As an aside, I can remember the media furore about Jello Biafra (of the Dead Kennedys) running for Mayor of San Fransisco in (I think) '79. One of the points on his manifesto was that all businessmen should be forced to wear clown suits within city limits. He finished 4th out of a field of 10. So close...
Interesting you should say that. I haven't coded full-time for a few years now, but I often feel I was more productive with the old amber-on-black ANSI terminal than I have ever been with modern devices. But maybe that's because the hardware effectively forced me to not be diverted by the distraction of extraneous shiny things...
To save cost, phone companies tend to use a single IP-address for many phones at the same time.
Holy shit. That makes me glad I persist in using a comparatively "dumb" but very robust phone (a Motorola Razr2 V9), since the majority of my contacts don't function in realms beyond voice calls and SMS.
I find it decidedly scary that people are so happy to conduct critical (e.g. banking) transactions via a device which by its highly stealable nature (if nothing else) is so obviously not secure. I have no objection to being able to call up the occasional map or wikipedia entry on my phone (which I can), but I prefer to use a "real" computer, since I don't care for straining my comparatively poor eyesight on handheld devices or dealing with poor text entry methods. I have yet to be convinced that the "there's an app for that" gimmmick will stand the test of time.
Your link, while interesting, appears to have nothing to do with filesystems. Ext4 might be numerically more advanced than ext2, but the latter still has a useful place in the scheme of things if we accept the proviso that proper steps are taken to secure the data. I still use ext2 for boot partitions on general-purpose Linux boxes. I mount these read-only in the interests of security, but that means, of course, that I can't have journalling on them, which precludes the use of ext3 or 4.
Google probably doesn't have a requirement for read-only partitions on machines that have only one purpose, so the uptime benefits are a more compelling factor.
Everything is more competitive than the Zune, since Microsoft doesn't believe in marketing it outside the US and Canada. Since Microsoft obviously isn't serious about it, it might just as well concede that market to Apple.
...I have to search the documentation to find that key combination.
That reminds me of the days when I persisted in using TECO (or clones thereof) as my preferred text editor. My colleagues used to tease me with comments about its memory usage, i.e. the amount of meat-space memory required to remember all those commands. I was younger then, and my memory was more functional, so I now have no shame in taking all the help I can get.
...Which is exactly why we don't need a SysRq button. I don't need more than one finger to count the number of Linux kernel crashes I have seen since 1994, disregarding those circumstances where through my own stupidity or lack of attention I have managed to compile a kernel doomed to failure.
it would pause the output to the screen so if it was scrolling by to fast to read you could stop it...
Back in the day, we used to be able to get the same effect on *nix-ish machines (and more than a few distantly related mini/mainframe OSs) with Ctrl-S to stop and Ctrl-P to restart scrolling. I remember answering helpdesk enquiries where the user complained of a frozen screen which was often fixed with a judicious application of Ctrl-P...
The key I most despise is that stupid Windows button. I never knew (or cared) what it did, even on Windows boxes. Next is the Caps Lock key, which I simply disable, since the only times I have ever used it were by accident.
Used it a lot on my desktop when I hacked some scanner drivers to support my parallel port scanner.
Memories, memories...
I used to have a Umax parallel port scanner (it was a gift) but I didn't even consider attempting to construct drivers for it to work with Linux. It turned out to be a vastly better use of my time (though not the environment) to chuck it in the bin and get an Epson USB device...
I'm just informing you of your error in understanding the net effect "Round-up Ready" crops have on total herbicide use in agriculture.
I don't have an error of understanding. I have what most would consider a good amount of in-depth knowledge of biotechnology. I don't argue that Roundup Ready crops allow for fewer applications of herbicide. But those applications are quite heavy, and as I pointed out previously, we now know that Roundup is nowhere near as non-toxic as Monsanto used to claim. In fact, they got slapped down a few years ago for exactly those claims. The United States Environmental Protection Agency has caught Monsanto's scientists deliberately falsifying test results on at least two occasions.
