Um, Win2k may run with 128MB of memory, but it doesn't run very smoothly.
And as for the swap file thing, that's ridiculous. I don't think he should have been expected to know that Windows breaks horribly when swap space drops to or below 2MB. I remember doing the same thing with NT 4.0 and wondering why the system broke (couldn't start up most services), despite having tons of RAM as long as it didn't have any swap.
On Linux, I can run swapon and swapoff. I don't think it's particularly obvious or intuitive that NT just breaks when you cut the swap file size.
There's been some awful "feminine software" junk put out, like games for girls. Flopped. Not surprising -- the software was pretty bad.
There are definitely areas that appeal more to the female demographic. Interpersonal interaction, for instance, has more appeal among women than men. I think the only time I've heard of non-techie women using software much (aside from the mandantory Word/IE combo) is on AIM and The Simms.
Think you can't make a game with simulated human/human interaction? Too complicated? Sure you can!
Let me put it this way -- we've had about two decades of commercial game development aimed primarily at improving graphics. AI has not improved much at all. Despite the major role it plays in a game, usually only a small fraction of the CPU time in a game is devoted to the AI. The Simms is a good example of game that isn't particularly graphically advanced but puts a lot of work into AI and simulation. It's a Good Thing (tm).
Apple would be fine with selling Linux boxes (as long as it didn't result in costly support fees for them), especially if it expanded their market instead of eating away from their current MacOS users. Most of their profits are from hardware. OS development is pretty much a sunk cost.
Re:Grounds for divorce.
on
Spy v. Spy
·
· Score: 1
I'm a little dubious about censoring content for kids.
The primary rationale I've heard of for keeping a given kid from being exposed to sexual content is that perhaps they'll remain unaware of sex and not have it at an early age. I kind of think that that's a pipe dream. Kids that are going to have sex are going to have sex, regardless of whether you try to hide porn from them or not -- you're better off talking it over with them.
Let Johnny have his porn, and talk over sex with him early instead of putting it off as long as you can.
At some point in life, Johnny *is* going to have to cope with goatse.cx and other "adult subjects". The only way he's going to build up the ability to cope with sexual content is having some exposure to sexual content -- people do not suddenly mature in their ability to deal with something without any experience in that area at all. Putting off that exposure is pointless -- and could be divisive. If he's out looking for porn, then he's interested in in sex and he's going to find out about it no matter what you try to do. It's much better if you're the one to talk about it first.
The Puritanical "sex is a taboo topic and we won't discuss it with children in the hope that they won't practice it" just doesn't make a lot of sense in today's society (frankly, I don't think it's made much sense for hundreds of years either, but that's just me).
Yeah, but the main difference that made Core Wars cool was that it was sandboxed.
Maybe sandboxing by default will become the way of the future...
Re:Or use the simple method....
on
Spy v. Spy
·
· Score: 1
Don't use Windows 9x or any other system that basically gives all users root on the machine.
Don't install closed source software written by companies that make their money from spyware and screwing around with your computer -- particularly P2P stuff.
Honestly, the best way to avoid spyware is just to install Linux (Or *BSD or whatever floats your boat) and just not hand out root accounts.
DoT works perfectly (except for a few issues with music late in the game), but I don't think any of the other SCUMM games work flawlessly in it. Sam and Max works, but has definite issues and crashes frequently.
Required disclosure and documentation of any data that leaves their system. File formats, network protocols, etc.
That would be near-perfect. It would allow competition, it would help consumers, it would *not* penalize MS for no reason (if no one chooses to use the information, then they have a legitimate reason to have a monopoly), it would make a lot of open source coders happy, it wouldn't put any restrictions on the coders at Microsoft.
This should be submitted as a solution to the states...though the cynical part of me says that at least a few would rather fish for money.
I have to agree. Sam is really cool, and the benefit the Linux world has gotten from his work is tremendous -- it's fostered a whole arena of people coding and a fair degree of commercial development.
Regardless of how awful the rest of Blizzard might be, Sam is a Good Guy (tm).
The depressing thing is that probably a few goverments seriously would like to spend $1 billion to try to read something in an RSA encrypted format.
Yet despite all that money and zillions of man-years being blown on reading stuff in such a format, no one has managed to go out, and no one is willing to spend the money to try to crack.DOC and produce software capable of reading it. A much, much easier problem but one that hasn't been done completely.
There are so many *smarter* things to blow money on than cryptography that it blows the mind. Cryptography is a fun mind game, but frankly when this much money is being spent on it it's just ridiculous.
You can bribe the people involved for less than $1 billion. Heck, buy up a private army and take over the building that has the information that you want.
I doubt that using multiple encryption on one message would lower the strength. I'm not a cryptographer, but if that were the case, the very first thing any attacker would do is encrypt the message again with the same encryption scheme and a random key, which is a relatively cheap operation.
I had to select "Plain old text" to get that to post. Has anyone else noticed that "Plain old text" and "extrans" are labeled in reverse in the posting menu?
I've been associated VeriSign with bad business for a long time. I've heard nothing but bad stuff about them -- that it's a pain to update information, that it's expensive, that it's hard to talk to tech support...
