Both the tv and telephone are excellent examples of technology that seems to defy the ages. Esp. the good ole telephone. In this high tech age, it hasen't changed much (well at least from the end user perspective).
Re:The percentage of Safari Users that would use t
on
Hyatt Discusses Tabs
·
· Score: 1
WindowsKey+M minimizes all windows
That's great when you want to minimize ALL windows, not if you want to minimize all IE windows, which is usually what the people I've observed want (btw, most users know how to do this, though they usually just click the show desktop icon in the toolbar). Typically their hunting through windows to find the one their interested in, minimizing windows as they go. Being able to group your browser windows allows you to eliminate an entire category of windows in one fell swoop.
Others have mentioned Amazon and some other genre specific sites. Perhaps having a site that does consolidation like Rotten Tomatoes does for movie reviews. If you could get Amazon and the other web owners to agree, you could integrate their reviews and rankings and make your site a meta site. One advantage for Amazon could be that you could provide a "buy it now" link (not saying that this is a "worthy" thing, just that it might take something like this to get them to agree).
Re:The percentage of Safari Users that would use t
on
Hyatt Discusses Tabs
·
· Score: 1
The percentage of Safari Users that would use tabs is low at best... it seems that the only people that are wanting this feature which causes interface clutter (eventhough minimal, it is is evasive) are the only ones posting, maybe several thousand. It also bloats code.
You may be right about the percentage, but it's one of those things where those who want it, REALLY want it. I disagree about ui clutter though, since the way I look at it, it reduces ui clutter by reducing the number of open windows. I know I may be a bit unique in how I interact with my ui, but I tend to have MANY windows open at once (several browser sessions, several msdev sessions, excel, word, powerpoint, explorer (win not ie) and I make extensive use of virtual desktops. Tabs allow me to open a grouping of webpages and then "manage them" (i.e. minimize, move, etc) as a single unit. I watch others and they inevitably spend what seems like an eternity minimizing their 9 IE browser windows. I know it's not for everybody, but just like keyboard shortcuts, those who use it tend to take a lot of advantage of it.
Well, on the one hand you have the credit card company model. They eat unauthorized charges all the time, and generally it is a good thing. Phone companies and other utilities do a similar thing, if you can prove the fraud, then they generally cut you some slack (though they might make you work for it). I think that this is a workable "consumer" friendly model. I think that generally, if one had a choice between two isp's and one said we're gonna charge you no matter what, and the other said that we won't charge you for malicous use, assuming you can prove it, then I think that the choice would be obvious (price comparos not withstanding of course).
When I lived out in that area, not a year would go by where there wasn't some attack by skin heads and their ilk in Portland. Plus I thought that Eugene was the liberal capital of Oregon?
The first requirement was: Must work with the existing dispatching system.
I don't know the specifics around this particular situation, but this on the surface seems like a reasonable requirement. If they have to run both systems side by side for some duration of time, then it could make sense for this compatability be important. Again, not to say that this isn't some circle jerk, but just on the example that you gave, it doesn't seem to unreasonable. The general gist of your statement though certainly rings true.
You know, I think Washington should activate their National Guard and invade Oregon over this
I can see it now, Idaho will send human shields in to Oregon to protect valuable hiking grounds and fisheries. The French of course will not support Washington. Berkeley will pass a resolution to pout and not bath until Washington backs down. Meantime the Oregonian leaders will be out in Elmira with Ken Kesey chillin with some good jane wonderin what all the fuss is about. It would then be up to the white supremecists in Portland to defend the state.
I wasen't talking in the broad sense of systems development. I was just curious to see how their MIPS chip compared to other MIPS implementations to get a sense for just how good their engineering was. After all, just because it's a 500mhz chip doesn't mean that it performs the same as a 500mhz R14k. Notice that I put quotes around "only".
Intel thought the same thing about AMD for a long time..... but the Chinese have plenty of resources, and they WILL get to a point where their CPUs are competitive with American CPUs
We haven't even seen performance #'s with these chips. To think that they could go from copying a 500mhz chip to producing chips that can keep up with 3ghz x86 chips (and this is assuming that the x86 market stands still for a few years) seems to me a bit of a stretch. I just believe that they have the tech horsepower yet to be that competitive.
