It's laughable to say that Deep Fritz is the strongest computer programme - Deep Blue (that defeated Kasparov) evaluated 200 million positions per second compared to Deep Fritz's 3-4 million. Deep Blue was running on an IBM-made supercomputer. Fritz isn't.
Was the machine at bletchley park which helped break enigma so effective because of the codes-per-second it could try?
Nope, it was so effective because of the huge number of codes that it could eliminate
surely moves-per-second means less than good-moves-per-second
Sacrificing your queen and your rook in the first few moves of a game is clearly a bad strategy, so why waste millions of checks to see if you can win at the end?
...who when reading the article - and looking at the picture of the smashed pitch - finds it hard to get images of a slow motion T-1000 out of my head?
...if he HAD found a way to do factoring in P time... gotta wonder what would happen if he took a holiday to the states - I'm sure SOMEONE would try to have a go at him for breaking encryption
I dont remember where I read it, but I thought that there was a project involving creating a point of light at the intersection of 3 beams, where the beams were not visible and the point of light appeared to be floating in mid air
...or does anyone else think that the way that this particular exploit was handled was, to say the least, irregular...
Personally, I'd go as far to say that I would rather switch to an alternative SSHd in the period that we were given from the presence of the exploit being announced to the fix being released - rather than following the "everyone upgrade now to our super-duper-improved privaledged seperated version"
It just seems to me that rather than attempting to help us users, the way that this bug was handled was just a huge PR stunt...
I may be completely missing something, but I fail to see how this could work
Without "supernodes", and if each node feeds less than 16 other nodes, wouldnt the system get full very quickly?
Streaming to 16 other nodes on cable/adsl/etc isnt realistic since thats a full single stream
If we assume that each node can only stream one of the 1/16ths out, and if you push to (say) 256 nodes, that means 16 extra nodes could be added, and a futher 1 node from those 16
If we assume each node can stream out 15/16, then it takes much longer before the system is saturated, but wouldnt it still happen? 256 -> 240 extra -> 225 extra and so on...
So the only way I can see this working is if a reasonably large proportion of the users were on systems which could stream more than 16/16ths of a channel... hence it would run into bandwith problems if the majority of users were cable...
When I walk down the street in town on a saturday, I see many people talking on mobile phones... nothing strange about that... then I often see a man walking toward me and he's talking to someone... he's not using a phone... and no one is listening to him...
freaky? well, this in-the-tooth stuff is gonna make it much much worse than just the hands free personal kits:/
If you have a well thought out and well structured design... and if every single function is documented atleast mostly before coding begins... and if all of the theory of interactions fit in... then only a small amount of testing is required
The main problems which require more testing come when corners are cut over the initial design stages, or their not done as fully as they should be doing, or when people dont actually think about what input users can give
For one of my projects I did ages ago for college, half of the class (which was split to give the same coding ability spread in both halfs) were each asked to write this program and the other half were asked to design it, review the design, make a proper testing strategy, document and THEN start writing it
The second half took a little longer to get their program working, but the first half had more bugs, and spent more time testing... My bet is that the second half would spend less total time on that program and bug fixes in a real world situation (which was the whole point of the exercise)
This would have been good for everyone, I think - sure you could write something for Microsoft's JVM that wouldn't run on Sun's JVM.. but I can still do that today if I really want to (tie my code to a particular VM or a particular set of native code).
Have you forgotten how "good" it is for everyone that a non-standards-complient browser has a huge market share at the moment? (IE)
Both developers and consumers are getting a raw deal because developers have to cater for quirks and some consumers are locked out of certain websites
When people extend the standards with their own stuff which only they can use, its fine... so long as no one uses it - else people are tied to using the windows platform
Its not a question of "wanting" to break suns JVM so you have to use microsofts, but if enough developers use the extensions, it becomes the norm and it excludes a lot of people and removes choice from others by forcing them to use microsofts JVM
Choice 4 is much more likely to give "good" results since more of the major holders of illegal material are targetted
Holywood would get better results by shutting down illegal DVD manufactureres of spiderman in korea (or wherever they are) rather than someone who makes a copy for his friends
Choice 1 gives everyone the same chance of being targetted and thus small time distributers/downloaders will be hit a higher percentage of the time and not have as great an effect on the overall level of content available
Well, atleast we know who skipped maths lessons
on
Collapsing P2P Networks
·
· Score: 5, Funny
In particular, our analysis of the model leads to
three potential strategies, which can be used in conjunction:
1. Randomly selecting and litigating against users engaging in piracy 2. Creating fake users that carry (incorrectly named or damaged files) 3. Broadcasting fake queries in order to degrade network performance 4. Selectively targeting litigation against the small percentage of users that carry the majority of the files
Although a single network may collapse...