Of course, this is also second-hand.
Gandi has the best terms of use and one of the best prices according to a big comparative review I read on the 'Net a while ago. My friend signed up with them and is happy with them. If you're looking for someone besides VeriSign, they might be good. I've heard that GoDaddy is also a good choice, if you don't like Gandi.
Of course, YMMV, and you might prefer a different one, but VeriSign is one of the few with a straight out bad rep.
If it makes the thumbs more dextrous, it means that too many people are using Gameboys instead of computers.
With a computer, the thumb is used not infrequently (for the spacebar), but in a limited sence, and is used only as a guide for most mice rather than a button pushing finger.
That being said, I use my thumb button to drag all my windows around my clicking anywhere in the content area -- thanks, Sawfish.
I wish MS just disk-cached stuff locally with all free disk space in Windows. That'd take care of 95% of users, and the rest of us (with our already running local squid proxies) could use our computers in content.
Re:this reminds me of a trick for telemarketers
on
He Writes Back
·
· Score: 1
"You're only hurting soldiers of the Reich, not the Nazi establishment that you disagree with."
bzip is noticeably slower than gzip. I copy files using nc piped through gz frequently on my LAN. Using bzip would make things much slower, since the CPU is the bottleneck.
They pay for upstream bandwidth, which is now less. They pay for downstream bandwidth, which is equal if the customer is ineed transferring the same number of files.
Heck, if the service is more attractive, they *get more users* and make more money.
I may not agree completely with Jeremy, but I have to say that this attack on him is completely bogus.
Re:A few words from the original author
on
Usenet Encoding: yEnc
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
Mmm...I disagree.
USENET is wildly inefficient for binary distribution unless someone downloads every binary file from every server. I admit that most P2P systems don't allow offloading network load for files that you are publishing -- with Gnutella, you have to wait until someone else decides to share the file you're sharing if you want any load balancing.
But Freenet exists, though it's a bit rough at the edges and there is no non-Java implementation (blech). And it is much better for this sort of thing and much more efficient than USENET.
I have to agree. Yes, it sucks that there's no longer any carrot to convince users to upgrade to any new standard -- the speed issue is gone. However, if someone was even in the progress of making a standard, I think that the argument against yEnc would be a lot stronger. There was nothing going on...so yEnc will be the new standard.
Slashdot Mirror
Just don't compile in support for a bunch of stuff into the demo.
Um, Win2k may run with 128MB of memory, but it doesn't run very smoothly.
And as for the swap file thing, that's ridiculous. I don't think he should have been expected to know that Windows breaks horribly when swap space drops to or below 2MB. I remember doing the same thing with NT 4.0 and wondering why the system broke (couldn't start up most services), despite having tons of RAM as long as it didn't have any swap.
On Linux, I can run swapon and swapoff. I don't think it's particularly obvious or intuitive that NT just breaks when you cut the swap file size.
There's been some awful "feminine software" junk put out, like games for girls. Flopped. Not surprising -- the software was pretty bad.
There are definitely areas that appeal more to the female demographic. Interpersonal interaction, for instance, has more appeal among women than men. I think the only time I've heard of non-techie women using software much (aside from the mandantory Word/IE combo) is on AIM and The Simms.
Think you can't make a game with simulated human/human interaction? Too complicated? Sure you can!
Let me put it this way -- we've had about two decades of commercial game development aimed primarily at improving graphics. AI has not improved much at all. Despite the major role it plays in a game, usually only a small fraction of the CPU time in a game is devoted to the AI. The Simms is a good example of game that isn't particularly graphically advanced but puts a lot of work into AI and simulation. It's a Good Thing (tm).
Apple would be fine with selling Linux boxes (as long as it didn't result in costly support fees for them), especially if it expanded their market instead of eating away from their current MacOS users. Most of their profits are from hardware. OS development is pretty much a sunk cost.
I'm a little dubious about censoring content for kids.
The primary rationale I've heard of for keeping a given kid from being exposed to sexual content is that perhaps they'll remain unaware of sex and not have it at an early age. I kind of think that that's a pipe dream. Kids that are going to have sex are going to have sex, regardless of whether you try to hide porn from them or not -- you're better off talking it over with them.
Let Johnny have his porn, and talk over sex with him early instead of putting it off as long as you can.
At some point in life, Johnny *is* going to have to cope with goatse.cx and other "adult subjects". The only way he's going to build up the ability to cope with sexual content is having some exposure to sexual content -- people do not suddenly mature in their ability to deal with something without any experience in that area at all. Putting off that exposure is pointless -- and could be divisive. If he's out looking for porn, then he's interested in in sex and he's going to find out about it no matter what you try to do. It's much better if you're the one to talk about it first.
The Puritanical "sex is a taboo topic and we won't discuss it with children in the hope that they won't practice it" just doesn't make a lot of sense in today's society (frankly, I don't think it's made much sense for hundreds of years either, but that's just me).
Yeah, but the main difference that made Core Wars cool was that it was sandboxed.
