As for air-flow-blocking, normal ATA cables can easily be made into round ones. You can purchase these at most local computer stores (not Best Buy-type places, but Fry's has them). You can also make them yourself by cutting the ribbon wire lengthwise in between the 80 conductors (making sure to cut between, not through, each conductor), then twisting the thing so it's rope-like instead of ribbon-like, and wrapping electrical tape around it.
First of all, starting off a comment with "No. Wrong." is so ridiculously juvenile as to barely warrant a response.
Secondly, only one device can talk on an IDE bus at a time, but as you noted the drives can't push data fast enough to saturate it anyway. So with two drives, you have them continuously reading data off the disk into their caches and then alternately sending it on the bus. So yes, they don't talk concurrently on the bus, but they are concurrently reading off the disk. The end result is that you have the bus more saturated than before.
While ATA has had some incompatibility problems, mostly due to large drives, SCSI has tons of compatibility problems. Not only are there tons of different standards (SCSI-1, Fast-SCSI, Ultra-SCSI, Ultra-Wide-SCSI, etc.), but there are tons of different cable in use (IDC-50, CN-50, HD-50, HD-68, DB-25, VHDCI, HDI-30, etc., etc.) none of which are compatible, of course. At least with IDE you can be reasonably certain that your new IDE drive will plug into your IDE controller.
You need to read some history if you think that North Korea or the Soviet Union were Communist in even the remotest sense of the term. The Soviet Union made some early attempts at Communism; Leninism could be argued to be a method of implementing Marx's ideas. However, Stalinism is in no way Communism - Marx argued for the weakening of the state and its eventual merger with civil society (the goal was to eliminate the distinction between "state" and "civil society"). Stalin on the other hand strengthened it through a command and control economy, a path more ideologically Fascist than Communist.
And North Korea is just a closely-knit family dictatorship.
As far as I know there have been, with the possible exception of the early days of the Soviet Union, no actual implementations of Marx's ideas. There have certainly been those claiming to implement Marx's ideas (Mao Zedong in China, for example, who instead implemented his own ideas), but they obviously either did not read Marx or chose to ignore the parts they didn't like.
1) I thought the company was no longer "VA Linux Systems," as it had dropped the word "Linux" from its name?
2) From several articles written by Bowie J. Poag I gather than the founding of SourceForge was not quite so happy as you seem to indicate. His allegations are that VA requested that he work on such a project (at the time called system26), but that VA appropriated his work and turned it into sourceforge.
[For those who don't know, Bowie J. Poag is the main force behind Propaganda Desktop Graphics, which used to be the main feature of VA's themes.org until Mr. Poag deliberately destroyed the site in protest against VA's actions (it took VA about 6 months to put the site back together again, minus Propaganda, which is now at the new location linked to above).]
For those of you with Economist subscriptions, you can view the article online (for free) here to avoid having to search through your printed issue.
For those without Economist subscriptions, you can either buy access for $2.95 to this article, pay $4.95 for a week of access to the online archives, or buy a subscription...FWIW it's the only magazine I still subscribe to in printed form, as it's the only one still worth my money (Rolling Stone and Newsweek having long since become virtually worthless).
That's because you spelled "Slovenia" wrong. When you search for its correct spelling, the article referred to comes up. But a subscription to the printed version of the magazine is required to view it freely. It's here.
FWIW, all articles from the print version of the Economist are available online.
Since Emacs is his principle coding project, and Emacs has several thousand lines of GUI code (for use under X), I don't see how this could be the case.
The problem with RMS's view of embracing the same development methods and openess that FS does is that with such a method you can not make money on software. If you have to give the source code away for free to others, how can you make money from it in a practical sense?
Yet somehow I keep seeing Red Hat boxes sold at the local Best Buy, and somehow it keeps selling rather well.
Since GNOME is part of the GNU project, I don't see how one could accurately represent the interests of the GNOME project as stated without being partial to the GNU project itself.