on
Collapsing P2P Networks
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
P2P as a concept is unlikely to collapse
Networks come and go, and encounter obstacles as the number of people using the network increases, but as one reaches "critical mass" another is born because the first became too unstable
There are a large number of p2p networks at the moment, some are more successful than others, but importantly they use very different technologies, some of which are less affected by increasing numbers of users The fasttrack model appears quite comfortable with several million users, when the orignal gnutella protocol couldnt cope with that number (iirc)
I'm sure that a number of p2p protocol designers will attempt to use the ideas in the paper to avoid the various pitfalls
It's not a Linux bug, but rather an XFree86 and mozilla bug. It would probably crash any box running those two programs just as handily...
As many people have already said - dont shoot the messanger
Mozilla is no more guilty for this problem as it is for a user to open a star office document with such a large font size - after all, opening an office document wont crash your computer - right??
Of course, it is good practice for Mozilla to implement a limit themselves to stop people exploiting the problem in xfree86, but please, stop calling it a Mozilla bug!
In the Windows browser, selecting text will even do strange things like go back the the previous page, or close the browser window! It may be the gestures getting confused, but it's highly annoying.
Then change your optimoz / mouse gestures settings...
Slashdot Mirror
its doing essentially the same as in the movie Spaceballs
An attendant is standing at the door to the cinema and will pour jam (strawberry seems to be the most effective) all over the lens
Sort of a gas/electric hybrid, watch for Honda's next innovation. Should be interesting!
Honest dear - if I stop farting in the car, we'll never make it there by 8pm!
since the Republic of China is behind the great firewall of china, NAT would be very simple.
does the "fact" mentioned relate to number of real IP addresses or number of IP addresses in use including NATted ones
(the implied question here being does china use nat to ensure that everyone has to go through their firewall?)
It's laughable to say that Deep Fritz is the strongest computer programme - Deep Blue (that defeated Kasparov) evaluated 200 million positions per second compared to Deep Fritz's 3-4 million. Deep Blue was running on an IBM-made supercomputer. Fritz isn't.
Was the machine at bletchley park which helped break enigma so effective because of the codes-per-second it could try?
Nope, it was so effective because of the huge number of codes that it could eliminate
surely moves-per-second means less than good-moves-per-second
Sacrificing your queen and your rook in the first few moves of a game is clearly a bad strategy, so why waste millions of checks to see if you can win at the end?
When you dream about cordless optical rechargable mice, you really need to go down to the pub and meet some girls!
...who when reading the article - and looking at the picture of the smashed pitch - finds it hard to get images of a slow motion T-1000 out of my head?
You've been watching too much Minority Report again, havent you?
...if he HAD found a way to do factoring in P time... gotta wonder what would happen if he took a holiday to the states - I'm sure SOMEONE would try to have a go at him for breaking encryption
I dont remember where I read it, but I thought that there was a project involving creating a point of light at the intersection of 3 beams, where the beams were not visible and the point of light appeared to be floating in mid air
Does anyone else remember that?
Even that is too good for bill
just force him to answer windows support calls for eternity
Yes?
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/26/154
http://apache.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06
to name 2
...or does anyone else think that the way that this particular exploit was handled was, to say the least, irregular...
Personally, I'd go as far to say that I would rather switch to an alternative SSHd in the period that we were given from the presence of the exploit being announced to the fix being released - rather than following the "everyone upgrade now to our super-duper-improved privaledged seperated version"
It just seems to me that rather than attempting to help us users, the way that this bug was handled was just a huge PR stunt...
and I dont like it
I may be completely missing something, but I fail to see how this could work
Without "supernodes", and if each node feeds less than 16 other nodes, wouldnt the system get full very quickly?