Being the cranky soul that I am, I commonly like to tease people about the definition of "organic". I.e. show me some inorganic vegetables, perhaps made of silicon? Germanium or ruthenium?
Selective breeding is certainly well tried and gradual, but "true" is misleading. All you are doing is leading evolution in a direction of your choosing, rather than allowing natural selection to take its course. But you're right in that no amount of evolutionary genetic recombination would result in the spontaneous production of Bt toxin in our lifetime.
It's worth noting that this is entirely different from the so-called "Roundup Ready" crops which by definition encourage the farmer to use potentially toxic doses of the herbicide. Bt toxin is a pesticide, and the degree of its expression in GM crops is not yet entirely predictable.
When I first started studying biotechnology 10 years ago, Roundup was commonly regarded as being no more toxic than coffee. We have since learned otherwise, and Monsanto's crude sledgehammer approach to farming practice has gone a long way towards discrediting the biotechnology industry in general.
Firefox is so unstable it regularly crashes Windows XP, although not Linux, apparently.
The only time I've seen Firefox crash on XP is when my former boss let his 10-year-old son install crapware like dodgy mouse cursors and so forth on his wife's machine. I primarily use Linux and OS X, and I haven't seen Firefox crash in years (literally), although I work it pretty hard. And certainly not do anything as drastic as making the machine fall over.
Seems to me this alleged instability should be addressed apropos of your operating system, not Firefox.
I have no problem with text-mode browsers. Very useful on machines with no X server.
But I get very tired of people complaining that Firefox is bloated, when they usually have an excessive number of unnecessary extensions loaded. People are very quick to complain if their browser doesn't support the latest shiny doodad, but whine about the extra codespace it takes up.
So here you go, folks: the Voice of Reason(TM) says: Lots of features == more code. Less features == less code. Take your pick and stop complaining.
By way of an aside, I used to maintain my own builds of the old Mozilla (minus email client and kitchensink) browser back in the days when Firefox was still called Phoenix. The general complaint at the time was that Mozilla had got too bloated, so a re-write was necessary. However, my builds of Mozilla were significantly more compact and faster than Phoenix. Eventually, of course, Mozilla's codebase stagnated, and since I wanted a few new shiny doodads myself, I went with the flow. But now that Firefox can be accurately described as mature, it might be a good time for me to start doing my own builds again...
Now here's a suggestion for Google: rather than pissing folks off by putting billboards on StreetView, thet could try constructing a translator that actually respects grammar rules for both languages. I know it's not easy, but these people are supposed to be among the smartest in the world. So here's an opportunity for them to prove it.
Trouble is, you can say anything you want with the simplest of statistics. Like this: 20% of all traffic accidents are caused by drunk drivers. Therefore 80% must be caused by sober drivers. Therefore, you're safer if you drive drunk than sober.;-)
Perhaps the OS? That does it for me, but I am not a graphic artist.
Neither am I, except on a non-professional basis. I like OS X for the same reason I like Linux: there is a useful terminal and command prompt where you can get sane things done when necessary, and without interference from those pesky GUIs.
Indeed. but it is still of some interest, as the submission says: given the public's utter apathy about tablet computers to date. A lot of that is because the Windows-based offerings from other manufacturers have been clunky and generally second-rate. If Apple can pull off a successful hardware release, I won't be sad. A decent, lightweight, non-bulky tablet computer will suit a lot of people (including me, if I can afford it).
But I suspect Apple only has the one shot at it. Like the MacBook Air, the iSlate idea might be just a bit too far ahead of its time.
Slashdot Mirror
But if everyone was wearing a clown suit...
As an aside, I can remember the media furore about Jello Biafra (of the Dead Kennedys) running for Mayor of San Fransisco in (I think) '79. One of the points on his manifesto was that all businessmen should be forced to wear clown suits within city limits. He finished 4th out of a field of 10. So close...
Interesting you should say that. I haven't coded full-time for a few years now, but I often feel I was more productive with the old amber-on-black ANSI terminal than I have ever been with modern devices. But maybe that's because the hardware effectively forced me to not be diverted by the distraction of extraneous shiny things...