Exactly. Sure, you ban the Nazis because you believe they are wrong, and their beliefs are harmful to society. Plus they're only a small percentage anyway.
Then what happens in a very religious country when you decide that atheists are wrong, and their beliefs harmful to society? Ban them too.
Your views are identical to those stated in different times by the Catholic Church: speech that deviates from the Catholic Church's views is harmful and injures a community exposed to it, because it encourages people to follow beliefs other than those prescribed by God.
So why is your example different? Only because you believe fascism is wrong while you don't believe all non-Catholic religions (or atheism) are wrong. But what about those who do? Would they be right in advocating a ban on non-Catholic speech?
But you'll never know if what you read about his views is accurate until you read his views as he stated them.
Banning important primary documents in history is opening the way for a 1984-style scenario where the "official history" is all there is, because everything that disagrees with it is banned.
The two restrictions are not the same, though I'll agree that the US is not *ideal* - it's certainly better.
In Europe, hate speech is censored, period. You cannot SAY that you think Jews are evil, for example. You cannot record a video glorifying Hitler and sell it, as another example.
In the US, on the other hand, you cannot broadcast vulgar speech on television. You cannot put sexually explicit materials in the front window of your video store. You can however record pornographic videos and sell them (as should be obvious; this is a very large industry in the US). You can curse as much as you want on record albums, and then sell them to the public (this is also a quite large industry).
Don't confuse restrictions where you can do something with banning it entirely. Both are bad, but the second is far worse.
I believe by that comment he meant "the Linux kernel support for ext2 is well-tested and stable, while that for XFS and Reiser FS is not." It's their Linux support that's problematic, not the filesystems themselves.
And I'm tempted to disregard any arguments that start with something as ridiculously juvenile as "Bzz. Try again."
Uhh, just because you can't recompile the kernel doesn't mean you can't recompile your other programs. You can keep your gcc-compiled (slower) kernel and then recompile your other programs with the Intel compiler (faster). Just because only part of your system speeds up doesn't mean it's useless.
Umm, your analogy makes no sense at all. This ruling is holding that French anti-Nazi laws do not apply in the U.S. As such, holding that other French laws - 'backup copy' laws, for example - also do not apply in the U.S. is entirely consistent. Holding, on the other hand, that they do (as you seem to imply they should to be consistent) would in fact be diametrically opposed to this ruling.
Well yes, the RIAA labels are certainly the most popular and the most visible. But there are quite a few independent popular bands, though sometimes the non-RIAA labels don't really treat their artists or customers much better (but that's more a "music industry people tend to be bastards" problem than an "RIAA is a cartel" problem). Also I forgot to mention that TVT Records, the label that released Nine Inch Nails's first two (wildly popular) albums as well as several by Ministry and KMFDM, is not an RIAA member.
Nine Inch Nails' first two albums (Pretty Hate Machine in 1989 and Broken in 1992) were released by TVT Records, a label that was not and is still not a member of the RIAA. (Other successful TVT bands include Ministry and KMFDM).
When The Offspring sold 8 million copies of Smash and Rancid sold 2 million copies of...And Out Come the Wolves in 1994, they were both signed to Epitaph Records, which at the time was not an RIAA member (they joined the RIAA several years later).
So yes, it is possible to achieve commercial success (and enormous commercial success at that) on a non-RIAA-member label. I'm sure there's plenty more examples, those were just the three that came to mind immediately.
I don't see *any* advantage to printf statements. If you take the line in the code you would've put the printf statement at, and instead set a breakpoint at that line, and then inspect the value of the variable you would've printed out, you have the *exact* same effect with no recompilation. And if that gives you useful information (perhaps reminds me of somewhere else to look for the bug), you can now investigate further without yet ANOTHER recompile.
What could possibly be the advantage of using the printf instead of just inspecting the variable at that line?
Slashdot Mirror
As for air-flow-blocking, normal ATA cables can easily be made into round ones. You can purchase these at most local computer stores (not Best Buy-type places, but Fry's has them). You can also make them yourself by cutting the ribbon wire lengthwise in between the 80 conductors (making sure to cut between, not through, each conductor), then twisting the thing so it's rope-like instead of ribbon-like, and wrapping electrical tape around it.
