
In the 1950s, many people (non-communists) lived in fear of being "fingered" as communists or communist sympathizers and having their lives utterly destroyed as a result. Sometimes those fears were quite justified.
We're very fortunate that things never progressed as far as actually killing them preemptively.
I'm also not sure I understand how preemptively killing communists would constitute anything but murder and suffering.
Even if it could be justified, what about the (not inconsiderable) number of people erroneously identified as such?
Also, what about the risk of arousing pro-communist sympathies? Martyrdom always plays well for ideologues.
The parent is modded as funny, but replace "terrorist" with "communist" in the above quotes and realize that ordinary, reasonably intelligent people really said and believed such things only 50 years ago.
Well, the animals having no soul bit is certainly correct.
As for the no dreams bit, I'll certainly take your word on your own experiences. It's not inconceivable to me that it might have been taught, though it seems a little inconsistent with the general strain of the current Pope's thought.
Realize, though, that the notion of papal infallibility extends only to teachings issued "ex cathedra", which is a pretty rare and noteworthy event.
Sadly, my google-fu is proving ineffective here. I keep either finding books by Joyce Pope or "The Pope and the Homeless Cats". So, if you do find anything more, feel free to drop me a line at mental at rydia dot net.
I believe the actual message was something like "...don't let the space bugs bite. And don't worry about the pressure thing; we'll have some procedures for you to try in the morning."
Your friend may be encouraged to learn that whether or not animals dream is not actually an issue of orthodox Catholic doctrine. I might suggest he consult his parish priest in the matter, and/or the Catechism.
(Granted, by "conservative" he might mean something other than "orthodox"; by "orthodox" I mean in line with the official teaching of the Church.)
It's like a burger - who cares if you get one pickle slice or two, as long as you get your burger?
Typically the restaurant cares, if you work in a big chain.
My first summer job was working at *unnamed major chain*. They have rigorous accounting procedures to keep track of every last slice.
Every burger got three slices, no more, no less. If, at the end of the day, ( slices_in_discard_bin + 3 * burgers_w_pickles_sold ) < initial_pickle_slice_supply, somebody would eventually get in trouble (theoretically, I never actually saw anyone get busted, though we were also pretty good about always coming up even)...
Of course to get the daily discard count for each ingredient, this meant some poor sap had to dig through the kitchen trash, armed with a sheet of butcher's paper and a grease pencil. Often that poor sap was me.
Ah, sorry... I wasn't questioning your competence.
(Admittedly, this will require you to put on your tinfoil hat for a moment)
I was suggesting the possibility that the laptop had been "customized", and the power cord and/or power supply might be false, containing other hardware instead...
Perhaps because they neglected to charge the battery the night before, you noticed, and naturally drew attention to it. Hence they quickly remove the evidence...
Could you even verify that the laptop returned after "repair" was the same one (containing the same hardware) that they removed?
This is probably a little far-fetched, but the fact that they would have theoretically been able to do that if they wanted is a bit worrisome...
What's to stop someone from walking into their local Verizon store armed with someone's cell number and maybe a little additional information and taking the number for themselves?
Slashdot Mirror
Never mind; once I read your link I realized I misunderstood your criticism.
Actually, bittorrent is designed to permit serving of entire raw directory trees.
.torrent contains a description of the directory structure, individual checksums, and file sizes -- see the specification.)
(In the directory tree case, instead of just a filename+size, the
The official bt clients do support this.
I assume you also noticed that Microsoft is a major investor in Comcast?
No, Firefox really is all XUL.
The XUL engine uses Gtk for widget _rendering_ now on Unix platforms (as it uses Aqua on OS X, or the Win32 Appearance Manager on Windows), but that's it.
I believe iChat already uses XMPP for Rendezvous chat.
AlterSlash does a pretty good job of that actually.
...which does sort of raise the question of whether it might not be worth just using a capsule in the first place.
Actually, in the anaerobic environment of most landfills, even plain newsprint takes an obscenely long period of time to decompose.
Because it's nice having globally unique addresses for your devices. The private IPs used with NAT are not globally unique.
... and so have you. One of you is going to have to renumber, redo your DNS and anything else that used the IPs.
Let's say you get a roommate and you want to put both your appliances on your LAN. Well, he's been using 192.168.0.x
You just shouldn't have to do that.
