Well, to be fair Debian Linux suffers from the same problem. Trusted update is a more difficult problem than solving some buffer overrun in xlock or whatever.
I think it's pretty obvious why they tested the G5: their Altivec program is 13X faster than their scalar program. They don't mention the SSE2 so I assume they have an investment in Altivec programs. Therefore they would naturally be interested in comparing the G5 versus the XServe and G4. Until Intel releases the 34.5GHz P4 (13X 2.66GHz), there doesn't seem to be any reason to run out and buy a latest P4 just for this comparison.
And surely the version of RH Linux hardly matters. Maybe they benchmarked using this OS because (shock, horror) it is what they use daily.
Nice work. I saw your letter on macintouch too. But I was wondering, do you have information that leads you to believe that the new finder features in Mac OS X are in any way related to BFS? Or are you just trying to draw a comparison?
And why shouldn't he? DirectTV is beaming their signal into your brain at this very moment. Why should it be illegal to perform a mathematical transform on the EM passing through your own head?
Well smart guy, if you bought a house and you were forced to buy an extra foundation that you didn't want and planned to rip up anyway, then you WOULD call it the foundation tax!
I think my head will explode if I see one more illiterate nitwit typing "for all intensive purposes". Fifty times on the blackboard kid: for all intents and purposes. And 500 more times "I will not repeat a cliche if I don't understand it".
Opteron already has an excellent memory subsystem and fast paths to PCI-X peripherals. Aggregate I/O and memory bandwidth in 4-way Opterons is pretty sick, and although it won't compete with insane systems from IBM and SGI, it is a lot better than anything else you can get in an $8000 box. What were you hoping for?
You would have rather seen that? 1080 is shit shit shit. 720p looks entirely better. There is essentially no reason for 1080i to exist at all.
2048x1280 means 6.6 million thin film transistors, and if even one of those transistors is inoperable people like you will bitch and whine that the pixels are stuck on, and therefore LCDs are crap.
Samsung has made a nice compromise by producing an LCD monitor that is both huge and manufacturable. I'm not expecting the crowd here on small-minded-naysayers.com to appreciate it though.
This only works until the protocols become smarter. An encrypted IPIP (or SSH, or IPSec, et. al) stream carrying kazaa traffice looks the same to a packet inspection system as an encrypted IPIP tunnel carrying data from your rotodynamics sensors. There will come a point when bandwidth usage will be dealt with at the social level because all technical solutions have been obsoleted by encryption and tunnelling.
You can still buy SCSI drives in reasonable sizes down to 18GB, new. The used SCSI market has many bargains, for example new Maxtor Atlas 10K III 18GB for $50 and 73GB for $150 (ebay prices). The performance is better than any IDE drive you can buy new today, WD Raptor included. I know I've posted this screed here before, but in price/performance SCSI still wins, and there are entire areas of performance that IDE does not even pretend to compete in.
5-year warrantees on SCSI gear, too. Probably not on eBay, but certainly on $10/GB equipment from CDW or similar.
Interesting. I have a small pile of (failed) Hitachi hard disks on my shelf, all from April '00 to December '01, and all marked as made in the Philippines.
Anecdotally, Hitachi drives are just crap. I'm always pulling their 10,000RPM SCSI gear and sending it for RMA. Seagate's 15,000RPM equipment never fails (knock on wood).
Not a security issue
on
Hijacking .NET
·
· Score: 3, Informative
People seem to be making this into a big security issue, but I don't see it that way at all. Private declarations shouldn't be used to provide security. You can assume that if you put a piece of code or data into a computer, other programs may be able to access the storage thereof. No big surprise there. This is true of introspection techniques, self-modifying code, and related styles of programming.
The declaration of something as private, or not exported, or static, or the analog provided by your favorite programming language is a tool for the programmer, not the computer. It tells the programmer that this interface or piece of data is not be used by anyone but the author. It means that the interface or data could change at any time, and any use of it is a hack in the classic sense. It will probably work, in appearance or in actuality, but it will break unpredictably.
Private declarations may be enforced with varying vigor by compilers or runtimes, but usually there is a way around such enforcements. At the extreme, you can usually just directly access the memory in question, if the kernel allows that (or even if it doesn't, in the case of a super-user).
