I don't know much about M-B, but I gather there are four "booleans", thus 16 possible personality classifications.
Correct. I/E, N/S, T/F, P/J. Keirsey subdivies them into four "temperments": NT, NF, SP, SJ. (Yeah, the S's are paired with a different component for some reason.)
So the average size of these will be 6%. Being in one of 5% doesn't seem to be much of a distinction to me, but I guess it depends on the distributions...if they're say 94%, 5%, 1%, 0%, 0%... then being in the 5% class is indeed distinctive.
Double-checking my figures, INTP is 1% of the world population, 5% of US population and 4% of web users. My source is the tables in the middle of the page here just below the color 3-d bar graph (1st and second tables after the bar chart). Unfortunately its quoted references are invalid links now. I won't try to further explain the distribution, but I'm satisfied enough to feel better about not "fitting in" to mainstream society. Additionally, since INTP's aren't generally outwardly social I'm less likely to meet the ones who act and think like me.
I wish I had kept the reference, but one of those famed psych papers is about a prof who wrote some generic stuff about how you feel like you don't fit in, and sometimes you think people are just using you or whatnot, and gave (the same text) to a bunch of psych students. The vast majority accepted that it was specifically about them, and insightful to boot. One must read any kind of personality description with a salt lick at hand, IMO.
The description of the types isn't as you described. I kinda thought "everyone probably thinks this describes them" at first, but in Keirsey's book at least only one of the descriptions fits me nearly 100% while a couple others are roughly 50%. (My own post, however may fit into the category of "everyone thinks it's them" since I generally talk about not fitting in and wanting validation. )
I'm not buying in 100% to the Myers-Briggs or Keirsey analyses, but they've been useful to me. I'm willing to consider the possibility they are mumbo-jumbo meaningless categorizations as I carry large doses of salt for any psychologists' observations. In fact my first impression was that it was like Zodiac signs. My "don't fit in" and "not like others" statements were based on my whining, not MBTI...I took what I read and extrapolated it to a reason why I don't fit in to validate myself an my feelings. The MBTI research appears to be fairly straightforward and not touchy-feely on its own merit.
Perhaps I should further qualify myself by saying that any short quote or paragraph from the Keirsey books may describe many or even most people, but the whole INTP chapter(s) appear to describe me nearly 100% accurately whereas the other chapters don't. The unofficial MBTI web sites usually have short descriptions and probably are less distinctive.
I was about to skip this article entirely, but the editor's comment about INTP caught my interest. If his insight is correct I may have something to offer.
I've never quite fit in and might possibly fit your description, although I would never publicly declare myself "unusually but non-traditionally bright" even though I may sometimes think so if I haven't done something really stupid recently (which I'm prone to do).
At age 34 I think I'm finally more or less comfortable with my future plans and how I fit into things.
Now, the INTP thing. That's a Myers-Briggs [personality] Type Indicator. I've never been much into classifying people, but I felt personally validated after reading some material on the subject. Basically I'm an INTP which is less than 5% of the world's population, so I figure it's okay that I don't seem to think like "everyone else" (for better or worse). The descriptions of INTP's thinking, working and love habits really hit home, too, so that made me feel better. David Keirsey has a couple of books _Please Understand Me_ and _... II_ which cover the subject.
If MB typing interests you, check out _Do What You Are_ by Paul D. Tieger & Barbara Baroon-Tieger. It suggests occupations that match the interests of each of the types.
Like I say I'm a bit skeptical of psychological studies and categorizations in general, but using the above material for validation and occasionally a sanity check helped me feel better, although I don't know if it made any tangible difference in my life. My career was already set when I read these books.
Back to practical advice and personal experience, I had no clue what I wanted to do after high school. I went to college as a default. I did okay at first, but my grades went downhill after a year or two. I was good with computers but couldn't imagine any job I would like involving them; I imagined sitting in front of a green screen typing all day and didn't like it. I had a job with a big company, though, and when working a remote site my terminal went down. The tech showed up while I was there, unplugged the modem and plugged in a new one. I said (or maybe thought...I can't remember now) "you get paid to do that? I can do that." So I got in touch with his manager and found out what the job requirements were: an Associate's degree. So I changed my college focus and got the 2-year degree and happened to get that job just as I graduated. From there my experiences and job interests expanded.
So I guess my career advice is to open your eyes and watch what other people are doing; if you like it, find out how you can do it. That probably sounds obvious to everyone else, but at that age I was very introspective and other people didn't interest me much.
