NT is, of course, not 98 with better networking. But the NewTechnology is not "relative to win 9x", but relative to DOS/win 3.x.
(Sigh) Bit shy of the mark. NT was a port of VMS with an attempt to avoid the command line, not an upgrade of DOS. Dave Cutler (the architect of both VMS and Windows NT) was hired away from Digital by Bill Gates in order to write an OS that could be used as a server but with a UI that looked like Windows, in the belief that a familiar interface would sell more servers. Good business decision, and it built their server business for many years. Both companies negotiated for the transfer of IP at the time, all above board. The major useful port was the virtual memory model, and you can see identical parameter names for the same system attributes in VMS' SYSGEN as you can in the early NT Registry, things like pgflquota, iota (which was originally given in units of microfortnights) and a number of longer and less obviously named params.
What didn't get ported was the security model, because of hardware incompatibilities. VAX had a KESU model, Intel couldn't support it. KESU (Kernel, Exec, Supervisor, User) had instructions that would only work for set exclusive address ranges, and is one of the reasons VMS is as secure as it is, particularly the separation between Executive (I/O instructions) and Supervisor (user process script) modes. The inability of Intel to support the full KESU model in the instruction set is why NT security fell into the lake instead of stepping into the boat.
Superb insight. I never got closer to it than driving above it on (think it was) Highway 280, but even that was a thrill knowing it was that close. Mostly I used to work over at that air field on the other side of the hill, writing code for a very slow network, and that took a lot of my time. Sad that I never got to see the innards of that big pipe.
He's building his second helicopter. He may sell that and build a third. Maybe he refines his processes well enough that he can bring in a brother to help. Maybe he can buy an item cheaper if he buys in lots of five...maybe he can bootstrap himself to stardom. I can think of a few other folks who have. It's initiative plus entrepreneurial attitude plus an idea, cemented together with education that's going to help this guy, and it looks like he's got that covered.
Oh, and maybe a lathe. Maybe he doesn't need a million dollars to industrialise, maybe he needs a lathe.
The Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, or SLAC, generates and accelerates...
Brilliant and informative post (used up all my mod points yesterday -- bugger!)
One observation however deserves expansion, I believe. The object...The center of the vertex detector (a silicon CCD device about the size of a soft drink can reminds me of how the original cloud chamber reaction detector was inspired by a glass of beer, or rather the cavitation of bubbles within the glass of beer (not that beer can't be inspring on it's own, of course). This discovery was loosely dramatised in a movie by Yahoo Serious by a depiction of young Einstein splitting the beer atom in the chook shed out back. Thus I'm certain the vertex chamber described above must be the size of a beer can, not a soft drink can, in honour of the late esteemed Mme.Curie's boyfriend and co-inventor of Rock & Roll, as fine a Tasmanian as you will ever meet (disclaimer -- both of my children are Tasmanian, so I may be a little biased).
You will excuse me I trust, I need to crack another tinnie (hmmm...Inspiration for another metric -- the PicoTinnie, amount of energy absorbed by one of these collectors).
Soo, ye're an idealistic hippy are ye? Weeel now I'd shoot ye for that but my wife's got the USB nerf missile launcher and won't let me have it except when I'm taking a nap on the couch. It's not safe tuning my sitar any more, or chanting "om" except quietly.
Let's see you cracking a joke about the robot at the funeral if it was *your* son in the casket
I did. It was our second daughter, not a son. I was not going to bottle it up, so I cracked a joke. Don't remember what it was, doesn't matter. And yes, the laughter was a bit hysterical, and there were tears involved too. And yes, I am an Australian, maybe we're different that way.
Not sure I agree, it depends on what you pour through the documents, and whether or not it's flammable as well as inflammatory. The syntax would be correct if you were talking about a few litres of petrol.
As much as I want to laugh at that jape, I cannot. I have a fundamental dislike of treating anyone as a category. People are people. The moment you start putting people in categories, you become part of the problem. The only way that direction can go is to treat the category as "the problem" and pretty soon you're treating people as things and looking for ultimate solutions. Stop it, please.
Humour is one of the alternatives we have for dealing with catastrophe. It's better than denial, because it holds the option open of unloading the emotion in conversation. And I'd much prefer unloading to reloading (hmm...my interpretation of that may not be yours).