Fucking read the link next time. The proposals in Car-Free Cities include large parking structures on the outskirts of every segment of the city, served by the underground rail system. It would be no more effort to get your car than it is today.
Look, you are totally missing my point. Firstly, I can easily build a radio to eavesdrop on your cordless phone calls (49MHz, 900MHz FH) with parts that probably cost less than their own shipping fee.
Secondly, for rather more money, Innovative Computer Engineering will sell you enough DSPs on a PCI card to tune and record 32 channels of whatever band you desire. You feed it IF, it feeds you whatever you want. They have been selling this hardware for YEARS. So the invention of a stupid little Palm with a tuner is hardly remarkable. If you are afraid of guys in vans mass-tuning your phone calls with software-defined radio, I regret to inform you that the future was yesterday.
Well, maybe technology will force people who broadcast their voice all over the known universe to realize that they are broadcasting their voice all over the known universe. Anybody with $0.30 in their pockets can order the parts necessary to eavesdrop on your phone call with hardware. Why is it scarier that you can do it in software?
That the last governor was an idiot doesn't change the fact that the current governor is an idiot. Davis increased spending even above the silly revenue increases of the bubble, and now he can't find reverse gear. He really must be disposed of.
Sounds like a really small latching relay. DO you think they are inventing a new, wonderful type of ram that is also unfortunately sensitive to physical shock?
His point is that the petawatt laser has extreme energy flux for a tiny instant of time. A 1 PW laser with a 1 MJ capacity would only be able to fire for 1 ns, which obviously isn't all that long. However it might be enough for these purposes. The laser at the National Ignition Facility is a 500 TW and 1.8MJ, which allows it to fire for a bit longer.
This article doesn't prove its own premise. Where is the evidence that open software is less likely to implement a standard than closed software? I can think of so many counterexamples, because OSS tends to actually define the standard. See: every major internet protocol.
I don't get this "smart display" business. It sounds like a display with a CPU, some memory, and a wireless network interface, and a battery. In other words, it is a full-blown computer. Maybe (probably) the operating system is crippleware, but it sounds to me like you could put some proper software on there and use it like a wireless X11 terminal. Bonus: remote X11 users don't "monopolize the PC while they are running".
Slashdot Mirror
Well, to be fair Debian Linux suffers from the same problem. Trusted update is a more difficult problem than solving some buffer overrun in xlock or whatever.
I think it's pretty obvious why they tested the G5: their Altivec program is 13X faster than their scalar program. They don't mention the SSE2 so I assume they have an investment in Altivec programs. Therefore they would naturally be interested in comparing the G5 versus the XServe and G4. Until Intel releases the 34.5GHz P4 (13X 2.66GHz), there doesn't seem to be any reason to run out and buy a latest P4 just for this comparison.
And surely the version of RH Linux hardly matters. Maybe they benchmarked using this OS because (shock, horror) it is what they use daily.
Nice work. I saw your letter on macintouch too. But I was wondering, do you have information that leads you to believe that the new finder features in Mac OS X are in any way related to BFS? Or are you just trying to draw a comparison?
Of course. If I want my mail to be private, the burden falls upon me.
And why shouldn't he? DirectTV is beaming their signal into your brain at this very moment. Why should it be illegal to perform a mathematical transform on the EM passing through your own head?
Well smart guy, if you bought a house and you were forced to buy an extra foundation that you didn't want and planned to rip up anyway, then you WOULD call it the foundation tax!
I think my head will explode if I see one more illiterate nitwit typing "for all intensive purposes". Fifty times on the blackboard kid: for all intents and purposes. And 500 more times "I will not repeat a cliche if I don't understand it".
Opteron already has an excellent memory subsystem and fast paths to PCI-X peripherals. Aggregate I/O and memory bandwidth in 4-way Opterons is pretty sick, and although it won't compete with insane systems from IBM and SGI, it is a lot better than anything else you can get in an $8000 box. What were you hoping for?
You would have rather seen that? 1080 is shit shit shit. 720p looks entirely better. There is essentially no reason for 1080i to exist at all.
2048x1280 means 6.6 million thin film transistors, and if even one of those transistors is inoperable people like you will bitch and whine that the pixels are stuck on, and therefore LCDs are crap.