I hate sales. And it sounds like you probably do, too: "Friends and others recognize my strength in these areas." I usually say that I'm bad at first impressions but when people see what I can do they gain respect. When I say sales I include the forward type of behavior involved in cold selling, meeting women and job hunting, because I think they use very similar talents that I (and I suspect you) lack. A couple of things that helped me in this area a while back were college classes in interpersonal communication and business communication. A few customer service seminars at work helped a lot, too. This is important: having techincal skills is good, but these days you *have* to have the people skills to be secure. I still vehemently hate cold selling and job hunting, but I have good customer service skills and work well with just about everyone.
The rest you will decide for yourself as you learn and get more experience in exactly who you are and what you want. I didn't really figure it out until quite recently. I looked at other people and couldn't find anyone whose example I wanted to follow. At 30 I kinda freaked out, quit my job and did some other odd stuff because I just didn't like where my life was going. The past 3 years I've spent recovering fina
I remember watching a 'making of' show about the first Shrek movie and they said they purposely made the girl less human-like for the same reason. That she got to a point were it was freaky to have her look that human.
The way I remember it is that they said she looked so realistic she looked out-of-place in contrast to the intentionally cartoony/exaggerated sets and other characters.
but the creepiness is due to the differences, not the similarities
I haven't RTFA, and I took the quote out of context, but that's par for the course.
Actually I think this similarities make the differences more noticable. It's like if you play two musical notes together, but one is a half-note out of tune it sounds incredibly awful...way more awful than if the notes were a quarter-octive apart and one was out of tune by a half note. Or if you're wearing a red shirt and red pants, but they aren't quite the same color red it's very distracting and annoying.
I think as the overall effect looks more realistic the tiny differences sour the effect more than they normally would because instead of our imagination filling in the gaps our perceptions keep warning us something ain't right.
Very cutesy, but the 3-d data layout could be useful.
I've been playing with MRTG a little lately...I wonder if you could have Apache or other processes provide info via SNMP and use or modify MRTG to provide more 3-d and 4-d (brightness like VisitorVille's lit/unlit buildings or color) 'graphs'?
I did that on SuSE 9.0, downloaded the entire tree and mirrored it on one machine.
Me too, but I didn't realize it was 9Gb before I started.
Is there a way to cache only the files you need? I want to install one Suse install by downloading and then have those parts of the tree cached locally. If I install another Suse using my local cache and hit a file not cached it would then proxy download it for me. I guess I would call it a demand mirror or mirror cache; is there such a thing? I asked this question in my journal but have had no responses.
I moslty use and support Windows but am a Linux/unix fan.
Tab auto complete....
Nice, but annoying to have to rely on it. I use Cygwin periodically and use tab completion. Under cmd.exe I do stuff like this:
cd prog* cd comm*
or
cd docu* cd [username, probably abbreviated]
I know tab completion is enable-able in XP, but I don't think it is in 2k without a 3rd party shell.
The annoying part about the unix filesystem is that you have to learn it. But you have to learn Windows, too. Sure, your temp files are under C:\documents and settings\username\local settings\temp, but there is a c:\winnt\temp and for some odd reason c:\documents and settings\default user\local settings\temp gets used by some apps (although this last one may be because of a distributed installer I use that runs as the SYSTEM user). Furthermore, if you're having a problem with app conflicts where do you look? For example, Netscape 4.x likes to replace MAPIDLL32.DLL which makes Outlook 97 not work. That file is under \winnt\system32, and it took me a while to figure that out. McAfee has parts of its program files under \program files\mcafee (or NAI, I forget which) and some under \program files\common files\vshield or similar.
I absolutely hate that \winnt\system32 is the general dumping ground for all dlls, especially now that spyware/adware keeps adding to it.
Anyway, the/usr/bin and/usr/local bin were a bit odd to figure out at first, but it's great now./usr/bin is where all the distribution's program files go, and/usr/local/bin is where apps I download install myself go. When I need to update or remove them, the process is different so it's helpful to have them in different places.
This isn't the best organized rebuttal ever, but I'm getting sleepy and am a bad debater to begin with.
The unix filesystem is sweet, too:
/etc : systemwide config files /home/user : user config files and data /usr/sbin : system tools /usr/bin : programs that were tested and configured for my distribution /usr/local/bin : programs that I downloaded, configured, compiled and installed
Okay, I'm out of steam. Let me summarize by saying there are advantages and disadvantages to both the Windows filesystem and the unix filesystem. I prefer the unix filesystem because once you learn the basics it makes sense and is easy to maintain. Windows looks easier on the surface but has some serious maintainability problems; sure some is caused by vendors but at least in unix the structure generally keeps annoying vendor structures under/usr/local or/opt instead of having them reside in your \winnt, \winnt\system32 and \program files\common files folders all willy nilly.
I *wish* someone would implement a comparable database-based filesystem. I would *kill* to do complex queries on my filesystem and get the results back instantly.
The OpenBeOS project status page indicates the filesystem is in the late beta stages. I don't know how much work it would be to port it to *nix, but I expect it's possible.
