Re:I've been using vi for so long...
on
The Birth of vi
·
· Score: 1
The ESC key is a simple target but it's too far away! To leave insert mode you can also press ^C, which isn't too different from Emacs. In vim you can also use ALT-direction (either the cursor keys or the hjkl keys). These have the benefit that your hands don't leave the home area on the keyboard.
I've never seen anyone edit text in emacs as fast as a competent vi user. I've seen some pretty experienced emacs users (including some guys who wrote a whole IDE for prolog in it), but none of them have the same speed as a vi user. On a modern machine I'm sure that emacs can't really be running that slowly - but it feels slow. Vi feels about as fast as I think.
Yeah that's true enough. The corporate website doesn't make it entirely clear what they're making. At one point they seem to claim the actual display materials, at another it's the "support electronics". The other strange thing is that they look suspiciously like an earlier Cambridge spinoff with a new name. Even the website layout was deja-vu. Is this E-Ink rebranding themselves for another tranche of funding?
Electronic paper is not made of paper. It's a marketing term for flexible displays made from charged two-colour particles that can be realigned. Electronic paper is infact (confusingly for you) made from plastic. So there is no contridiction in the title, it is an electronic plastic plant that will be used to make "electronic paper".
The article implied that they were going to try to synthesize the sequences that they find. This is where the interesting science would come from; some of those sequences may not be valid DNA strings - syntax errors if you will. Others may create proteins that are deadly - understanding the difference between the two would be a major advance in understanding the encoding that DNA uses.
Writing some perl to skim through a database of genes and pull out the entries that aren't there is fairly trivial. Doing it in a small length of time for a large database is somewhat harder. Analysing the resultant sequences to try and find commonalities and structure - that's where the majority of the money will go.
Ok, I hadn't heard of a power factor before. Not suprising as I'm not an Electrical Engineer. So now that I've looked it up and can see that you have a point, you've also proved two additional things:
1. That you are incredibly anal 2. Unlike every other reply the joke went over your head.
I think that you missed the point slightly. 100% of the energy supplied to the lightbulb is turned into either heat or light. All of those losses, they're turned into heat.
Electric heating is also more expensive here than gas, however, in terms of efficiency lightbulbs are perfect* (if you want heat with your light).
* Ignoring the height of heat delivery or production of sound, as the two other (impressively pedantic) posters pointed out.
Well I've sat through a presentation from an information forensics company showing how it can be done. We're academics rather than customers, so it was purely technical. It's not so much the sloppy position that is the problem. When you change the field in a pit on the drive, there is a residual field left over. It can't be read by the head on the drive (otherwise you'd get data errors), but you can put the drive platter in another (more expensive and sensitive) reader and recover those residual fields. Also, the pits are not completely contiguous on the platter surface, and a record of previous fields (going back 8 or 9 writes in practice) can be recovered from the gaps.
I would have said the same as you about flash, but somebody earlier in the thread made a good point about excess capacity for distributing writes across the flash.
This implies is that because memory is larger less attention can be paid to efficiency, but the hapless programmers don't know better. I used to use quicksort when I had 640 KiB of RAM, but now that I have 8 GiB, I'll just use bubble sort. Brilliant. You are really misrepresenting his point here. We both know that bubble sort would run much slower on a 8Gb dataset than quicksort. The real comparison is "should we some really tricky and nasty code for this particular function or should it be a giant lookup table?" When memory is (relatively) cheaper than processor time, the set of tradeoffs changes. Some of these tradeoffs then mean than code can be written more correctly (securely) at the expense of higher memory usage. These tradeoffs are intuitively bad to someone who cut their teeth on a 16bit processor with hardly any memory, but as I'm sitting writing this there is only 130Mb out of 1Gb in use (not counting the cache) - who is to say that doubling memory usage is bad if it removes a whole class of bugs and holes?
or saving the 20 seconds it takes to locate a disc and physically place it in the player Dude. Those 20 seconds are away from the couch. That's not what I paid good money for...
When they started aiming at charter renewel a few years ago they came up with their original promises for releasing digital content. Sure, DRM'd crap for foreign markets is a part of that, but they also promised legal peer-to-peer downloads for UK residents. There are several ways to accomplish that.
One difference is that the stuff that residents are interested in is not current programs. It's the back catalogue. I wouldn't mind if they distribute some kind of customised BitTorrent that is locked to uk ip addresses, and has a proxy blacklist. Putting DRM on the media would be kindof pointless, and it directly contridicts their stated aims. The back-catalogue of BBC media belongs to the British people, not the coroporation.
