I recently wrote a client for a distributed computing project that compiled without one line of change for Windows, several Linux versions, several BSDs, Solaris, Tru64, and OSX.
And probably others, I can't rememeber. People with unusual machines gave me a login account, I ftp'd stuff over, I compiled, I ftp'd stuff back, and I logged out. All over in 5 minutes, it's easy to forget quite whih ones I did.
No, it didn't have a GUI. No it didn't need a GUI. Not all programs do, you know. Ad if I were to write a GUI, I'd write a simple wrapper in Tcl/Tk. Or do you claim that Tcl/Tk is non-portable too?
Out of court settlements won't strengthen any case, they set no legal precedent. They do nothing but put the frighteners on your opponent to indicate that everyone else thought they'd lose in court.
Ignore him, he'll just confuse you. You don't appear to have any incorrect misapprehensions at the moment.
Come to the Usenet newsgroup comp.compression ( http://groups.google.com/ ) and ask your questions there, you'll get a lot more sense from most of the responders.
You put "10 times smaller than X" in quotes. Who are you quoting? It's not the sentence the original AC made his dig at, and that I pedantically spelt out an interpretaion of.
I respectfully advise you to get a fucking Dick and Jane book and fucking learn to read.
See YAW. See YAW flame. Flame YAW flame.
You appear to know a lot about asses - your head's stuck up one.
No! It's _easier_ to write bread-and-butter HTML that looks _fine_, if a little unexciting, than it is to write anything that could break any half-decent browser (i.e. one that understands what it's told, like w3m or opera).
YAW (who writes his boring but perfectly usable (100-hits a day on some pages, which ain't too bad) web-pages using 'cat > filename')
I'm pseudonymous. You don't have authentication of identities in 99% of real life, so that's pseudonymous too. What's your local shopkeeper's name? Even if you think you know it - you can't be sure. All you know is that the guy who sold you glue last week is the same guy as the the one who sold you glue this week, and he knows that you need your regular fix.
Any post from "You're All Wrong" comes from the same person as any other post from "You're All Wrong". However, posts from "Anonymous Coward" could come from anybody.
You really do have problems with quite simple concepts, don't you?
And is my workstation dead? Nope, it's running happily, number-crunching as we speak. It's your brain that's dead.
Idiot. You're not alone, there are about 10 equally ill-informed idiots about 10 posts back too.
The patent is about having a _visually_ static part of the page pull up other pages, dynamically over a network, into a separate region of the display. e.g. frames with a menu frame, and using target= to pull up the request into the other frame.
My mouse contains a microcontroller and a serial line. It is therefore surely a rudimentary networked computer. It has more CPU power than most machines from the 50s, I'm sure, and they were _real_ computers!
""" but you don't use the stupid x87 for floating point, you use SSE """
Not if you want 64-bits of mantissa! The x86 FPU is the only extended double architecture that I know of, and it has many real-world uses. If you're going to use plain old IEEE854 doubles, then nothing apart from cost separates a P4 from an Alpha/Power (or HPPA/Sparc/MIPS who have dropped the ball).
But did your poxy PCs have _16KB_ L1 Cache, and 256KB L2 cache?
i.e. would they be running off to main memory all the time like a pathetic child running to mother after being picked on in a school playground?
The machine I'm posting this from has _4MB_ cache. And it's 5 years old. Yeah, my memory bandwidth is 10 times lower than your cited modern PCs, but I access it 10 times less often than you. And that's, as I say, a 5-year old machine. Caches are far bigger nowadays on decent workstation processors.
Athlons may be hotter than Pentia, but the leader in the heat stakes was always the Alpha. Alpha was the first chip to exceed a lightbulb, for example; both 60W and 100W targets.
However, look at the Power4 dissipation figures - one Power4 module dissipates 500W!
Nope. You have to escape the name, so they recognise it as being non-7-bit. You'd probably need somtehing like --verisign-sucks.com or something, I forget exactly how it works. (like I ever knew or cared).
Exactly. During the winter olympics a few years ago (OK, a decade), the olympic committee decided that it would make sense to transliterate all competitors names into ASCII. All the on-screen competitors lists that came up, and the ones that commentators would read out to you were in this format.