1) Free and easily ported OS allows them to have a reasonable non-standard processors.
Agreed. One of the reasons I love NetBSD.
2) US restrictions on exporting high powered chips and other computer parts are easily diluted by open standards.
Well I don't know if I'd call a watered down 500mhz MIPS based chip "high powered". Maybe once you lash 128 of them together you'll have a decently powered box, but individually, it's way less than yesterdays tech.
3) Test, over time, in the market place the use of cheap open chips vs. more expensive perhaps more cutting edge chips (from the west). Do you use 1 or 2 AMD or Intel chips costing 700 USD or 5 or 6 Dragon/Godson 2 chips costing? $5 or $50 (etc).
Not a good comparison I think. It costs $200 RETAIL for an Athlon 2400MP. Now home much supporting chips, power, etc would you need to put together 5 of those Dragons to get at the same fudged clock rate, assuming of course you're doing things that a parallizable enough to counter the loss in raw clock rate. There are other "non open" chips that are alternatives that cost less/run cooler/etc. I don't see how an "Open" chip helps at all here. Plus how is the Dragon "open"? They "steal" another companies tech and explicitly work around any licensing issues. That's "open"?
It would be interesting to see performance #'s on these things. They're "only" running at 500mhz, so how do they compare to other MIPS based cpu's? Basically, just how good is there engineering. It's nice for the Chinese to have a home grown cpu to use in their home grown machines, but so far it looks like a major yawn in relation to the overall cpu market.
Hopefully the Chinese will leave DRM out of their chips and give people looking for a "free" CPU a competitive option to the crippled intel/AMD CPUs.
How are Intel and/or AMD chips "crippled"? Are you referring to cpu id's? How would the "Dragon" be "free" and how could it be competitive running at 500mhz?
Of course there is the ultimate irony of using DRM and China in the same sentence.
Nice to see that you say that you can't take steps to protect one's identity, then list a bunch of steps one can take to protect one's identity.
No, I said that there was no way to completely protect your identity. Then I listed several steps that one can do to check to see if anyone has been messing with it so you could react quickly (the time element being the most important) when/if someone did. I didn't list any steps to "protect" your identity. It would appear that, as you said, you simply did not comprehend my post.
What steps can one take to protect one's identity?
You can't (not to say that you shouldn't make it more difficult, but just don't fool yourself into thinking that it's possible to do absoultely). It's like your house or car, you can take steps to make it more difficult to break in/steal, but there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop someone is wants to target YOU. So the best thing to do is to introduce a bit of paranoia in your life and assume therefore that it COULD happen and adjust accordingly. So for you're indentity, you do regular checks of your credit report, you keeps tabs on your bank accounts, you review your credit card statements, etc. The absolute worse thing that can happen is for someone to grab your identity and use it for a length of time without your knowledge. Getting your cc company to forgive unauthorized purchases is easy, as long as you do it within 30 days of your statement. Having someone apply for a cc with your info can bite you in the butt if you're trying to buy that car or get that mortgage, so you make sure you check well in advance and make sure that window of exposure is a small as possible.
The UT link appears to be/.ed, but when I read it before it sounded like a simple brute force ssn lookup. The attacker simply generated random ssn and sent them against a page that returned information based on ssn. The attacker then simply harvested "positive" hits. The problem was that this interface was exposed to the public and that it had no means of throttling/preventing multiple requests/failed requests.
On another note, UT is phasing out SSN in many aspects of the students life. My wifes UT ID does not contain her ssn, it has a student # now. Though I assume that there are still many points of interface with the UT system that expects to see ssn.
The tcp/ip findings were interesting, but were they really relevant. Let's say that one of the tcp/ip stacks that had more "bugs" was Solaris. Now I assume that the Solaris tcp/ip stack has not had significant changes in a very long while, also, that if these "bugs" actually negatively impacted the working of the code, that they would have repaired. So my question is, how does your application mark a bug? And from the original/. article, it would appear that you treated all "bugs" the same. Is a failure to check for a null pointer "a bug". Having a more explicit rundown of the type and scope of bugs found would be much more meaningful.