Maybe sandboxing by default will become the way of the future...
Don't use Windows 9x or any other system that basically gives all users root on the machine.
Don't install closed source software written by companies that make their money from spyware and screwing around with your computer -- particularly P2P stuff.
Honestly, the best way to avoid spyware is just to install Linux (Or *BSD or whatever floats your boat) and just not hand out root accounts.
My two cents.
DoT works perfectly (except for a few issues with music late in the game), but I don't think any of the other SCUMM games work flawlessly in it. Sam and Max works, but has definite issues and crashes frequently.
This is a really, really good idea.
Required disclosure and documentation of any data that leaves their system. File formats, network protocols, etc.
That would be near-perfect. It would allow competition, it would help consumers, it would *not* penalize MS for no reason (if no one chooses to use the information, then they have a legitimate reason to have a monopoly), it would make a lot of open source coders happy, it wouldn't put any restrictions on the coders at Microsoft.
This should be submitted as a solution to the states...though the cynical part of me says that at least a few would rather fish for money.
I have to agree. Sam is really cool, and the benefit the Linux world has gotten from his work is tremendous -- it's fostered a whole arena of people coding and a fair degree of commercial development.
Regardless of how awful the rest of Blizzard might be, Sam is a Good Guy (tm).
The depressing thing is that probably a few goverments seriously would like to spend $1 billion to try to read something in an RSA encrypted format.
.DOC and produce software capable of reading it. A much, much easier problem but one that hasn't been done completely.
Yet despite all that money and zillions of man-years being blown on reading stuff in such a format, no one has managed to go out, and no one is willing to spend the money to try to crack
There are so many *smarter* things to blow money on than cryptography that it blows the mind. Cryptography is a fun mind game, but frankly when this much money is being spent on it it's just ridiculous.
You can bribe the people involved for less than $1 billion. Heck, buy up a private army and take over the building that has the information that you want.
I doubt that using multiple encryption on one message would lower the strength. I'm not a cryptographer, but if that were the case, the very first thing any attacker would do is encrypt the message again with the same encryption scheme and a random key, which is a relatively cheap operation.
Red Hat, please send Finlay Dobbie a free set of CDs.
If Apple doesn't want him around, a lot of us *would* like to have someone who's talented and cares around.
And a nice letter of apology or something. Christ. This guy saved them a freaking lot more money than they have risk in taking him on.
I had to select "Plain old text" to get that to post. Has anyone else noticed that "Plain old text" and "extrans" are labeled in reverse in the posting menu?
I've been associated VeriSign with bad business for a long time. I've heard nothing but bad stuff about them -- that it's a pain to update information, that it's expensive, that it's hard to talk to tech support...
Of course, this is also second-hand.
Gandi has the best terms of use and one of the best prices according to a big comparative review I read on the 'Net a while ago. My friend signed up with them and is happy with them. If you're looking for someone besides VeriSign, they might be good. I've heard that GoDaddy is also a good choice, if you don't like Gandi.
Of course, YMMV, and you might prefer a different one, but VeriSign is one of the few with a straight out bad rep.
Anyone a VeriSign fan out there?
If it makes the thumbs more dextrous, it means that too many people are using Gameboys instead of computers.
With a computer, the thumb is used not infrequently (for the spacebar), but in a limited sence, and is used only as a guide for most mice rather than a button pushing finger.
That being said, I use my thumb button to drag all my windows around my clicking anywhere in the content area -- thanks, Sawfish.
I wish MS just disk-cached stuff locally with all free disk space in Windows. That'd take care of 95% of users, and the rest of us (with our already running local squid proxies) could use our computers in content.
"You're only hurting soldiers of the Reich, not the Nazi establishment that you disagree with."
bzip is noticeably slower than gzip. I copy files using nc piped through gz frequently on my LAN. Using bzip would make things much slower, since the CPU is the bottleneck.
How is this bad for the service provider?
They pay for upstream bandwidth, which is now less. They pay for downstream bandwidth, which is equal if the customer is ineed transferring the same number of files.
Heck, if the service is more attractive, they *get more users* and make more money.
I may not agree completely with Jeremy, but I have to say that this attack on him is completely bogus.
Mmm...I disagree.
USENET is wildly inefficient for binary distribution unless someone downloads every binary file from every server. I admit that most P2P systems don't allow offloading network load for files that you are publishing -- with Gnutella, you have to wait until someone else decides to share the file you're sharing if you want any load balancing.
But Freenet exists, though it's a bit rough at the edges and there is no non-Java implementation (blech). And it is much better for this sort of thing and much more efficient than USENET.
Hmm...IIRC, wasn't kermit designed to handle situations like over IP where you could have wacky latency?
I have to agree. Yes, it sucks that there's no longer any carrot to convince users to upgrade to any new standard -- the speed issue is gone. However, if someone was even in the progress of making a standard, I think that the argument against yEnc would be a lot stronger. There was nothing going on...so yEnc will be the new standard.
I know CMU was doing terrabit ATM research at least a year and a half ago from posters in Hammerschlag Hall.