I'm a great believer in (and a solid user of) Wikipedia, and consideration of the vast number of people who have contributed good content vs. the much smaller number of poo-flinging monkeys gives me a good feeling; I think the ratio is inherently good.
Although I do believe grammar is becoming a specialty skill, I'm also glad that such "specialists" regularly edit the submissions. Forum trolls (really, let's keep the word "trolls" -- "poo-flinging monkeys" may be accurate, but is a slight on our simian brethren) are corrected as well, but less transparently than the enormously democratic collaboration of a Wiki. Forums compare with Wikis in the same way that music relates to art. You get to see (| hear) the changes, the mistakes, they're not brushed over.
Darn! And just when I was hoping someone would post an equation or two in their defense. (/humourous quip)
Although you both disagree, I have to say the thread has given me pause to contemplate the ethics of professionalism, how we term ourselves and how such things are measured. It's a real concern for me, who must honestly admit my best work was done when I was considerably younger. At what point must I characterise myself as "once was..." on my resume?
Yes, isn't it amazing? 0.2 entire nanowatts! You'd only need about 5 billion of them to provide you with a single useful watt.
Actually, when you come to think of it that's pretty good for such a nanostructure. But I wonder if stringing such structures together in a scale that would permit reasonably measurable current flow wouldn't generate enough heat to let the magic smoke out at ambient STP? Is there a point of diminishing returns, or could they perhaps be partially embedded in a matrix of something that is highly thermally conductive such aluminium to keep that from happening? And how large would such a structure containing 5 billion of these need to be?
Should be plenty of light inside the body, if you count infrared, and not all tissues are completely opaque. Should be some parts of the aqueous humour of the eye that aren't used for imaging, too.
Gaah where's my fork (--recent eye surgery patient)
Sigh. It's not whether it's good or bad justice, peeps. It's the fact that if the legal system and its means of enforcement doesn't meet your needs then the broader populace will consider the contract broken, and will consider alternatives. This is not a nice thing, or what should be, it's a simple fact of human behaviour. One that's enshrined in your Declaration of Independence, I might add -- and you don't have to read past the Preamble to see it.
As an outsider living in a land once populated by cast-offs ourselves, I would respect any of you who are re-reading those documents that underpin your entire system of government. Do you still teach that stuff over there? It's pretty good. Other people are reading it, maybe it's relevant now more than ever.
Slashdot Mirror
(Sigh) Bit shy of the mark. NT was a port of VMS with an attempt to avoid the command line, not an upgrade of DOS. Dave Cutler (the architect of both VMS and Windows NT) was hired away from Digital by Bill Gates in order to write an OS that could be used as a server but with a UI that looked like Windows, in the belief that a familiar interface would sell more servers. Good business decision, and it built their server business for many years. Both companies negotiated for the transfer of IP at the time, all above board. The major useful port was the virtual memory model, and you can see identical parameter names for the same system attributes in VMS' SYSGEN as you can in the early NT Registry, things like pgflquota, iota (which was originally given in units of microfortnights) and a number of longer and less obviously named params.
What didn't get ported was the security model, because of hardware incompatibilities. VAX had a KESU model, Intel couldn't support it. KESU (Kernel, Exec, Supervisor, User) had instructions that would only work for set exclusive address ranges, and is one of the reasons VMS is as secure as it is, particularly the separation between Executive (I/O instructions) and Supervisor (user process script) modes. The inability of Intel to support the full KESU model in the instruction set is why NT security fell into the lake instead of stepping into the boat.
...we'll have to write this feature into Ubuntu. Can't be accused of not supporting our fair share of the world's tech service, can we? (j/k)
If lead ingestion (as some surmise) was a contributing factor in the fall of Rome, then TFA's research is more valuable for that datum.
Whups, my Ubuntu download just finished, bye...
He's building his second helicopter. He may sell that and build a third. Maybe he refines his processes well enough that he can bring in a brother to help. Maybe he can buy an item cheaper if he buys in lots of five...maybe he can bootstrap himself to stardom. I can think of a few other folks who have. It's initiative plus entrepreneurial attitude plus an idea, cemented together with education that's going to help this guy, and it looks like he's got that covered.
Oh, and maybe a lathe. Maybe he doesn't need a million dollars to industrialise, maybe he needs a lathe.
