(And you can patch RedHat to SELinux if you are paranoid... ^_^)
They come with the same software packages with security patches released at similar release schedules. Both Suse and RedHat have deals with hardware manufacturers to make your life easier. They both support RPM. They both have excellent installation tools.
Since you aren't looking for Enterprise support, and you are thus not harping over price, pick which logo you like better.
1) I was kidding. I mean, well, the expression is just that: an expression... and it's using the word in an ambigous way. I countered one wrong way to look at flatness with other troll-ish semi-informed thing to be silly.
And I got modded informative? Sheesh.
2) RMS of the magnitude of discretely sampled gradients is probably a misleading indicator anyway. You really want is to know: 1) how much of Kansas is "tilted" and to what average magnitude; 2) how much of these titled areas are surrounded by areas of similar tilt. The latter are places that look flat to someone driving through it, but on a geological scale are significant! So roughness might not be a bad measure from that point of view either.
In the end you're going to need some sort of autocorrelation applied to some heuristics about elevation, grade, and changes in grade.
I think that "flatness" was incorrectly measured in this case. What should have been used as the flatness measure is the RMS of the discrete slopes in the measurements at a sampling interval measured at the lowest of the two sampling intervals (if the pancake laser raster contained 500 measurements, then only 500 measurements (derived?) of the USGS cross section would be considered).
Fitting an ellipse just tells you if the state is eccentric. If the state was a completely upwards tilted plane, either it's perflectly flat, or it's moderately (but constantly) non-flat. I assume it's the latter. Now imagine a state containing nothing but up-and-down hills of the same gradient as before. According to the ellipsoid measure, the state could be considered flatter, when in fact it is should be less flat because of the changes in grade.
1) Scanners are not too expensive (as long as you know which standard... small cheap tags == small cheap scanners). So you can scan and then sanitize your own goods
2) Scanners only work at personal-space encroaching range unless the RFID has a power source (which becomes easy to find). So at most you can be scanned in situations where you might find a metal detector.
3) Won't work from the outside of your car reliably, so toll booths are probably safe. ("Smart Tag" uses a battery and is on your windshield... exception)
While most people won't notice or care, motivated people are not without recourse. The big brother fear-factor may be overstated. I am not worried.
In fact, I'm excited. I can start using scanners to tag all my stuff and keep track of it without having to buy the tags. (me === scatterbrained) Wheee!
UIs don't make their own errors. You know what I'm talking about.
If a dialog box pops up with an error message in it, guaranteed it was generated by something behind the UI.
Copying a UI is copying the location of menu items, command line syntax, etc. They keep saying "UI" and I keep hearing "what it looks like" or "how the toolbars look" or "whether its a modeless dialog or tabs"
Would you forget to add the SCROLL_UP event handler in the custom GDI object just like the original designer by opening up the app and using it?
By this logic, you should be able to take apart your car to see what kind of pieces it's made of. God forbid.
It's not the disassembly that's bad, it's when you use it to create a competing product. OTH, if it works exactly the same, the original designers will be able to see that it's bug-compatible (including race conditions), and thus be able to invoke some flavor of IP violation.
And when your oh-so-precious product crashes my systems and I want to single step through it to see what you fucked up, what tools will I be able to use besides these illegal tools to give you a point to start debugging at?
Draw a picture of a dead president on a piece of green paper, then cut it out into a rectangular shape. It's about twice as long as it is wide.
Shrink wrap it with a EULA that the fare collector must accept the contents as legal tender. If he claims your bill is fake when he puts it up to a light, tell him that he can't reverse engineer your money, or risk a civil suit.
That's when I would start to get REALLY worried about "reverse engineering".
So they play with the finished product and copy what they see (roughly) -> fine, as long as you don't violate anything protected by patents. No clause in a EULA could be upheld that would prevent that. It has nothing to do with what can be put in a EULA, but rather, what can be determined as permissible in such an off-hand context.