Not such a big deal in a home environment, maybe, but similar scenarios on massively larger scales already happen with NAT after corporate mergers on a fairly regular basis, inflicting major pain on all concerned.
With sufficient skill, you can do that now. It's called "social engineering".
That sort of thing would just lower the bar for entry quite a bit.
To be clear, it's not that there wasn't a real threat to the US in the 50s, just that we went too far in our countermeasures.
The McCarthy-era stuff was a lot worse than any of that now (so far). But in a way that relates to my point too -- people haven't fundamentally changed since then. We can expect the same or worse abuses now if things progress as they have.
How many of those people in the 50s were actually comitting treason? Does it still make it okay that so many innocent people's lives were ruined?
You'll be happy to learn that they're dead now.
I think you're rather missing the point.
In the 1950s, many people (non-communists) lived in fear of being "fingered" as communists or communist sympathizers and having their lives utterly destroyed as a result. Sometimes those fears were quite justified.
We're very fortunate that things never progressed as far as actually killing them preemptively.
I'm also not sure I understand how preemptively killing communists would constitute anything but murder and suffering.
Even if it could be justified, what about the (not inconsiderable) number of people erroneously identified as such?
Also, what about the risk of arousing pro-communist sympathies? Martyrdom always plays well for ideologues.
The parent is modded as funny, but replace "terrorist" with "communist" in the above quotes and realize that ordinary, reasonably intelligent people really said and believed such things only 50 years ago.
It's not far-fetched at all.
Well, the animals having no soul bit is certainly correct.
As for the no dreams bit, I'll certainly take your word on your own experiences. It's not inconceivable to me that it might have been taught, though it seems a little inconsistent with the general strain of the current Pope's thought.
Realize, though, that the notion of papal infallibility extends only to teachings issued "ex cathedra", which is a pretty rare and noteworthy event.
Sadly, my google-fu is proving ineffective here. I keep either finding books by Joyce Pope or "The Pope and the Homeless Cats". So, if you do find anything more, feel free to drop me a line at mental at rydia dot net.
The "wind trails" appear to be wind trails.
Seriously almost.
I believe the actual message was something like "...don't let the space bugs bite. And don't worry about the pressure thing; we'll have some procedures for you to try in the morning."
Well, the nice thing about AMD's 64-bit thing is that, unlike ia64, it's even quite capable as a 32-bit processor.
So maybe think of it as getting a very good 32-bit processor, with room to grow as more 64-bit binaries become available?
Your friend may be encouraged to learn that whether or not animals dream is not actually an issue of orthodox Catholic doctrine. I might suggest he consult his parish priest in the matter, and/or the Catechism.
(Granted, by "conservative" he might mean something other than "orthodox"; by "orthodox" I mean in line with the official teaching of the Church.)
Here in the US, those were the machines we'd been using in Maryland for the past few elections.
Unfortunately the state government decided these new (shiney!) Diebold machines were better.
Typically the restaurant cares, if you work in a big chain.
My first summer job was working at *unnamed major chain*. They have rigorous accounting procedures to keep track of every last slice.
Every burger got three slices, no more, no less. If, at the end of the day, ( slices_in_discard_bin + 3 * burgers_w_pickles_sold ) < initial_pickle_slice_supply, somebody would eventually get in trouble (theoretically, I never actually saw anyone get busted, though we were also pretty good about always coming up even)...
Of course to get the daily discard count for each ingredient, this meant some poor sap had to dig through the kitchen trash, armed with a sheet of butcher's paper and a grease pencil. Often that poor sap was me.
Ah, sorry... I wasn't questioning your competence.
(Admittedly, this will require you to put on your tinfoil hat for a moment)
I was suggesting the possibility that the laptop had been "customized", and the power cord and/or power supply might be false, containing other hardware instead...
Perhaps because they neglected to charge the battery the night before, you noticed, and naturally drew attention to it. Hence they quickly remove the evidence...
Could you even verify that the laptop returned after "repair" was the same one (containing the same hardware) that they removed?
This is probably a little far-fetched, but the fact that they would have theoretically been able to do that if they wanted is a bit worrisome...
Maybe what you were looking at wasn't really a power cord...
No documentation?
What's to stop someone from walking into their local Verizon store armed with someone's cell number and maybe a little additional information and taking the number for themselves?
Uh, they've been doing that for ages. Apparently it's not working well enough...