Sure, I'll upgrade to SCSI, as soon as you point me to an affordable 75-gig SCSI drive. By affordable I of course mean "under $250," not $1000.
First of all, starting off a comment with "No. Wrong." is so ridiculously juvenile as to barely warrant a response.
Secondly, only one device can talk on an IDE bus at a time, but as you noted the drives can't push data fast enough to saturate it anyway. So with two drives, you have them continuously reading data off the disk into their caches and then alternately sending it on the bus. So yes, they don't talk concurrently on the bus, but they are concurrently reading off the disk. The end result is that you have the bus more saturated than before.
While ATA has had some incompatibility problems, mostly due to large drives, SCSI has tons of compatibility problems. Not only are there tons of different standards (SCSI-1, Fast-SCSI, Ultra-SCSI, Ultra-Wide-SCSI, etc.), but there are tons of different cable in use (IDC-50, CN-50, HD-50, HD-68, DB-25, VHDCI, HDI-30, etc., etc.) none of which are compatible, of course. At least with IDE you can be reasonably certain that your new IDE drive will plug into your IDE controller.
But, as you noted, that's a rant about IBM AT architecture. There's no such problem with IDE on a Mac, so it's not IDE's fault.
And North Korea is just a closely-knit family dictatorship.
As far as I know there have been, with the possible exception of the early days of the Soviet Union, no actual implementations of Marx's ideas. There have certainly been those claiming to implement Marx's ideas (Mao Zedong in China, for example, who instead implemented his own ideas), but they obviously either did not read Marx or chose to ignore the parts they didn't like.
A few questions:
1) I thought the company was no longer "VA Linux Systems," as it had dropped the word "Linux" from its name?
2) From several articles written by Bowie J. Poag I gather than the founding of SourceForge was not quite so happy as you seem to indicate. His allegations are that VA requested that he work on such a project (at the time called system26), but that VA appropriated his work and turned it into sourceforge.
[For those who don't know, Bowie J. Poag is the main force behind Propaganda Desktop Graphics, which used to be the main feature of VA's themes.org until Mr. Poag deliberately destroyed the site in protest against VA's actions (it took VA about 6 months to put the site back together again, minus Propaganda, which is now at the new location linked to above).]
Yes. Any GPL-compatible license is acceptable; this includes the BSD license (new version, without "obnoxious advertising clause") among many others.
For those of you with Economist subscriptions, you can view the article online (for free) here to avoid having to search through your printed issue.
For those without Economist subscriptions, you can either buy access for $2.95 to this article, pay $4.95 for a week of access to the online archives, or buy a subscription...FWIW it's the only magazine I still subscribe to in printed form, as it's the only one still worth my money (Rolling Stone and Newsweek having long since become virtually worthless).
That's because you spelled "Slovenia" wrong. When you search for its correct spelling, the article referred to comes up. But a subscription to the printed version of the magazine is required to view it freely. It's here.
FWIW, all articles from the print version of the Economist are available online.
Since Emacs is his principle coding project, and Emacs has several thousand lines of GUI code (for use under X), I don't see how this could be the case.
The problem with RMS's view of embracing the same development methods and openess that FS does is that with such a method you can not make money on software. If you have to give the source code away for free to others, how can you make money from it in a practical sense?
Yet somehow I keep seeing Red Hat boxes sold at the local Best Buy, and somehow it keeps selling rather well.
Since GNOME is part of the GNU project, I don't see how one could accurately represent the interests of the GNOME project as stated without being partial to the GNU project itself.
Exactly. Sure, you ban the Nazis because you believe they are wrong, and their beliefs are harmful to society. Plus they're only a small percentage anyway.
Then what happens in a very religious country when you decide that atheists are wrong, and their beliefs harmful to society? Ban them too.
And so on.