But to have errors duplicated in the system: I assure you would not be duplicated in a UI unless the coders copied the exact methods behind the UI. Hence they have legitimate claims that there is something fishy going on.
There's matching behavior, and then reimplementing without first understanding. The latter is 1) irresponsible 2) lazy, 3) contemptable, and those that practice should not be protected by reverse-engineering rights. I claim that shouldn't be called reverse-engineering, but something else.
Both FPSs (UT2k3, Splinter Cell) use the Unreal engine. Comanche uses it's own engine, but it's not a real GPU hog (the physics sim is the limiting constraint on FPS).
So you've got Unreal numbers, and a meaningless test the author even suggested he will drop in the future.
As a rule, these "roundups" should contain timedemo-style benchmarks from games using at least 3 different engines. Otherwise you're just rating the engine. By trying the 3 more popular engine, you can guage the performance of a wide swath of games.
I was also interested to note that high CPU usage produces measurable extra power usage. On a dual-processor P3/733 system, each processor pulls an extra 10 watts under load. So it turns out that things like SetiAtHome aren't free.
This is because rathering then executing self: jmp $self in the idle loop, the operating system typically uses the HLT instruction which puts the CPU into a low power (unclocked) state until an interrupt is received (typically the timer interrupt, meaning the scheduler needs to run again).
You will note that no matter what kind of program you run, it'll draw the same amount of power as long as the load % is the same. The exception might be an app that steps all over the cache, triggering memory to work hard.
SunOS 5.X is the core OS. Sort of like a linux kernel version, glibc, and sysv core stuff.
Solaris X is SunOS 5.X plus a bunch of other stuff with differeing version numbers that all come on one CD (CDE, management framework, etc.). This is like releases of RedHat or Slackware.
They started calling it 2.X when SunOS went from 4->5 . Then marketing decided that the 2.X part was useless once no one cared about Solaris 1.x, so they just focused on the X. Also note that they probably intend to catch up to MacOS's and RedHat's release numbers for marketing reasons.
OTH, Sun holds the reins, so they make sure all the numbers have a logical mapping (whereas knowing what versions of glibc and the kernel come with RedHat XYZ requires the use of google)
Mostly because we never owned a full until I was much older, hence my confusion. But once I saw that it was wider than the twin, suddenly I began to see the size hierarchy.
(and there's another head-scratcher, how does twin make sense either? You'd have to understand the size is suitable for use in master bedrooms that would normally fit two twins side by side where a king might have been. Blargh)
All things in life can be appropriately referenced by a humorous Simpsons quote.
Does this mean that Fox won't air another season? Because if they did, then they'd start repeating themselves. The shark has already been jumped; they don't need to jump it again.
Murphy (the author) claims that the/dev/xxxx metaphor isn't suitable for A/D, or memory mapped registers.
He seems to have forgotten block devices. Block devices can be mmap'd and manipulated as he would want (the device driver writer would have to permit such access). Also, chara devices can do very well for A/D if you use realtime signal delivery.
(RT)Linux, NetBSD, QNX: they all do this.
Modern unix-likes are more flexible than one might believe.
Slashdot Mirror
USB mass storage is supported since late 2.2, as is the interesting "hotplug" interface.
Plug in the camera, and it appears as a SCSI disk. If you have autofs turned on, it should "just work".
With modern Gnome and KDE, it's as easy as plugging it in and double-clicking an icon that appears on your desktop.
(And you can patch RedHat to SELinux if you are paranoid... ^_^)
They come with the same software packages with security patches released at similar release schedules. Both Suse and RedHat have deals with hardware manufacturers to make your life easier. They both support RPM. They both have excellent installation tools.
Since you aren't looking for Enterprise support, and you are thus not harping over price, pick which logo you like better.
1) I was kidding. I mean, well, the expression is just that: an expression... and it's using the word in an ambigous way. I countered one wrong way to look at flatness with other troll-ish semi-informed thing to be silly.