I understand what you mean about the advantages of the anonymity. I pretty much avoid the issue by never posting about anything related to my job, other than in the grossest level (I program in C, we use Win2K, etc). One reason is that you can never be sure who is sniffing on the wire, esp if they are using a http proxy, or even worse, an ip proxy.
Anyway, paranoia aside, this wouldn't eliminate anon postings altogether, just hopefully eliminates/lessens all the junk anon posts. I agree that some anon posts are actually meaningful, but the ratio seems to me is quite low.
How lame is that. If you had something interesting to say, it would be modded up no matter when you posted.
Not true. If you're post is the 748th on an article, the odds of any appreciable number of moderators seeing it are very slim. Esp. since by then, you'd be buried in amongst a lot of other non-moderated posts. You can see this effect all the time. This is esp. true for things like redundancy.
I'm a bit ambivilent about the early posting idea, since having an early post is directly related to the number of people likely to see your post, that "privilege" suddenly becomes a paid one. So people who might actually have something worthwhile to contribute suddenly have to become paying members.
But anyway, that is not the point of this post. I just wanted to say that if they do allow early posters, that they should NOT allow these early posts to be anonymous. This should help keep the quality of the early posts up. Maybe even have another modifier that increases any negative moderation by 1, again to try make the privilage of early posting a true privilage and keep abuse down.
Newby question here (IANAPhysicist), but wouldn't the elevator be a heavy load on the satellite supporting it? Wouldn't it exert a force downward towards the earth, thereby forcing it to continuously pull up to counter that force?
Abstract - A process by which documents, which encompasses the plurality of both physical and "virtual" assembledges of characters or images, are converted into a non usable format either via the physical process of shredding, disassembly via the use of prehensile appendages, use of the 'delete' or 'rm' utilities, editing with Microsoft Word, or any other method that would make said document unreadable to any law enforcement agency.
Slashdot Mirror
Both the tv and telephone are excellent examples of technology that seems to defy the ages. Esp. the good ole telephone. In this high tech age, it hasen't changed much (well at least from the end user perspective).
WindowsKey+M minimizes all windows
That's great when you want to minimize ALL windows, not if you want to minimize all IE windows, which is usually what the people I've observed want (btw, most users know how to do this, though they usually just click the show desktop icon in the toolbar). Typically their hunting through windows to find the one their interested in, minimizing windows as they go. Being able to group your browser windows allows you to eliminate an entire category of windows in one fell swoop.
Others have mentioned Amazon and some other genre specific sites. Perhaps having a site that does consolidation like Rotten Tomatoes does for movie reviews. If you could get Amazon and the other web owners to agree, you could integrate their reviews and rankings and make your site a meta site. One advantage for Amazon could be that you could provide a "buy it now" link (not saying that this is a "worthy" thing, just that it might take something like this to get them to agree).
The percentage of Safari Users that would use tabs is low at best ... it seems that the only people that are wanting this feature which causes interface clutter (eventhough minimal, it is is evasive) are the only ones posting, maybe several thousand. It also bloats code.
You may be right about the percentage, but it's one of those things where those who want it, REALLY want it. I disagree about ui clutter though, since the way I look at it, it reduces ui clutter by reducing the number of open windows. I know I may be a bit unique in how I interact with my ui, but I tend to have MANY windows open at once (several browser sessions, several msdev sessions, excel, word, powerpoint, explorer (win not ie) and I make extensive use of virtual desktops. Tabs allow me to open a grouping of webpages and then "manage them" (i.e. minimize, move, etc) as a single unit. I watch others and they inevitably spend what seems like an eternity minimizing their 9 IE browser windows. I know it's not for everybody, but just like keyboard shortcuts, those who use it tend to take a lot of advantage of it.