That means that a Finnish competitor with the name Väinö Mäenpää would be printed on screen as Vaeinoe Maeenpaeae. Now that's slightly fucked to the _eye_, but then imagine what happens when a phonetic Finn attempts to pronounce _twice_ the number of vowels that he would normally have to.
The difference between the front vowels and the back vowels (e.g. ä/a) is far less to most ears than the difference between two vowels and one (ae/a), and whoever thought it would be most sensible to do what they did should have been shot. Let's face it, few pronounce 'Moog' correctly, so feeble attempts to change 8-bit spellings in order to accomodate 7-bit speakers is futile, as they can't even get 7-bit words right.
Trasliteration is a complete minefield. DJB realises this, but Verisign are just greedy.
Slashdot Mirror
Bollocks.
I recently wrote a client for a distributed computing project that compiled without one line of change for Windows, several Linux versions, several BSDs, Solaris, Tru64, and OSX.
And probably others, I can't rememeber. People with unusual machines gave me a login account, I ftp'd stuff over, I compiled, I ftp'd stuff back, and I logged out. All over in 5 minutes, it's easy to forget quite whih ones I did.
No, it didn't have a GUI. No it didn't need a GUI. Not all programs do, you know. Ad if I were to write a GUI, I'd write a simple wrapper in Tcl/Tk. Or do you claim that Tcl/Tk is non-portable too?
YAW.
No it's nicer simply knowing what can go wrong and not doing stupid things.
I've never liked the "Java is better because I can be sloppy and it doesn't matter" argument.
All it tells me is you like being sloppy.
YAW.
Out of court settlements won't strengthen any case, they set no legal precedent. They do nothing but put the frighteners on your opponent to indicate that everyone else thought they'd lose in court.
YAW.
That's not stealing - that's _sharing_, and it's what Jesus, your Lord and saviour, told us all to do!
Now, where's my crack pipe.
YAW
Ignore him, he'll just confuse you. You don't appear to have any incorrect misapprehensions at the moment.
Come to the Usenet newsgroup comp.compression ( http://groups.google.com/ ) and ask your questions there, you'll get a lot more sense from most of the responders.
YAW.
You put "10 times smaller than X" in quotes.
Who are you quoting? It's not the sentence the original AC made his dig at, and that I pedantically spelt out an interpretaion of.
I respectfully advise you to get a fucking Dick and Jane book and fucking learn to read.
See YAW. See YAW flame. Flame YAW flame.
You appear to know a lot about asses - your head's stuck up one.
YAW.
"
all it takes is a little time
"
No! It's _easier_ to write bread-and-butter HTML that looks _fine_, if a little unexciting, than it is to write anything that could break any half-decent browser (i.e. one that understands what it's told, like w3m or opera).
YAW (who writes his boring but perfectly usable (100-hits a day on some pages, which ain't too bad) web-pages using 'cat > filename')
If old stuff reflects X, and new stuff reflects 90% less, then new stuff reflects X-X*(90/100) = 0.1*X.
If old stuff reflects X, and new stuff reflects 100% less, then new stuff reflects zero.
With me still?
100% of X _is_ one times X.
Ten times X _is_ 1000% of X.
With me still?
Something that reflects 10 times less than the old stuff reflects 1000% less than the old stuff, and therefore reflects -9*X.
With me still?
The original wording is misleading. The original complaint against it was valid. Instead they should have put something more like:
The new material reflects 1/10th to 1/20th of the amount that the old material reflected.
The new material is 10 to 20 times less reflective than the old material.
YAW.
I'm pseudonymous. You don't have authentication of identities in 99% of real life, so that's pseudonymous too. What's your local shopkeeper's name? Even if you think you know it - you can't be sure. All you know is that the guy who sold you glue last week is the same guy as the the one who sold you glue this week, and he knows that you need your regular fix.
Any post from "You're All Wrong" comes from the same person as any other post from "You're All Wrong". However, posts from "Anonymous Coward" could come from anybody.
You really do have problems with quite simple concepts, don't you?
And is my workstation dead? Nope, it's running happily, number-crunching as we speak. It's your brain that's dead.
Up your arse you pathetic anonymous jerkoff.
You're too fucking stupid to realise that it was Dec's Alphas at the top of the table?
Now go off to a quiet corner and kill yourself, to save us the effort.