Note, I'm not saying that these things are mutually exclusive. Selling current content to the overseas market is a separate concern from opening the back catalogue to free download for UK residents. Also, making the highres versions available does not affect the resale anymore than DVD rips on peer-to-peer networks do currently. It's not good - but no worse than the current situation.
But this is not what they promised to do. As a British Licensefee payer I expect them to open up their content on UK filesharing networks, as they promised. Offering DRM'd content to overseas markets is not part of their charter. Making money should be a secondary concern to their primary purpose - delivering good tv to a British audience.
2. The military and intelligence agencies are going to be very interested in a very open internet because its the perfect source for open source intelligence (and that has nothing to do with software). OK, here goes the mods that I've already done in this discussion. This is a bit of a weird point. On an open internet people are free to use whatever software they want, in order to communicate the ways that they want. If they use strong crypto to secure their connection then nobody will listen in on them. Traffic analysis has some limited appeal, but it is muffled if a large number of people start to encrypt their comms.
The intelligence communities would love a world where everyone uses prescribed apps, like myspace, that they can monitor. Any use of strong crypto would stick out like a sore thumb, and be easier to track down.
You really go from bad to worse don't ya? So in your "logic" offtopic=moron. I guess your highschool education is really holding up well.
Enjoy your crappy IT job. Oh dear, are you trying to find a way to offend me? Terrible shot. I love my job, and as a clue I'll tell you that it is certainly not in "IT".
Well done you! Somebody must have brushed you with a touch of the cluestick.
I'm not arguing that Windows is as flexible as the average *nix. Nobody is. Well done. That's a 180 degree turn. That is exactly what you were arguing, and it is the point that I corrected you on.
Now, if you want to make a claim that Windows is inflexible because you can't write a crappy user space script to load your files into memory, and you can on *nix, that's fine (and perhaps this is what you were trying to do). That is exactly what the OP did. Now the rest of your whining about how his script isn't the same as Superfetch is just that, whining. Probably it isn't the same - although given Redmond's hyping of features before release I'm not 100% sure that they haven't just copied his script. The only point being argued by the OP that was attacked for bad logic was that windows isn't as flexible as unix. It's good to see that you've learnt the error of your ways. Try a class in basic logic next time, rather than whining for a few posts before admiting that you were wrong.
If that was the original intent, your argument has nothing to do with SuperFetch and is off topic. Entirely. But that is the first correct thing that you've said.
No. His logic is terrible, and so is yours. Windows doesn't let you muck around with most things in the system Do you understand the word flexible? It means open to change. You can't say that windows doesn't let you change something, but then argue with the OP's logic that this means it is not flexible. No matter how many times you repeat your point it is still obviously wrong.
Because this feature isn't difficult to implement, it's proof of how inflexible Windows? Your logic is terrible. Really? His logic seemed to make sense, are you sure that the error isn't in your understanding. He pointed out that the feature is trivial, and because linux is flexible he can implement it with a few lines of script. There is no way for the end user to implement the feature in Windows, hence Microsoft adding it to the system code. The fact that the system cannot be reconfigured to do this by the end user shows inflexibility. Did you understand it this time?
Your other point is dubious. If the system was loading files when they're used then there wouldn't be any speedup. You need to do the loading before the request - hence preloading. The description of this feature that someone linked to earlier suggests that popular applications are silently loaded at boot. The Vista memory management is becoming more aggressive in filling the system RAM with things that may be useful.
You replied to a comment joking that Demorel was good enough to stop the pain in Karoke bars. I didn't accuse you of not reading the article, in fact had you read my comment I said that you had - but that you didn't seem to have read the comment that you were replying to. I guess that's twice you've done that now. Are you aware of how stupid it makes you sound?
So... is your chronic and neuropathic pain caused by hanging out in Karoke bars taking Demoral, or did you RTFA but fail to read the fucking context that you were replying to?
Slashdot Mirror
The ESC key is a simple target but it's too far away! To leave insert mode you can also press ^C, which isn't too different from Emacs. In vim you can also use ALT-direction (either the cursor keys or the hjkl keys). These have the benefit that your hands don't leave the home area on the keyboard.
I've never seen anyone edit text in emacs as fast as a competent vi user. I've seen some pretty experienced emacs users (including some guys who wrote a whole IDE for prolog in it), but none of them have the same speed as a vi user. On a modern machine I'm sure that emacs can't really be running that slowly - but it feels slow. Vi feels about as fast as I think.
Yeah that's true enough. The corporate website doesn't make it entirely clear what they're making. At one point they seem to claim the actual display materials, at another it's the "support electronics". The other strange thing is that they look suspiciously like an earlier Cambridge spinoff with a new name. Even the website layout was deja-vu. Is this E-Ink rebranding themselves for another tranche of funding?