Ooh, I just followed the BeFS link on that page, and it references an experimental Linux BeFS driver. Happy birthday.
P.S. You said you would kill....how about Darl? (I keeed, I keeed.)
Wikipedia is very cool, but why do people keep linking to it as if it were athoritative proof of a point? I could change the whole page to say "mostly harmless", "/\/\$ suxors" or "dude you're wrong!" because it's a publicly editable Wiki. The information isn't attributed to any verifiable source, although admittedly there are some external links at the bottom that may or may not lead to more athoritative sources.
It shouldn't really be an issue post-FAT. I think most people's obsesison with fragementation are a remnant of having to defragment FAT drives regularly. One did it superstitiously in those days because an overly fragmented filesystem did slow down considerably. No modern filesystem has an excuse for not handling fragmentation with no interference from the user.
Head seek and rotational latency is still much slower than contiguous blocks. True, modern systems deal with it better, partially due to b-tree and other file indexing strategies and partially due to having plenty of RAM for metadata caching and predictive caching. But fragmentation is still a major issue for me on multiuser Windows PCs and periodic disk cleanup and defragmentation is necessary for reasonable operation speed.
<MS gripe> In particular, the hidden "Content.IE5" cache of IE on 20-100 user PCs fills up hard drives in a big hurry, and I haven't found a way of controlling this except for periodically deleting with the following batch file I made for Win2k. (Limiting the cache size doesn't seem to affect these files.)
@echo off echo. echo ***** WARNING!!!!! This will wipe out echo ***** C:\Documents and Settings\*\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files contents. echo ***** Press Control-C to abort or any other key to delete all temp files. echo. pause for/D %%x in (c:\"Documents and Settings"\*) do rd/s/q "%%x\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.ie5"
This needs to be done preventatively, though. In addition to fragmenting data, 20-100 user PCs with large numbes of files (and Content.IE5 is my killer in my situation) fill up the MFT and then fragment it, and once you get the MFT fragmented you're basically screwed. </MS gripe>
Admittedly the biggest problem PCs have disks less than 12G and I don't have as much of a problem with 20G+ systems. But have you ever run defrag after a clean install, even with an enormous hard drive? You'd think it could at least install itself without severe fragmentation. Oh well.
if Mac OS X runs on emulated generic PPC hardware, what's to stop people from running MacOS X on any number of PPC platforms?
Money.
PPC systems are expensive, presumably due to lower production volume. (Also the major vendors Apple and IBM presumably only sell very high quality workstations, and no other PPC workstation vendor manufactures enough PPC systems/boards to bring the price to near-cheap-PC levels.) After OS X & Mac-On-Linux came out I started investigating getting a "cheap" PPC to have a cheap OS X system. But PPC stuff that can run Linux and/or OS X is very expensive--even the used stuff. The IBM RS/6000 series of workstations is PPC-based but more costly than Mac. There were a couple of other vendors with obscure OSes but I don't recall finding a viable alternative cheaper than simply buying a Mac.
I want a Mac, but I don't want to pay for one. I have too much PC stuff that I can incrementally upgrade. Oh well.
Crazy thought that's probably totally impractical: I wonder if you could run Darwin/x86 and use PearPC to handle the proprietary code? Then the kernel and glibc calls would run natively.
As long as they send Freenet the balance and don't steal, I see nothing (catastrophically) wrong with this.
One point most people in this discussion seem to be missing is that all the subscription donations are now terminated. That is to say that Freenet's income/cash flow from Paypal is now terminated. I don't know what percentage of their donations come from Paypal, but I suspect it was their bread-and-butter stream of money to pay the developers.
I expect most adults to realize that they won't come close recovering that revenue stream anytime soon. It's not like all their subscribers will immediately find another way to contribute. A significant portion will either not take the time to re-pledge or won't notice that the subscription stopped. Even if Paypal were to reinstate Freenet the subscriptions couldn't (I assume) be auto-reinstated and not all contributors would immediately resubscribe.
That doesn't necessarily change the issue of whether or not Paypal has a right to terminate or if it's bad business to do so, but the point needs to be made that this really hurts the Freenet Project, and if I were a software project or other entity that relied heavily on subscribed donations or a business that relied on paid subscriptions I would want to learn more about why Paypal cut off Freenet and determine whether I would want to rely on Paypal for my enterprise.
The Olds 350 diesel engine that GM tried in the early 80s didn't help its reputation any.
Oh my God that thing sucked! It scared me off diesels for years. I haven't had a diesel since.