WHY HAVEN'T YOU READ UP ON THE ISSUE?
Idiot. You're not alone, there are about 10 equally ill-informed idiots about 10 posts back too.
The patent is about having a _visually_ static part of the page pull up other pages, dynamically over a network, into a separate region of the display. e.g. frames with a menu frame, and using target= to pull up the request into the other frame.
YAW.
It used to be 20, but is now 17.
YAW.
"over a computer network"
My mouse contains a microcontroller and a serial line. It is therefore surely a rudimentary networked computer. It has more CPU power than most machines from the 50s, I'm sure, and they were _real_ computers!
YAW
The final release came out then, but there were several betas before then.
A quick google indicates Oct. 1995 is when frames first hit the street with Netscape 2.0Beta1.
Aw bollocks - I had 5 mod points yesterday, but wasted them modding down idiots. If only I'd kept one for a +1 funny.
"and besides, shells don't let you do much anyways."
Love it!
YAW.
Idiot.
This machine was _top_ of the Spec tables from the minute it was released until the minute it was superseded. Intel never came close to it.
Intel doing anything apart from a pile of crap has been only a very recent twist to the story.
YAW.
"""
but you don't use the stupid x87 for floating point, you use SSE
"""
Not if you want 64-bits of mantissa!
The x86 FPU is the only extended double architecture that I know of, and it has many real-world uses. If you're going to use plain old IEEE854 doubles, then nothing apart from cost separates a P4 from an Alpha/Power (or HPPA/Sparc/MIPS who have dropped the ball).
YAW.
"""
That's why all of the largest supercomputers now are... clusters of PC's.
"""
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
NEC, Alpha, Alpha, Power.
0/4, please insert another nickel and try again.
""" ...
8MB of L2 cache?
Get back to me when Linux can do any one of those
"""
Four years ago, at least. (e.g. DS and ES family)
Sheesh.
YAW.
But did your poxy PCs have _16KB_ L1 Cache, and 256KB L2 cache?
i.e. would they be running off to main memory all the time like a pathetic child running to mother after being picked on in a school playground?
The machine I'm posting this from has _4MB_ cache. And it's 5 years old. Yeah, my memory bandwidth is 10 times lower than your cited modern PCs, but I access it 10 times less often than you. And that's, as I say, a 5-year old machine. Caches are far bigger nowadays on decent workstation processors.
YAW.
Athalon? Sheesh.
Athlons may be hotter than Pentia, but the leader in the heat stakes was always the Alpha. Alpha was the first chip to exceed a lightbulb, for example; both 60W and 100W targets.
However, look at the Power4 dissipation figures - one Power4 module dissipates 500W!
YAW.
Idiot.
Just because internal data pathways may be 128bit or 256bit wide doesn't mean that it can process 128bits or 256bits simultaniously.
If that were the case, then your cache would be given a higher rating than your ALUs. And which does the more processing?
YAW.
"""
Frankly, if you're going to look at a website with a Chinese URL, you're going to know Chinese anyway.
"""
What if you're looking for the abuse@ address for a Chinese ISP that host spammers that spam you in Chinese?
YAW
Nope. You have to escape the name, so they recognise it as being non-7-bit.
You'd probably need somtehing like
--verisign-sucks.com
or something, I forget exactly how it works.
(like I ever knew or cared).
YAW.
Exactly. During the winter olympics a few years ago (OK, a decade), the olympic committee decided that it would make sense to transliterate all competitors names into ASCII.
All the on-screen competitors lists that came up, and the ones that commentators would read out to you were in this format.
That means that a Finnish competitor with the name Väinö Mäenpää would be printed on screen as Vaeinoe Maeenpaeae. Now that's slightly fucked to the _eye_, but then imagine what happens when a phonetic Finn attempts to pronounce _twice_ the number of vowels that he would normally have to.
The difference between the front vowels and the back vowels (e.g. ä/a) is far less to most ears than the difference between two vowels and one (ae/a), and whoever thought it would be most sensible to do what they did should have been shot. Let's face it, few pronounce 'Moog' correctly, so feeble attempts to change 8-bit spellings in order to accomodate 7-bit speakers is futile, as they can't even get 7-bit words right.
Trasliteration is a complete minefield. DJB realises this, but Verisign are just greedy.