Electronic paper is not made of paper. It's a marketing term for flexible displays made from charged two-colour particles that can be realigned. Electronic paper is infact (confusingly for you) made from plastic. So there is no contridiction in the title, it is an electronic plastic plant that will be used to make "electronic paper".
The article implied that they were going to try to synthesize the sequences that they find. This is where the interesting science would come from; some of those sequences may not be valid DNA strings - syntax errors if you will. Others may create proteins that are deadly - understanding the difference between the two would be a major advance in understanding the encoding that DNA uses.
Writing some perl to skim through a database of genes and pull out the entries that aren't there is fairly trivial. Doing it in a small length of time for a large database is somewhat harder. Analysing the resultant sequences to try and find commonalities and structure - that's where the majority of the money will go.
Ok, I hadn't heard of a power factor before. Not suprising as I'm not an Electrical Engineer. So now that I've looked it up and can see that you have a point, you've also proved two additional things:
1. That you are incredibly anal
2. Unlike every other reply the joke went over your head.
Well done you.
I think that you missed the point slightly. 100% of the energy supplied to the lightbulb is turned into either heat or light. All of those losses, they're turned into heat.
Electric heating is also more expensive here than gas, however, in terms of efficiency lightbulbs are perfect* (if you want heat with your light).
* Ignoring the height of heat delivery or production of sound, as the two other (impressively pedantic) posters pointed out.
I hate to be pedantic (well, ok that's a lie) but if you're lighting and heating a house then surely any kind of lightbulb is 100% efficient...
For the love of god! Unencrypted data in main memory...
Well I've sat through a presentation from an information forensics company showing how it can be done. We're academics rather than customers, so it was purely technical. It's not so much the sloppy position that is the problem. When you change the field in a pit on the drive, there is a residual field left over. It can't be read by the head on the drive (otherwise you'd get data errors), but you can put the drive platter in another (more expensive and sensitive) reader and recover those residual fields. Also, the pits are not completely contiguous on the platter surface, and a record of previous fields (going back 8 or 9 writes in practice) can be recovered from the gaps.
I would have said the same as you about flash, but somebody earlier in the thread made a good point about excess capacity for distributing writes across the flash.
Because if you rent a single "last" version to them then they will pay you money forever, and you don't need big product launches every five years.
When they started aiming at charter renewel a few years ago they came up with their original promises for releasing digital content. Sure, DRM'd crap for foreign markets is a part of that, but they also promised legal peer-to-peer downloads for UK residents. There are several ways to accomplish that.
One difference is that the stuff that residents are interested in is not current programs. It's the back catalogue. I wouldn't mind if they distribute some kind of customised BitTorrent that is locked to uk ip addresses, and has a proxy blacklist. Putting DRM on the media would be kindof pointless, and it directly contridicts their stated aims. The back-catalogue of BBC media belongs to the British people, not the coroporation.
Note, I'm not saying that these things are mutually exclusive. Selling current content to the overseas market is a separate concern from opening the back catalogue to free download for UK residents. Also, making the highres versions available does not affect the resale anymore than DVD rips on peer-to-peer networks do currently. It's not good - but no worse than the current situation.
But this is not what they promised to do. As a British Licensefee payer I expect them to open up their content on UK filesharing networks, as they promised. Offering DRM'd content to overseas markets is not part of their charter. Making money should be a secondary concern to their primary purpose - delivering good tv to a British audience.
The intelligence communities would love a world where everyone uses prescribed apps, like myspace, that they can monitor. Any use of strong crypto would stick out like a sore thumb, and be easier to track down.
Ok fair enough. I guess we both got caught up in arguing for the sake of it. Your message makes you the better man. No sarcasm intended. Take it easy.
I'll take your word for it. 48mins is too long a chunk of my life to watch a Windows developer describe a new feature.
Your other point is dubious. If the system was loading files when they're used then there wouldn't be any speedup. You need to do the loading before the request - hence preloading. The description of this feature that someone linked to earlier suggests that popular applications are silently loaded at boot. The Vista memory management is becoming more aggressive in filling the system RAM with things that may be useful.
Well done you! You've proven that you are a fucktard
You replied to a comment joking that Demorel was good enough to stop the pain in Karoke bars. I didn't accuse you of not reading the article, in fact had you read my comment I said that you had - but that you didn't seem to have read the comment that you were replying to. I guess that's twice you've done that now. Are you aware of how stupid it makes you sound?
So... is your chronic and neuropathic pain caused by hanging out in Karoke bars taking Demoral, or did you RTFA but fail to read the fucking context that you were replying to?