Well, on the one hand you have the credit card company model. They eat unauthorized charges all the time, and generally it is a good thing. Phone companies and other utilities do a similar thing, if you can prove the fraud, then they generally cut you some slack (though they might make you work for it). I think that this is a workable "consumer" friendly model. I think that generally, if one had a choice between two isp's and one said we're gonna charge you no matter what, and the other said that we won't charge you for malicous use, assuming you can prove it, then I think that the choice would be obvious (price comparos not withstanding of course).
When I lived out in that area, not a year would go by where there wasn't some attack by skin heads and their ilk in Portland. Plus I thought that Eugene was the liberal capital of Oregon?
Are you kidding?
;) It's been a while since I lived out there, but some things surely don't change :)
Yes I was kidding
The first requirement was: Must work with the existing dispatching system.
I don't know the specifics around this particular situation, but this on the surface seems like a reasonable requirement. If they have to run both systems side by side for some duration of time, then it could make sense for this compatability be important. Again, not to say that this isn't some circle jerk, but just on the example that you gave, it doesn't seem to unreasonable. The general gist of your statement though certainly rings true.
You know, I think Washington should activate their National Guard and invade Oregon over this
I can see it now, Idaho will send human shields in to Oregon to protect valuable hiking grounds and fisheries. The French of course will not support Washington. Berkeley will pass a resolution to pout and not bath until Washington backs down. Meantime the Oregonian leaders will be out in Elmira with Ken Kesey chillin with some good jane wonderin what all the fuss is about. It would then be up to the white supremecists in Portland to defend the state.
Actually my point was to see how their MIPS implementation compares to other MIPS implementations to get a feel for how good their engineering is.
I wasen't talking in the broad sense of systems development. I was just curious to see how their MIPS chip compared to other MIPS implementations to get a sense for just how good their engineering was. After all, just because it's a 500mhz chip doesn't mean that it performs the same as a 500mhz R14k. Notice that I put quotes around "only".
Intel thought the same thing about AMD for a long time ..... but the Chinese have plenty of resources, and they WILL get to a point where their CPUs are competitive with American CPUs
We haven't even seen performance #'s with these chips. To think that they could go from copying a 500mhz chip to producing chips that can keep up with 3ghz x86 chips (and this is assuming that the x86 market stands still for a few years) seems to me a bit of a stretch. I just believe that they have the tech horsepower yet to be that competitive.
1) Free and easily ported OS allows them to have a reasonable non-standard processors.
Agreed. One of the reasons I love NetBSD.
2) US restrictions on exporting high powered chips and other computer parts are easily diluted by open standards.
Well I don't know if I'd call a watered down 500mhz MIPS based chip "high powered". Maybe once you lash 128 of them together you'll have a decently powered box, but individually, it's way less than yesterdays tech.
3) Test, over time, in the market place the use of cheap open chips vs. more expensive perhaps more cutting edge chips (from the west). Do you use 1 or 2 AMD or Intel chips costing 700 USD or 5 or 6 Dragon/Godson 2 chips costing? $5 or $50 (etc).
Not a good comparison I think. It costs $200 RETAIL for an Athlon 2400MP. Now home much supporting chips, power, etc would you need to put together 5 of those Dragons to get at the same fudged clock rate, assuming of course you're doing things that a parallizable enough to counter the loss in raw clock rate. There are other "non open" chips that are alternatives that cost less/run cooler/etc. I don't see how an "Open" chip helps at all here. Plus how is the Dragon "open"? They "steal" another companies tech and explicitly work around any licensing issues. That's "open"?
It would be interesting to see performance #'s on these things. They're "only" running at 500mhz, so how do they compare to other MIPS based cpu's? Basically, just how good is there engineering. It's nice for the Chinese to have a home grown cpu to use in their home grown machines, but so far it looks like a major yawn in relation to the overall cpu market.
Hopefully the Chinese will leave DRM out of their chips and give people looking for a "free" CPU a competitive option to the crippled intel/AMD CPUs.
How are Intel and/or AMD chips "crippled"? Are you referring to cpu id's? How would the "Dragon" be "free" and how could it be competitive running at 500mhz?
Of course there is the ultimate irony of using DRM and China in the same sentence.
Nice to see that you say that you can't take steps to protect one's identity, then list a bunch of steps one can take to protect one's identity.