Quite a few years back my granddad acquired one of these in the form of a Regency 98 (boat on wheels with luxurious living-room-like interior) in exchange for some work. It wasn't running well, and I was going to fix it up, sell it and split the money with granddad. I had it almost ready to sell, but it was still knocking a bit on the freeway. One last adjustment and freeway test drive...it starts knocking...I pull over to let it settle down...it revs up...I turn the key off...it keeps revving faster and faster, billowing a thick smoke screen in back and accross the freeway. I panicked thinking the engine was going to throw pieces at me through the firewall and dashboard and exit the car and ran away somehow not getting hit by a car in the process.
It didn't blow up; it just quit, but it took a few minutes for the smoke to clear. I had it towed home and never tried starting it again. I sold it as is and the guy I sold it to said it was probably burning its own oil from around the pistons, and that's why turning the key off and removing it didn't stop the motor.
I wonder how the heck it got enough air to rev that fast, though? That never occurred to me until I typed this post. Weird stuff.
Secondly, the primary reason diesels aren't popular is pretty much based on pollution. They just aren't as clean as gasoline based cars, and that's that.
I've seen this brought up several times in this thread with no challenge. I've been told that while diesel exhaust is less comfortable to breathe, gasoline exhaust is actually way more toxic. i.e. you'll cough breathing diesel exhaust, you'll die breathing gasoline exhaust. Was I told wrong?
OK, first of all, comparing Diesel and Gasoline mileage isn't really apples to apples. They do after all use different fuel, and I wouldn't be surprised to find the energy density of diesel to be higher.
If you assume as I do that most people care about MPG for money then comparing diesel mileage to gasoline mileage is reasonable as long as diesel fuel is comparably priced to gasoline, and last I checked it's usually a bit lower than regular unleaded. But from a techincal or environmental point of view you're right that it's not necessarily an even comparison.
Still, hybrids *do* get more mileage than conventional autos with comparable performance. Just not as much . ..
Okay, but after reading the article and some of the comments I really am wondering if a lightly built small engine car like a Toyota Echo has any economical disadvantage to a hybrid. My brother's echo gets real MPG roughly equivalent to what people say the hybrids are getting. But don't you have to periodically replace the batteries on a hybrid?
And if you factor in the environmental aspect of battery manufacturing & reconditioning (of which I know nothing), is a hybrid really more environmentally friendly than a comparably powered fossil fuel only car?
Cool! I'm not sure I've heard of these before. Can you give any links to get us started? I searched for "electric assist bicycle" on Google, but some direction from a Slashdotter who bought and uses one would be nice.
They are converting 1/3 of their preferred stock at an enormous loss (13.50 vs. curent price 5.94) and selling 2/3.
The prevailing presumption is that they sold the 2/3 at a loss and will strategically dump the common stock. Keeping the common stock after a move like this wouldn't seem to make sense, but there is probably more going on than any of us know.
So they divested 2/3 of their stock for unknown terms, lost some benefits of the PIPE deal and are holding 1/3 of their original investment at >50% loss over 7 months. They presumably had the option to force redemption like Baystar, and being the majority investor would get their slice of the pie first. Instead they wait to weeks and pull this. Sounds like they're cutting their losses and splitting to me.
But admittedly that's not certain yet.
My best guess is that RBC prefered cutting losses and dropping SCOX rather than fighting about redemption, while Baystar has committed to redemption or bullying, and doubling their stock holdings for presumably a nice discount increases their leverage against SCO management and increases their redemption penalty should they win.
The P6 (PPro, PII, PIII) architecture is coming back to the desktop. This does make pretty good sense.
I agree. Intel had to brutally kill PIII because it was beating out the higher clockspeed PIVs. As a consumer that never made sense to me, and I've never wanted a PIV. I'd rather have had a PIII 1.3GHz or an AMD.
One of my users just got a new laptop with a Pentium M. I didn't really know what it was until yesterday, and just now I realize the clockspeed is 1.6GHz where his old PIV laptop was 2.4GHz. I haven't found any GHz claim or speed rating on the laptop or box yet, just a "Pentium M" logo prominently displayed below the keyboard. Heh, that 2.4GHz laptop is a joke to me; it has a rather loud fan that kicks on frequently when using it. I have yet to hear the Pentium M laptop make any unfriendly noises. (Besides the time I had that unbalanced CD in the drive, but that's not the laptop's fault.)
-Typing this from a PII 266MHz laptop. The techs in my company get the bottom-end equipment. Go figure. Not that I'm complaining; I think it's funny.
Maybe if I wait long enough it will be replaced by something that doesn't confuse me.:)
Uh, like chat rooms and IM? AOL, Yahoo and MSN had that covered long ago.
I never got into IRC, either. Last time I tried it told me I needed identd running. I think the techie barrier to entry is intentional.