Streaming to 16 other nodes on cable/adsl/etc isnt realistic since thats a full single stream
If we assume that each node can only stream one of the 1/16ths out, and if you push to (say) 256 nodes, that means 16 extra nodes could be added, and a futher 1 node from those 16
If we assume each node can stream out 15/16, then it takes much longer before the system is saturated, but wouldnt it still happen?
256 -> 240 extra -> 225 extra and so on...
So the only way I can see this working is if a reasonably large proportion of the users were on systems which could stream more than 16/16ths of a channel... hence it would run into bandwith problems if the majority of users were cable...
Or, as I said, am I missing something?
When I walk down the street in town on a saturday, I see many people talking on mobile phones...
:/
nothing strange about that...
then I often see a man walking toward me and he's talking to someone...
he's not using a phone...
and no one is listening to him...
freaky?
well, this in-the-tooth stuff is gonna make it much much worse than just the hands free personal kits
Its all in the same package...
... My bet is that the second half would spend less total time on that program and bug fixes in a real world situation (which was the whole point of the exercise)
If you have a well thought out and well structured design... and if every single function is documented atleast mostly before coding begins... and if all of the theory of interactions fit in... then only a small amount of testing is required
The main problems which require more testing come when corners are cut over the initial design stages, or their not done as fully as they should be doing, or when people dont actually think about what input users can give
For one of my projects I did ages ago for college, half of the class (which was split to give the same coding ability spread in both halfs) were each asked to write this program and the other half were asked to design it, review the design, make a proper testing strategy, document and THEN start writing it
The second half took a little longer to get their program working, but the first half had more bugs, and spent more time testing
Have you forgotten how "good" it is for everyone that a non-standards-complient browser has a huge market share at the moment? (IE)
Both developers and consumers are getting a raw deal because developers have to cater for quirks and some consumers are locked out of certain websites
When people extend the standards with their own stuff which only they can use, its fine... so long as no one uses it - else people are tied to using the windows platform
Its not a question of "wanting" to break suns JVM so you have to use microsofts, but if enough developers use the extensions, it becomes the norm and it excludes a lot of people and removes choice from others by forcing them to use microsofts JVM
Choice 4 is much more likely to give "good" results since more of the major holders of illegal material are targetted
Holywood would get better results by shutting down illegal DVD manufactureres of spiderman in korea (or wherever they are) rather than someone who makes a copy for his friends
Choice 1 gives everyone the same chance of being targetted and thus small time distributers/downloaders will be hit a higher percentage of the time and not have as great an effect on the overall level of content available
P2P as a concept is unlikely to collapse
Networks come and go, and encounter obstacles as the number of people using the network increases, but as one reaches "critical mass" another is born because the first became too unstable
There are a large number of p2p networks at the moment, some are more successful than others, but importantly they use very different technologies, some of which are less affected by increasing numbers of users
The fasttrack model appears quite comfortable with several million users, when the orignal gnutella protocol couldnt cope with that number (iirc)
I'm sure that a number of p2p protocol designers will attempt to use the ideas in the paper to avoid the various pitfalls
can real 3d be obtained with just two cameras?
or is it merely 2.5d
Regardless of where the cameras are, is there not still a plane which the cameras/software cant determine the "height" of
Dont you need 3 cameras minimum for proper 3d?
It would help if I read the FAQ before asking :D
that they have replaced the old winmodem with a hardware one like they said they were going to
Although I'm sure that the lads down at wallmart have tested lindows on their new machines properly
...
...
...
right?
p.s. I just noticed a little checkbox under my post... what is a Score +1 Bonus? and why did I get the option of having one?
*looks at his 14.4k modem*
*looks at the article*
*looks at his modem*
*cries*
It's not a Linux bug, but rather an XFree86 and mozilla bug. It would probably crash any box running those two programs just as handily...
As many people have already said - dont shoot the messanger
Mozilla is no more guilty for this problem as it is for a user to open a star office document with such a large font size - after all, opening an office document wont crash your computer - right??
Of course, it is good practice for Mozilla to implement a limit themselves to stop people exploiting the problem in xfree86, but please, stop calling it a Mozilla bug!
In the Windows browser, selecting text will even do strange things like go back the the previous page, or close the browser window! It may be the gestures getting confused, but it's highly annoying.
Then change your optimoz / mouse gestures settings...