No, I said that there was no way to completely protect your identity. Then I listed several steps that one can do to check to see if anyone has been messing with it so you could react quickly (the time element being the most important) when/if someone did. I didn't list any steps to "protect" your identity. It would appear that, as you said, you simply did not comprehend my post.
It probably WAS his daughter. She was probably hunting for info on those over 21 so she could create more fake id's ;)
What steps can one take to protect one's identity?
You can't (not to say that you shouldn't make it more difficult, but just don't fool yourself into thinking that it's possible to do absoultely). It's like your house or car, you can take steps to make it more difficult to break in/steal, but there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop someone is wants to target YOU. So the best thing to do is to introduce a bit of paranoia in your life and assume therefore that it COULD happen and adjust accordingly. So for you're indentity, you do regular checks of your credit report, you keeps tabs on your bank accounts, you review your credit card statements, etc. The absolute worse thing that can happen is for someone to grab your identity and use it for a length of time without your knowledge. Getting your cc company to forgive unauthorized purchases is easy, as long as you do it within 30 days of your statement. Having someone apply for a cc with your info can bite you in the butt if you're trying to buy that car or get that mortgage, so you make sure you check well in advance and make sure that window of exposure is a small as possible.
The UT link appears to be /.ed, but when I read it before it sounded like a simple brute force ssn lookup. The attacker simply generated random ssn and sent them against a page that returned information based on ssn. The attacker then simply harvested "positive" hits. The problem was that this interface was exposed to the public and that it had no means of throttling/preventing multiple requests/failed requests.
On another note, UT is phasing out SSN in many aspects of the students life. My wifes UT ID does not contain her ssn, it has a student # now. Though I assume that there are still many points of interface with the UT system that expects to see ssn.
The tcp/ip findings were interesting, but were they really relevant. Let's say that one of the tcp/ip stacks that had more "bugs" was Solaris. Now I assume that the Solaris tcp/ip stack has not had significant changes in a very long while, also, that if these "bugs" actually negatively impacted the working of the code, that they would have repaired. So my question is, how does your application mark a bug? And from the original /. article, it would appear that you treated all "bugs" the same. Is a failure to check for a null pointer "a bug". Having a more explicit rundown of the type and scope of bugs found would be much more meaningful.
I understand what you mean about the advantages of the anonymity. I pretty much avoid the issue by never posting about anything related to my job, other than in the grossest level (I program in C, we use Win2K, etc). One reason is that you can never be sure who is sniffing on the wire, esp if they are using a http proxy, or even worse, an ip proxy.
Anyway, paranoia aside, this wouldn't eliminate anon postings altogether, just hopefully eliminates/lessens all the junk anon posts. I agree that some anon posts are actually meaningful, but the ratio seems to me is quite low.
How lame is that. If you had something interesting to say, it would be modded up no matter when you posted.
Not true. If you're post is the 748th on an article, the odds of any appreciable number of moderators seeing it are very slim. Esp. since by then, you'd be buried in amongst a lot of other non-moderated posts. You can see this effect all the time. This is esp. true for things like redundancy.
I'm a bit ambivilent about the early posting idea, since having an early post is directly related to the number of people likely to see your post, that "privilege" suddenly becomes a paid one. So people who might actually have something worthwhile to contribute suddenly have to become paying members.
But anyway, that is not the point of this post. I just wanted to say that if they do allow early posters, that they should NOT allow these early posts to be anonymous. This should help keep the quality of the early posts up. Maybe even have another modifier that increases any negative moderation by 1, again to try make the privilage of early posting a true privilage and keep abuse down.
Newby question here (IANAPhysicist), but wouldn't the elevator be a heavy load on the satellite supporting it? Wouldn't it exert a force downward towards the earth, thereby forcing it to continuously pull up to counter that force?
Abstract - A process by which documents, which encompasses the plurality of both physical and "virtual" assembledges of characters or images, are converted into a non usable format either via the physical process of shredding, disassembly via the use of prehensile appendages, use of the 'delete' or 'rm' utilities, editing with Microsoft Word, or any other method that would make said document unreadable to any law enforcement agency.