Wandering OT: Speaking of networks with tech barriers to entry, Freenet's clients from April 30 and later have bidirectional routing, even for transient/temporary nodes. The network is running better than it has in a year or more; I'm waiting for a Slashdot story to mention the improvements and see if Freenet can handle the influx of nodes. I think it might this time. Back on-topic: Wait 'till the NYT tries Freenet!
Slashdot Mirror
Must file patent...clowns will eat me.
I don't know much about M-B, but I gather there are four "booleans", thus 16 possible personality classifications.
Correct. I/E, N/S, T/F, P/J. Keirsey subdivies them into four "temperments": NT, NF, SP, SJ. (Yeah, the S's are paired with a different component for some reason.)
So the average size of these will be 6%. Being in one of 5% doesn't seem to be much of a distinction to me, but I guess it depends on the distributions...if they're say 94%, 5%, 1%, 0%, 0%... then being in the 5% class is indeed distinctive.
Double-checking my figures, INTP is 1% of the world population, 5% of US population and 4% of web users. My source is the tables in the middle of the page here just below the color 3-d bar graph (1st and second tables after the bar chart). Unfortunately its quoted references are invalid links now. I won't try to further explain the distribution, but I'm satisfied enough to feel better about not "fitting in" to mainstream society. Additionally, since INTP's aren't generally outwardly social I'm less likely to meet the ones who act and think like me.
I wish I had kept the reference, but one of those famed psych papers is about a prof who wrote some generic stuff about how you feel like you don't fit in, and sometimes you think people are just using you or whatnot, and gave (the same text) to a bunch of psych students. The vast majority accepted that it was specifically about them, and insightful to boot. One must read any kind of personality description with a salt lick at hand, IMO.
The description of the types isn't as you described. I kinda thought "everyone probably thinks this describes them" at first, but in Keirsey's book at least only one of the descriptions fits me nearly 100% while a couple others are roughly 50%. (My own post, however may fit into the category of "everyone thinks it's them" since I generally talk about not fitting in and wanting validation. )
I'm not buying in 100% to the Myers-Briggs or Keirsey analyses, but they've been useful to me. I'm willing to consider the possibility they are mumbo-jumbo meaningless categorizations as I carry large doses of salt for any psychologists' observations. In fact my first impression was that it was like Zodiac signs. My "don't fit in" and "not like others" statements were based on my whining, not MBTI...I took what I read and extrapolated it to a reason why I don't fit in to validate myself an my feelings. The MBTI research appears to be fairly straightforward and not touchy-feely on its own merit.
Perhaps I should further qualify myself by saying that any short quote or paragraph from the Keirsey books may describe many or even most people, but the whole INTP chapter(s) appear to describe me nearly 100% accurately whereas the other chapters don't. The unofficial MBTI web sites usually have short descriptions and probably are less distinctive.
I've never quite fit in and might possibly fit your description, although I would never publicly declare myself "unusually but non-traditionally bright" even though I may sometimes think so if I haven't done something really stupid recently (which I'm prone to do).
At age 34 I think I'm finally more or less comfortable with my future plans and how I fit into things.
Now, the INTP thing. That's a Myers-Briggs [personality] Type Indicator. I've never been much into classifying people, but I felt personally validated after reading some material on the subject. Basically I'm an INTP which is less than 5% of the world's population, so I figure it's okay that I don't seem to think like "everyone else" (for better or worse). The descriptions of INTP's thinking, working and love habits really hit home, too, so that made me feel better. David Keirsey has a couple of books _Please Understand Me_ and _... II_ which cover the subject.
If MB typing interests you, check out _Do What You Are_ by Paul D. Tieger & Barbara Baroon-Tieger. It suggests occupations that match the interests of each of the types.
Like I say I'm a bit skeptical of psychological studies and categorizations in general, but using the above material for validation and occasionally a sanity check helped me feel better, although I don't know if it made any tangible difference in my life. My career was already set when I read these books.
Back to practical advice and personal experience, I had no clue what I wanted to do after high school. I went to college as a default. I did okay at first, but my grades went downhill after a year or two. I was good with computers but couldn't imagine any job I would like involving them; I imagined sitting in front of a green screen typing all day and didn't like it. I had a job with a big company, though, and when working a remote site my terminal went down. The tech showed up while I was there, unplugged the modem and plugged in a new one. I said (or maybe thought...I can't remember now) "you get paid to do that? I can do that." So I got in touch with his manager and found out what the job requirements were: an Associate's degree. So I changed my college focus and got the 2-year degree and happened to get that job just as I graduated. From there my experiences and job interests expanded.
So I guess my career advice is to open your eyes and watch what other people are doing; if you like it, find out how you can do it. That probably sounds obvious to everyone else, but at that age I was very introspective and other people didn't interest me much.