And I got modded informative? Sheesh.
2) RMS of the magnitude of discretely sampled gradients is probably a misleading indicator anyway. You really want is to know: 1) how much of Kansas is "tilted" and to what average magnitude; 2) how much of these titled areas are surrounded by areas of similar tilt. The latter are places that look flat to someone driving through it, but on a geological scale are significant! So roughness might not be a bad measure from that point of view either.
In the end you're going to need some sort of autocorrelation applied to some heuristics about elevation, grade, and changes in grade.
I think that "flatness" was incorrectly measured in this case. What should have been used as the flatness measure is the RMS of the discrete slopes in the measurements at a sampling interval measured at the lowest of the two sampling intervals (if the pancake laser raster contained 500 measurements, then only 500 measurements (derived?) of the USGS cross section would be considered).
Fitting an ellipse just tells you if the state is eccentric. If the state was a completely upwards tilted plane, either it's perflectly flat, or it's moderately (but constantly) non-flat. I assume it's the latter. Now imagine a state containing nothing but up-and-down hills of the same gradient as before. According to the ellipsoid measure, the state could be considered flatter, when in fact it is should be less flat because of the changes in grade.
1) Scanners are not too expensive (as long as you know which standard... small cheap tags == small cheap scanners). So you can scan and then sanitize your own goods
2) Scanners only work at personal-space encroaching range unless the RFID has a power source (which becomes easy to find). So at most you can be scanned in situations where you might find a metal detector.
3) Won't work from the outside of your car reliably, so toll booths are probably safe. ("Smart Tag" uses a battery and is on your windshield... exception)
While most people won't notice or care, motivated people are not without recourse. The big brother fear-factor may be overstated. I am not worried.
In fact, I'm excited. I can start using scanners to tag all my stuff and keep track of it without having to buy the tags. (me === scatterbrained) Wheee!
UIs don't make their own errors. You know what I'm talking about.
If a dialog box pops up with an error message in it, guaranteed it was generated by something behind the UI.
Copying a UI is copying the location of menu items, command line syntax, etc. They keep saying "UI" and I keep hearing "what it looks like" or "how the toolbars look" or "whether its a modeless dialog or tabs"
Would you forget to add the SCROLL_UP event handler in the custom GDI object just like the original designer by opening up the app and using it?
Poor baby.
By this logic, you should be able to take apart your car to see what kind of pieces it's made of. God forbid.
It's not the disassembly that's bad, it's when you use it to create a competing product. OTH, if it works exactly the same, the original designers will be able to see that it's bug-compatible (including race conditions), and thus be able to invoke some flavor of IP violation.
And when your oh-so-precious product crashes my systems and I want to single step through it to see what you fucked up, what tools will I be able to use besides these illegal tools to give you a point to start debugging at?
Draw a picture of a dead president on a piece of green paper, then cut it out into a rectangular shape. It's about twice as long as it is wide.
Shrink wrap it with a EULA that the fare collector must accept the contents as legal tender. If he claims your bill is fake when he puts it up to a light, tell him that he can't reverse engineer your money, or risk a civil suit.
Problem solved.
That's when I would start to get REALLY worried about "reverse engineering".
So they play with the finished product and copy what they see (roughly) -> fine, as long as you don't violate anything protected by patents. No clause in a EULA could be upheld that would prevent that. It has nothing to do with what can be put in a EULA, but rather, what can be determined as permissible in such an off-hand context.
But to have errors duplicated in the system: I assure you would not be duplicated in a UI unless the coders copied the exact methods behind the UI. Hence they have legitimate claims that there is something fishy going on.
There's matching behavior, and then reimplementing without first understanding. The latter is 1) irresponsible 2) lazy, 3) contemptable, and those that practice should not be protected by reverse-engineering rights. I claim that shouldn't be called reverse-engineering, but something else.