Given that even mobile devices now have more CPU horsepower than a desktop system from the early days of the Web...
True, but don't forget that an iPhone can only do one... thing... at... a... time.
To save cost, phone companies tend to use a single IP-address for many phones at the same time.
Holy shit. That makes me glad I persist in using a comparatively "dumb" but very robust phone (a Motorola Razr2 V9), since the majority of my contacts don't function in realms beyond voice calls and SMS.
I find it decidedly scary that people are so happy to conduct critical (e.g. banking) transactions via a device which by its highly stealable nature (if nothing else) is so obviously not secure. I have no objection to being able to call up the occasional map or wikipedia entry on my phone (which I can), but I prefer to use a "real" computer, since I don't care for straining my comparatively poor eyesight on handheld devices or dealing with poor text entry methods. I have yet to be convinced that the "there's an app for that" gimmmick will stand the test of time.
I'm aware that ext4 can run without a journal, but isn't that functionally equivalent to leaving it as ext2?
Your link, while interesting, appears to have nothing to do with filesystems. Ext4 might be numerically more advanced than ext2, but the latter still has a useful place in the scheme of things if we accept the proviso that proper steps are taken to secure the data. I still use ext2 for boot partitions on general-purpose Linux boxes. I mount these read-only in the interests of security, but that means, of course, that I can't have journalling on them, which precludes the use of ext3 or 4.
Google probably doesn't have a requirement for read-only partitions on machines that have only one purpose, so the uptime benefits are a more compelling factor.
It's more competitive than the Zune, sure
Everything is more competitive than the Zune, since Microsoft doesn't believe in marketing it outside the US and Canada. Since Microsoft obviously isn't serious about it, it might just as well concede that market to Apple.
...I have to search the documentation to find that key combination.
That reminds me of the days when I persisted in using TECO (or clones thereof) as my preferred text editor. My colleagues used to tease me with comments about its memory usage, i.e. the amount of meat-space memory required to remember all those commands. I was younger then, and my memory was more functional, so I now have no shame in taking all the help I can get.
That doesn't work when your kernel crashes.
...Which is exactly why we don't need a SysRq button. I don't need more than one finger to count the number of Linux kernel crashes I have seen since 1994, disregarding those circumstances where through my own stupidity or lack of attention I have managed to compile a kernel doomed to failure.
it would pause the output to the screen so if it was scrolling by to fast to read you could stop it...
Back in the day, we used to be able to get the same effect on *nix-ish machines (and more than a few distantly related mini/mainframe OSs) with Ctrl-S to stop and Ctrl-P to restart scrolling. I remember answering helpdesk enquiries where the user complained of a frozen screen which was often fixed with a judicious application of Ctrl-P...
The key I most despise is that stupid Windows button. I never knew (or cared) what it did, even on Windows boxes. Next is the Caps Lock key, which I simply disable, since the only times I have ever used it were by accident.
Used it a lot on my desktop when I hacked some scanner drivers to support my parallel port scanner.
Memories, memories...
I used to have a Umax parallel port scanner (it was a gift) but I didn't even consider attempting to construct drivers for it to work with Linux. It turned out to be a vastly better use of my time (though not the environment) to chuck it in the bin and get an Epson USB device...
I'm just informing you of your error in understanding the net effect "Round-up Ready" crops have on total herbicide use in agriculture.
I don't have an error of understanding. I have what most would consider a good amount of in-depth knowledge of biotechnology. I don't argue that Roundup Ready crops allow for fewer applications of herbicide. But those applications are quite heavy, and as I pointed out previously, we now know that Roundup is nowhere near as non-toxic as Monsanto used to claim. In fact, they got slapped down a few years ago for exactly those claims. The United States Environmental Protection Agency has caught Monsanto's scientists deliberately falsifying test results on at least two occasions.
As far as Bt being organic...