Mod this young Nigerian up.
Brilliant and informative post (used up all my mod points yesterday -- bugger!)
One observation however deserves expansion, I believe. The object ...The center of the vertex detector (a silicon CCD device about the size of a soft drink can reminds me of how the original cloud chamber reaction detector was inspired by a glass of beer, or rather the cavitation of bubbles within the glass of beer (not that beer can't be inspring on it's own, of course). This discovery was loosely dramatised in a movie by Yahoo Serious by a depiction of young Einstein splitting the beer atom in the chook shed out back. Thus I'm certain the vertex chamber described above must be the size of a beer can, not a soft drink can, in honour of the late esteemed Mme.Curie's boyfriend and co-inventor of Rock & Roll, as fine a Tasmanian as you will ever meet (disclaimer -- both of my children are Tasmanian, so I may be a little biased).
You will excuse me I trust, I need to crack another tinnie (hmmm...Inspiration for another metric -- the PicoTinnie, amount of energy absorbed by one of these collectors).
And very, very rich.
Yes, positrons are considered anti-matter. But you can call it what you want in your own Jeffries tubes.
Do the students emit photons when they relax?
If you're that rich, are you going to queue up to go to work in the morning? Naah, wait for the rabble to clear first.
Soo, ye're an idealistic hippy are ye? Weeel now I'd shoot ye for that but my wife's got the USB nerf missile launcher and won't let me have it except when I'm taking a nap on the couch. It's not safe tuning my sitar any more, or chanting "om" except quietly.
I did. It was our second daughter, not a son. I was not going to bottle it up, so I cracked a joke. Don't remember what it was, doesn't matter. And yes, the laughter was a bit hysterical, and there were tears involved too. And yes, I am an Australian, maybe we're different that way.
Not sure I agree, it depends on what you pour through the documents, and whether or not it's flammable as well as inflammatory. The syntax would be correct if you were talking about a few litres of petrol.
As much as I want to laugh at that jape, I cannot. I have a fundamental dislike of treating anyone as a category. People are people. The moment you start putting people in categories, you become part of the problem. The only way that direction can go is to treat the category as "the problem" and pretty soon you're treating people as things and looking for ultimate solutions. Stop it, please.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Humour is one of the alternatives we have for dealing with catastrophe. It's better than denial, because it holds the option open of unloading the emotion in conversation. And I'd much prefer unloading to reloading (hmm...my interpretation of that may not be yours).
Although I do believe grammar is becoming a specialty skill, I'm also glad that such "specialists" regularly edit the submissions. Forum trolls (really, let's keep the word "trolls" -- "poo-flinging monkeys" may be accurate, but is a slight on our simian brethren) are corrected as well, but less transparently than the enormously democratic collaboration of a Wiki. Forums compare with Wikis in the same way that music relates to art. You get to see (| hear) the changes, the mistakes, they're not brushed over.
Although you both disagree, I have to say the thread has given me pause to contemplate the ethics of professionalism, how we term ourselves and how such things are measured. It's a real concern for me, who must honestly admit my best work was done when I was considerably younger. At what point must I characterise myself as "once was..." on my resume?
As a kid studying cosmology I was once told that you only needed 3 solar masses of imploding stellar material to make a black hole.
Are there any theories to cover black holes made up of say, more than one galaxy? Is there any upper limit?
(Clears throat)"Beyond the blue Event Horizon, Heechee waiting for meeeee..."
Actually, when you come to think of it that's pretty good for such a nanostructure. But I wonder if stringing such structures together in a scale that would permit reasonably measurable current flow wouldn't generate enough heat to let the magic smoke out at ambient STP? Is there a point of diminishing returns, or could they perhaps be partially embedded in a matrix of something that is highly thermally conductive such aluminium to keep that from happening? And how large would such a structure containing 5 billion of these need to be?
Gaah where's my fork (--recent eye surgery patient)
Yep, we lose a litte on every sale, but we make up for it in volume.
As an outsider living in a land once populated by cast-offs ourselves, I would respect any of you who are re-reading those documents that underpin your entire system of government. Do you still teach that stuff over there? It's pretty good. Other people are reading it, maybe it's relevant now more than ever.
So let me be the first to say it -- ours is bigger than yours!