Samsung has made a nice compromise by producing an LCD monitor that is both huge and manufacturable. I'm not expecting the crowd here on small-minded-naysayers.com to appreciate it though.
They don't. The lake is going to silt up more or less immediately, ruining all the land under the lake and making the dam pointless.
The best thing that can happen is for this dam to fail early, so it can destroy itself without killing people downstream.
Oops, you just pissed off the rotodynamics research group.
This only works until the protocols become smarter. An encrypted IPIP (or SSH, or IPSec, et. al) stream carrying kazaa traffice looks the same to a packet inspection system as an encrypted IPIP tunnel carrying data from your rotodynamics sensors. There will come a point when bandwidth usage will be dealt with at the social level because all technical solutions have been obsoleted by encryption and tunnelling.
5-year warrantees on SCSI gear, too. Probably not on eBay, but certainly on $10/GB equipment from CDW or similar.
Interesting. I have a small pile of (failed) Hitachi hard disks on my shelf, all from April '00 to December '01, and all marked as made in the Philippines. Anecdotally, Hitachi drives are just crap. I'm always pulling their 10,000RPM SCSI gear and sending it for RMA. Seagate's 15,000RPM equipment never fails (knock on wood).
The declaration of something as private, or not exported, or static, or the analog provided by your favorite programming language is a tool for the programmer, not the computer. It tells the programmer that this interface or piece of data is not be used by anyone but the author. It means that the interface or data could change at any time, and any use of it is a hack in the classic sense. It will probably work, in appearance or in actuality, but it will break unpredictably.
Private declarations may be enforced with varying vigor by compilers or runtimes, but usually there is a way around such enforcements. At the extreme, you can usually just directly access the memory in question, if the kernel allows that (or even if it doesn't, in the case of a super-user).
Fucking read the link next time. The proposals in Car-Free Cities include large parking structures on the outskirts of every segment of the city, served by the underground rail system. It would be no more effort to get your car than it is today.
Look, you are totally missing my point. Firstly, I can easily build a radio to eavesdrop on your cordless phone calls (49MHz, 900MHz FH) with parts that probably cost less than their own shipping fee. Secondly, for rather more money, Innovative Computer Engineering will sell you enough DSPs on a PCI card to tune and record 32 channels of whatever band you desire. You feed it IF, it feeds you whatever you want. They have been selling this hardware for YEARS. So the invention of a stupid little Palm with a tuner is hardly remarkable. If you are afraid of guys in vans mass-tuning your phone calls with software-defined radio, I regret to inform you that the future was yesterday.
Well, maybe technology will force people who broadcast their voice all over the known universe to realize that they are broadcasting their voice all over the known universe. Anybody with $0.30 in their pockets can order the parts necessary to eavesdrop on your phone call with hardware. Why is it scarier that you can do it in software?
That the last governor was an idiot doesn't change the fact that the current governor is an idiot. Davis increased spending even above the silly revenue increases of the bubble, and now he can't find reverse gear. He really must be disposed of.
If you don't think a US$1,000 per capita budget deficit is reasonable, you too can Recall Gray Davis.
Sounds like a really small latching relay. DO you think they are inventing a new, wonderful type of ram that is also unfortunately sensitive to physical shock?
His point is that the petawatt laser has extreme energy flux for a tiny instant of time. A 1 PW laser with a 1 MJ capacity would only be able to fire for 1 ns, which obviously isn't all that long. However it might be enough for these purposes. The laser at the National Ignition Facility is a 500 TW and 1.8MJ, which allows it to fire for a bit longer.
Oh yes. And a great big screen so you can see the action moving on Pacino's rifle when he drops that fat guy.
This article doesn't prove its own premise. Where is the evidence that open software is less likely to implement a standard than closed software? I can think of so many counterexamples, because OSS tends to actually define the standard. See: every major internet protocol.
I don't get this "smart display" business. It sounds like a display with a CPU, some memory, and a wireless network interface, and a battery. In other words, it is a full-blown computer. Maybe (probably) the operating system is crippleware, but it sounds to me like you could put some proper software on there and use it like a wireless X11 terminal. Bonus: remote X11 users don't "monopolize the PC while they are running".