Both FPSs (UT2k3, Splinter Cell) use the Unreal engine. Comanche uses it's own engine, but it's not a real GPU hog (the physics sim is the limiting constraint on FPS).
So you've got Unreal numbers, and a meaningless test the author even suggested he will drop in the future.
As a rule, these "roundups" should contain timedemo-style benchmarks from games using at least 3 different engines. Otherwise you're just rating the engine. By trying the 3 more popular engine, you can guage the performance of a wide swath of games.
I've got a box at work with a TNT2 Ultra and she's beeeeeerrry quiet (fan disabled). I still own at Q3a during lunch.
^_^
We need all that soul-fragmentation energy to power the massive submarine batteries in the you-know-whats that only last for five friggen minutes.
Or we can power a fleet of electric Beetles. Deloreans are too heavy. Hmm... either way, we win.
Prepare to die, Sailor Sluts!
He really is dead.
Not even dd can re-image his body with his ghost.
Suddenly, validity is brought to a common troll. In other news, hell is experiencing Christmas in June.
If companies such as these are littered with MBAs, supposedly trained to recognize and avoid such situations?
I was also interested to note that high CPU usage produces measurable extra power usage. On a dual-processor P3/733 system, each processor pulls an extra 10 watts under load. So it turns out that things like SetiAtHome aren't free.
This is because rathering then executing self: jmp $self in the idle loop, the operating system typically uses the HLT instruction which puts the CPU into a low power (unclocked) state until an interrupt is received (typically the timer interrupt, meaning the scheduler needs to run again).
You will note that no matter what kind of program you run, it'll draw the same amount of power as long as the load % is the same. The exception might be an app that steps all over the cache, triggering memory to work hard.
I need to register that account to combat the evil hordes of Satan posing as frist postryers.
SunOS 5.X is the core OS. Sort of like a linux kernel version, glibc, and sysv core stuff.
Solaris X is SunOS 5.X plus a bunch of other stuff with differeing version numbers that all come on one CD (CDE, management framework, etc.).
This is like releases of RedHat or Slackware.
They started calling it 2.X when SunOS went from 4->5 . Then marketing decided that the 2.X part was useless once no one cared about Solaris 1.x, so they just focused on the X. Also note that they probably intend to catch up to MacOS's and RedHat's release numbers for marketing reasons.
OTH, Sun holds the reins, so they make sure all the numbers have a logical mapping (whereas knowing what versions of glibc and the kernel come with RedHat XYZ requires the use of google)
...you insensitive clod.
Mostly because we never owned a full until I was much older, hence my confusion. But once I saw that it was wider than the twin, suddenly I began to see the size hierarchy.
(and there's another head-scratcher, how does twin make sense either? You'd have to understand the size is suitable for use in master bedrooms that would normally fit two twins side by side where a king might have been. Blargh)
What kind of computer and what kind of operating system are you using!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Because it makes a difference!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't use too many exclaimation marks; it's like yelling!!!!!!!
All things in life can be appropriately referenced by a humorous Simpsons quote.
Does this mean that Fox won't air another season?
Because if they did, then they'd start repeating themselves. The shark has already been jumped; they don't need to jump it again.
Murphy (the author) claims that the /dev/xxxx metaphor isn't suitable for A/D, or memory mapped registers.
He seems to have forgotten block devices. Block devices can be mmap'd and manipulated as he would want (the device driver writer would have to permit such access). Also, chara devices can do very well for A/D if you use realtime signal delivery.
(RT)Linux, NetBSD, QNX: they all do this.
Modern unix-likes are more flexible than one might believe.
1) If you aren't selling the software binaries itself, it doesn't matter, you can do whatever you want.
2) You only have to include the source of the module in question (which I hope you extended with an API to not expose your trade secret code)
nano is smaller than pico. Hah!
I win the contest. Any questions?
Also, I am SELinux.
I've always wanted to say that, but I could never get close enough at the US Open.
^_^