Being the cranky soul that I am, I commonly like to tease people about the definition of "organic". I.e. show me some inorganic vegetables, perhaps made of silicon? Germanium or ruthenium?
Selective breeding is certainly well tried and gradual, but "true" is misleading. All you are doing is leading evolution in a direction of your choosing, rather than allowing natural selection to take its course. But you're right in that no amount of evolutionary genetic recombination would result in the spontaneous production of Bt toxin in our lifetime.
It's worth noting that this is entirely different from the so-called "Roundup Ready" crops which by definition encourage the farmer to use potentially toxic doses of the herbicide. Bt toxin is a pesticide, and the degree of its expression in GM crops is not yet entirely predictable.
When I first started studying biotechnology 10 years ago, Roundup was commonly regarded as being no more toxic than coffee. We have since learned otherwise, and Monsanto's crude sledgehammer approach to farming practice has gone a long way towards discrediting the biotechnology industry in general.
Easy. Just go to "Help and Accounts" -> "Classic Index" -> "Authors" and untick samzenpus... which is what I have now done. See you folks later.
Forget it. Nobody who logs in as anything other than AC will ever see your sig. If you have anything worthwhile to say, than say it properly.
Firefox is so unstable it regularly crashes Windows XP, although not Linux, apparently.
The only time I've seen Firefox crash on XP is when my former boss let his 10-year-old son install crapware like dodgy mouse cursors and so forth on his wife's machine. I primarily use Linux and OS X, and I haven't seen Firefox crash in years (literally), although I work it pretty hard. And certainly not do anything as drastic as making the machine fall over.
Seems to me this alleged instability should be addressed apropos of your operating system, not Firefox.
I have no problem with text-mode browsers. Very useful on machines with no X server.
But I get very tired of people complaining that Firefox is bloated, when they usually have an excessive number of unnecessary extensions loaded. People are very quick to complain if their browser doesn't support the latest shiny doodad, but whine about the extra codespace it takes up.
So here you go, folks: the Voice of Reason(TM) says: Lots of features == more code. Less features == less code. Take your pick and stop complaining.
By way of an aside, I used to maintain my own builds of the old Mozilla (minus email client and kitchensink) browser back in the days when Firefox was still called Phoenix. The general complaint at the time was that Mozilla had got too bloated, so a re-write was necessary. However, my builds of Mozilla were significantly more compact and faster than Phoenix. Eventually, of course, Mozilla's codebase stagnated, and since I wanted a few new shiny doodads myself, I went with the flow. But now that Firefox can be accurately described as mature, it might be a good time for me to start doing my own builds again...
Now here's a suggestion for Google: rather than pissing folks off by putting billboards on StreetView, thet could try constructing a translator that actually respects grammar rules for both languages. I know it's not easy, but these people are supposed to be among the smartest in the world. So here's an opportunity for them to prove it.
Trouble is, you can say anything you want with the simplest of statistics. Like this: ;-)
20% of all traffic accidents are caused by drunk drivers. Therefore 80% must be caused by sober drivers. Therefore, you're safer if you drive drunk than sober.
Of course. It just involves a lot of Kleenex and having to shave palms... ;-)
I just didn't need to include the whole thing to reply to it.
No, I can see that, Mr. Troll. You obviously didn't even feel the need to read what you quoted. (Hint: the last sentence.)
Perhaps the OS? That does it for me, but I am not a graphic artist.
Neither am I, except on a non-professional basis. I like OS X for the same reason I like Linux: there is a useful terminal and command prompt where you can get sane things done when necessary, and without interference from those pesky GUIs.
What Apple Tablet?
Indeed. but it is still of some interest, as the submission says: given the public's utter apathy about tablet computers to date. A lot of that is because the Windows-based offerings from other manufacturers have been clunky and generally second-rate. If Apple can pull off a successful hardware release, I won't be sad. A decent, lightweight, non-bulky tablet computer will suit a lot of people (including me, if I can afford it).
But I suspect Apple only has the one shot at it. Like the MacBook Air, the iSlate idea might be just a bit too far ahead of its time.