Your views are identical to those stated in different times by the Catholic Church: speech that deviates from the Catholic Church's views is harmful and injures a community exposed to it, because it encourages people to follow beliefs other than those prescribed by God.
So why is your example different? Only because you believe fascism is wrong while you don't believe all non-Catholic religions (or atheism) are wrong. But what about those who do? Would they be right in advocating a ban on non-Catholic speech?
But you'll never know if what you read about his views is accurate until you read his views as he stated them.
Banning important primary documents in history is opening the way for a 1984-style scenario where the "official history" is all there is, because everything that disagrees with it is banned.
The two restrictions are not the same, though I'll agree that the US is not *ideal* - it's certainly better.
In Europe, hate speech is censored, period. You cannot SAY that you think Jews are evil, for example. You cannot record a video glorifying Hitler and sell it, as another example.
In the US, on the other hand, you cannot broadcast vulgar speech on television. You cannot put sexually explicit materials in the front window of your video store. You can however record pornographic videos and sell them (as should be obvious; this is a very large industry in the US). You can curse as much as you want on record albums, and then sell them to the public (this is also a quite large industry).
Don't confuse restrictions where you can do something with banning it entirely. Both are bad, but the second is far worse.
I believe by that comment he meant "the Linux kernel support for ext2 is well-tested and stable, while that for XFS and Reiser FS is not." It's their Linux support that's problematic, not the filesystems themselves.
And I'm tempted to disregard any arguments that start with something as ridiculously juvenile as "Bzz. Try again."
Uhh, just because you can't recompile the kernel doesn't mean you can't recompile your other programs. You can keep your gcc-compiled (slower) kernel and then recompile your other programs with the Intel compiler (faster). Just because only part of your system speeds up doesn't mean it's useless.
Umm, your analogy makes no sense at all. This ruling is holding that French anti-Nazi laws do not apply in the U.S. As such, holding that other French laws - 'backup copy' laws, for example - also do not apply in the U.S. is entirely consistent. Holding, on the other hand, that they do (as you seem to imply they should to be consistent) would in fact be diametrically opposed to this ruling.
Well yes, the RIAA labels are certainly the most popular and the most visible. But there are quite a few independent popular bands, though sometimes the non-RIAA labels don't really treat their artists or customers much better (but that's more a "music industry people tend to be bastards" problem than an "RIAA is a cartel" problem). Also I forgot to mention that TVT Records, the label that released Nine Inch Nails's first two (wildly popular) albums as well as several by Ministry and KMFDM, is not an RIAA member.
Nine Inch Nails' first two albums (Pretty Hate Machine in 1989 and Broken in 1992) were released by TVT Records, a label that was not and is still not a member of the RIAA. (Other successful TVT bands include Ministry and KMFDM).
...And Out Come the Wolves in 1994, they were both signed to Epitaph Records, which at the time was not an RIAA member (they joined the RIAA several years later).
When The Offspring sold 8 million copies of Smash and Rancid sold 2 million copies of
So yes, it is possible to achieve commercial success (and enormous commercial success at that) on a non-RIAA-member label. I'm sure there's plenty more examples, those were just the three that came to mind immediately.
Unfortunately for your argument, not all publishers are members of the music industry cartel:
http://www.nitrorecords.com/
http://www.gashed.com/
http://www.metropolis-records.com/
http://www.fatwreck.com/
http://www.victoryrecords.com/
http://www.dependent.de/
Just to name a few of the bigger ones with more popular bands...there's literally thousands of smaller ones.
Or sign to a non-RIAA label.
...
There are plenty
I don't see *any* advantage to printf statements. If you take the line in the code you would've put the printf statement at, and instead set a breakpoint at that line, and then inspect the value of the variable you would've printed out, you have the *exact* same effect with no recompilation. And if that gives you useful information (perhaps reminds me of somewhere else to look for the bug), you can now investigate further without yet ANOTHER recompile.
What could possibly be the advantage of using the printf instead of just inspecting the variable at that line?