I hate sales. And it sounds like you probably do, too: "Friends and others recognize my strength in these areas." I usually say that I'm bad at first impressions but when people see what I can do they gain respect. When I say sales I include the forward type of behavior involved in cold selling, meeting women and job hunting, because I think they use very similar talents that I (and I suspect you) lack. A couple of things that helped me in this area a while back were college classes in interpersonal communication and business communication. A few customer service seminars at work helped a lot, too. This is important: having techincal skills is good, but these days you *have* to have the people skills to be secure. I still vehemently hate cold selling and job hunting, but I have good customer service skills and work well with just about everyone.
The rest you will decide for yourself as you learn and get more experience in exactly who you are and what you want. I didn't really figure it out until quite recently. I looked at other people and couldn't find anyone whose example I wanted to follow. At 30 I kinda freaked out, quit my job and did some other odd stuff because I just didn't like where my life was going. The past 3 years I've spent recovering fina
I remember watching a 'making of' show about the first Shrek movie and they said they purposely made the girl less human-like for the same reason. That she got to a point were it was freaky to have her look that human.
The way I remember it is that they said she looked so realistic she looked out-of-place in contrast to the intentionally cartoony/exaggerated sets and other characters.
An example would be looking at a girl, being attracted to her and having no idea why i.e what specific features makes her attractive to you?
Her personalities.
but the creepiness is due to the differences, not the similarities
I haven't RTFA, and I took the quote out of context, but that's par for the course.
Actually I think this similarities make the differences more noticable. It's like if you play two musical notes together, but one is a half-note out of tune it sounds incredibly awful...way more awful than if the notes were a quarter-octive apart and one was out of tune by a half note. Or if you're wearing a red shirt and red pants, but they aren't quite the same color red it's very distracting and annoying.
I think as the overall effect looks more realistic the tiny differences sour the effect more than they normally would because instead of our imagination filling in the gaps our perceptions keep warning us something ain't right.
But I'm probably just nitpicking semantics....
Very cutesy, but the 3-d data layout could be useful.
I've been playing with MRTG a little lately...I wonder if you could have Apache or other processes provide info via SNMP and use or modify MRTG to provide more 3-d and 4-d (brightness like VisitorVille's lit/unlit buildings or color) 'graphs'?
It's probably a strech, but maybe....
Shortly after MS goes out of business.
Now, the important thing, is someone monitoring the pool and tossing out bad servers?
Yes. Apparently an automated tool does it, and people occasionally report a bad node on the mailing list.
I did that on SuSE 9.0, downloaded the entire tree and mirrored it on one machine.
Me too, but I didn't realize it was 9Gb before I started.
Is there a way to cache only the files you need? I want to install one Suse install by downloading and then have those parts of the tree cached locally. If I install another Suse using my local cache and hit a file not cached it would then proxy download it for me. I guess I would call it a demand mirror or mirror cache; is there such a thing? I asked this question in my journal but have had no responses.
Tab auto complete....
Nice, but annoying to have to rely on it. I use Cygwin periodically and use tab completion. Under cmd.exe I do stuff like this:or
I know tab completion is enable-able in XP, but I don't think it is in 2k without a 3rd party shell.
The annoying part about the unix filesystem is that you have to learn it. But you have to learn Windows, too. Sure, your temp files are under C:\documents and settings\username\local settings\temp, but there is a c:\winnt\temp and for some odd reason c:\documents and settings\default user\local settings\temp gets used by some apps (although this last one may be because of a distributed installer I use that runs as the SYSTEM user). Furthermore, if you're having a problem with app conflicts where do you look? For example, Netscape 4.x likes to replace MAPIDLL32.DLL which makes Outlook 97 not work. That file is under \winnt\system32, and it took me a while to figure that out. McAfee has parts of its program files under \program files\mcafee (or NAI, I forget which) and some under \program files\common files\vshield or similar.
I absolutely hate that \winnt\system32 is the general dumping ground for all dlls, especially now that spyware/adware keeps adding to it.
Anyway, the
This isn't the best organized rebuttal ever, but I'm getting sleepy and am a bad debater to begin with.
The unix filesystem is sweet, too:
Okay, I'm out of steam. Let me summarize by saying there are advantages and disadvantages to both the Windows filesystem and the unix filesystem. I prefer the unix filesystem because once you learn the basics it makes sense and is easy to maintain. Windows looks easier on the surface but has some serious maintainability problems; sure some is caused by vendors but at least in unix the structure generally keeps annoying vendor structures under
I *wish* someone would implement a comparable database-based filesystem. I would *kill* to do complex queries on my filesystem and get the results back instantly.
The OpenBeOS project status page indicates the filesystem is in the late beta stages. I don't know how much work it would be to port it to *nix, but I expect it's possible.
Ooh, I just followed the BeFS link on that page, and it references an experimental Linux BeFS driver. Happy birthday.
P.S. You said you would kill....how about Darl? (I keeed, I keeed.)
Wikipedia is very cool, but why do people keep linking to it as if it were athoritative proof of a point? I could change the whole page to say "mostly harmless", "/\/\$ suxors" or "dude you're wrong!" because it's a publicly editable Wiki. The information isn't attributed to any verifiable source, although admittedly there are some external links at the bottom that may or may not lead to more athoritative sources.
I challenge anyone to try and come up with an idea that doesnt have its origins in something else.
Um, I'll poke a badger with a spoon. No wait, I've heard that one before. (Eddie Izzard)
Okay, I'll cut off my balls and shove this red hot poker up my ass. Oh crap, that was George Carlin.
Um, um...I'll bang my noze and sneeze until my toenails fall off. There, that's original!
Head seek and rotational latency is still much slower than contiguous blocks. True, modern systems deal with it better, partially due to b-tree and other file indexing strategies and partially due to having plenty of RAM for metadata caching and predictive caching. But fragmentation is still a major issue for me on multiuser Windows PCs and periodic disk cleanup and defragmentation is necessary for reasonable operation speed.
<MS gripe>
In particular, the hidden "Content.IE5" cache of IE on 20-100 user PCs fills up hard drives in a big hurry, and I haven't found a way of controlling this except for periodically deleting with the following batch file I made for Win2k. (Limiting the cache size doesn't seem to affect these files.)This needs to be done preventatively, though. In addition to fragmenting data, 20-100 user PCs with large numbes of files (and Content.IE5 is my killer in my situation) fill up the MFT and then fragment it, and once you get the MFT fragmented you're basically screwed.
</MS gripe>
Admittedly the biggest problem PCs have disks less than 12G and I don't have as much of a problem with 20G+ systems. But have you ever run defrag after a clean install, even with an enormous hard drive? You'd think it could at least install itself without severe fragmentation. Oh well.
if Mac OS X runs on emulated generic PPC hardware, what's to stop people from running MacOS X on any number of PPC platforms?
Money.
PPC systems are expensive, presumably due to lower production volume. (Also the major vendors Apple and IBM presumably only sell very high quality workstations, and no other PPC workstation vendor manufactures enough PPC systems/boards to bring the price to near-cheap-PC levels.) After OS X & Mac-On-Linux came out I started investigating getting a "cheap" PPC to have a cheap OS X system. But PPC stuff that can run Linux and/or OS X is very expensive--even the used stuff. The IBM RS/6000 series of workstations is PPC-based but more costly than Mac. There were a couple of other vendors with obscure OSes but I don't recall finding a viable alternative cheaper than simply buying a Mac.
I want a Mac, but I don't want to pay for one. I have too much PC stuff that I can incrementally upgrade. Oh well.
Crazy thought that's probably totally impractical: I wonder if you could run Darwin/x86 and use PearPC to handle the proprietary code? Then the kernel and glibc calls would run natively.
As long as they send Freenet the balance and don't steal, I see nothing (catastrophically) wrong with this.
One point most people in this discussion seem to be missing is that all the subscription donations are now terminated. That is to say that Freenet's income/cash flow from Paypal is now terminated. I don't know what percentage of their donations come from Paypal, but I suspect it was their bread-and-butter stream of money to pay the developers.
I expect most adults to realize that they won't come close recovering that revenue stream anytime soon. It's not like all their subscribers will immediately find another way to contribute. A significant portion will either not take the time to re-pledge or won't notice that the subscription stopped. Even if Paypal were to reinstate Freenet the subscriptions couldn't (I assume) be auto-reinstated and not all contributors would immediately resubscribe.
That doesn't necessarily change the issue of whether or not Paypal has a right to terminate or if it's bad business to do so, but the point needs to be made that this really hurts the Freenet Project, and if I were a software project or other entity that relied heavily on subscribed donations or a business that relied on paid subscriptions I would want to learn more about why Paypal cut off Freenet and determine whether I would want to rely on Paypal for my enterprise.
The Olds 350 diesel engine that GM tried in the early 80s didn't help its reputation any.
Oh my God that thing sucked! It scared me off diesels for years. I haven't had a diesel since.
Quite a few years back my granddad acquired one of these in the form of a Regency 98 (boat on wheels with luxurious living-room-like interior) in exchange for some work. It wasn't running well, and I was going to fix it up, sell it and split the money with granddad. I had it almost ready to sell, but it was still knocking a bit on the freeway. One last adjustment and freeway test drive...it starts knocking...I pull over to let it settle down...it revs up...I turn the key off...it keeps revving faster and faster, billowing a thick smoke screen in back and accross the freeway. I panicked thinking the engine was going to throw pieces at me through the firewall and dashboard and exit the car and ran away somehow not getting hit by a car in the process.
It didn't blow up; it just quit, but it took a few minutes for the smoke to clear. I had it towed home and never tried starting it again. I sold it as is and the guy I sold it to said it was probably burning its own oil from around the pistons, and that's why turning the key off and removing it didn't stop the motor.
I wonder how the heck it got enough air to rev that fast, though? That never occurred to me until I typed this post. Weird stuff.
Secondly, the primary reason diesels aren't popular is pretty much based on pollution. They just aren't as clean as gasoline based cars, and that's that.
I've seen this brought up several times in this thread with no challenge. I've been told that while diesel exhaust is less comfortable to breathe, gasoline exhaust is actually way more toxic. i.e. you'll cough breathing diesel exhaust, you'll die breathing gasoline exhaust. Was I told wrong?
OK, first of all, comparing Diesel and Gasoline mileage isn't really apples to apples. They do after all use different fuel, and I wouldn't be surprised to find the energy density of diesel to be higher.
If you assume as I do that most people care about MPG for money then comparing diesel mileage to gasoline mileage is reasonable as long as diesel fuel is comparably priced to gasoline, and last I checked it's usually a bit lower than regular unleaded. But from a techincal or environmental point of view you're right that it's not necessarily an even comparison.
Still, hybrids *do* get more mileage than conventional autos with comparable performance. Just not as much . . .
Okay, but after reading the article and some of the comments I really am wondering if a lightly built small engine car like a Toyota Echo has any economical disadvantage to a hybrid. My brother's echo gets real MPG roughly equivalent to what people say the hybrids are getting. But don't you have to periodically replace the batteries on a hybrid?
And if you factor in the environmental aspect of battery manufacturing & reconditioning (of which I know nothing), is a hybrid really more environmentally friendly than a comparably powered fossil fuel only car?
I'm starting to have serious doubts.
Cool! I'm not sure I've heard of these before. Can you give any links to get us started? I searched for "electric assist bicycle" on Google, but some direction from a Slashdotter who bought and uses one would be nice.
Thanks.
They are converting 1/3 of their preferred stock at an enormous loss (13.50 vs. curent price 5.94) and selling 2/3.
The prevailing presumption is that they sold the 2/3 at a loss and will strategically dump the common stock. Keeping the common stock after a move like this wouldn't seem to make sense, but there is probably more going on than any of us know.
So they divested 2/3 of their stock for unknown terms, lost some benefits of the PIPE deal and are holding 1/3 of their original investment at >50% loss over 7 months. They presumably had the option to force redemption like Baystar, and being the majority investor would get their slice of the pie first. Instead they wait to weeks and pull this. Sounds like they're cutting their losses and splitting to me.
But admittedly that's not certain yet.
My best guess is that RBC prefered cutting losses and dropping SCOX rather than fighting about redemption, while Baystar has committed to redemption or bullying, and doubling their stock holdings for presumably a nice discount increases their leverage against SCO management and increases their redemption penalty should they win.
RBC folded, Baystar raised, and SCO is "all in".
The P6 (PPro, PII, PIII) architecture is coming back to the desktop. This does make pretty good sense.
I agree. Intel had to brutally kill PIII because it was beating out the higher clockspeed PIVs. As a consumer that never made sense to me, and I've never wanted a PIV. I'd rather have had a PIII 1.3GHz or an AMD.
One of my users just got a new laptop with a Pentium M. I didn't really know what it was until yesterday, and just now I realize the clockspeed is 1.6GHz where his old PIV laptop was 2.4GHz. I haven't found any GHz claim or speed rating on the laptop or box yet, just a "Pentium M" logo prominently displayed below the keyboard. Heh, that 2.4GHz laptop is a joke to me; it has a rather loud fan that kicks on frequently when using it. I have yet to hear the Pentium M laptop make any unfriendly noises. (Besides the time I had that unbalanced CD in the drive, but that's not the laptop's fault.)
-Typing this from a PII 266MHz laptop. The techs in my company get the bottom-end equipment. Go figure. Not that I'm complaining; I think it's funny.
Maybe if I wait long enough it will be replaced by something that doesn't confuse me. :)
Uh, like chat rooms and IM? AOL, Yahoo and MSN had that covered long ago.
I never got into IRC, either. Last time I tried it told me I needed identd running. I think the techie barrier to entry is intentional.
Wandering OT: Speaking of networks with tech barriers to entry, Freenet's clients from April 30 and later have bidirectional routing, even for transient/temporary nodes. The network is running better than it has in a year or more; I'm waiting for a Slashdot story to mention the improvements and see if Freenet can handle the influx of nodes. I think it might this time. Back on-topic: Wait 'till the NYT tries Freenet!
. . . and Novell has a secretary named Sun, and Sun had a secretary named Novell . . .