Not much more than speculation here. Here's some more for ya. Looks like a fellow doomsayer is still talking about oil being harvest in at least 42 countries until 2080
Lets put it this way -- If you took all the oil (some 200 years supply left at current consumption levels), and instead used it to produce hydrogen, your fossil fuel consumption levels would go WAY down (because cars aren't using them anymore) AND the plants generating the hydrogen would be able to cut emissions better than a car.
Suddenly you have a few millenia to figure out how to make electricity to produce hydrogen without gasoline. Think we can do it?
Internal combustion engines have ALWAYS been inefficient. There have been attempts to make them more efficient, but there has NEVER been an engine based on gasoline that has exceeded even 35%. Even rotary engines are very poor producers of energy to a set of tires. Just the facts of life.
Damn -- I thought Slashdot got a bad rap for posting old news -- this news is approximately 1.5 months OLD. Thanks again for the late-breaking information!
Apparently (at least) thousands of (huge) companies have chosen TRON as their OS of choice. Populous and popular are essentially the same thing. I mean, how does something get to be populous -- generally by being the popular choice or prefence.
If Linux is truly more popular, wouldn't it stand that 5 or so years down the road that Linux will have replaced TRON in these applications?
Well -- I think this guy MAY have a valid point after all. The term "Firewall" has been thrown around ENTIRELY too much.
A SOFTWARE "Firewall" running on a Micros~1 box is NOT A FIREWALL. In fact if you trust that thing you should be locked away in private address space for the remainder of your WWW years...
A SOFTWARE "Firewall" running on any *nix machine is probably ok.
A HARDWARE "Firewall" running at the Layer 2 -> 4 is probably your best bet. There's an OS designed to handle packets and not to share time with other processes, it's sole purpose is to block packets.
The argument? Writing apps for Windows on its API does not inspire a whole lot of confidence in the effectiveness of what you're writing. I'd be willing to bet some money that before your "Zone Alarm" software or whatever gets that packet to look at that Micros~1 has done some pre-parsing and processing for backdoor type stuff. If you want to inspect OpenBSD's 'pf' program, look at the source and decide if you like it or not. And well, the hardware firewalls -- that's why these people are in business. They protect networks.
(FINALLY) the MORAL of the story:
Don't assign the term "Firewall" to something that DOES NOT DESERVE IT. It creates a FALSE sense of security.
As much as the Micros~1 community likes acronyms, throw that one on the fire. Hell I bet it becomes one of the most widely used acronyms around!
Back to KDE(Desktop)/OpenOffice(Office Suite)/xmms(winamp)/Acrobat Reader(duh!)/NFS("File share")/Gimp(Photoshop).... Ahhh what a beautiful day. Isn't it?
Glad I'm not a Windows Operator (no such thing as a Windows Sys Admin)...
I'm going to be getting a G5 here in a little while and have a test suite that was written in-house to test mostly FP and int performance for use with benchmarking big number cruncher-type machines.
I will be running my bench on a Wintel box and the G5. Unfortunately my intuition tells me that the x86 box will outperform the Apple. The Opteron is a GREAT chip -- Apple is still kind of playing catch up as is Sun...
I'll try and post a/. article on my results.
Display makers telling you that you need two monitors instead of one? NO, really? They care about your productivity not that they'd double sales and profits, etc.
I hate milking a flameware and offtopic shit, but y'know it's religious!
Lessee -- *BSD is still taught at the university I went to. *BSD is being used in professional production environments (all 3 that I've worked at). And wouldn't you know it *BSD has *just* been installed on multiple servers for front-line services such as SMTP, NTP, FTP, SSH, among others, for a brand spankin new web presence with an OC3 pipe.
And the kicker -- I would use *BSD -ANY DAY- over most any main-stream linux distributions. Installs can be performed with a floppy and a network connection (in under 20 minutes, FULL INSTALL) compared to about 3 or 4 hours with Red Hat CD's. The reason? First you have to go through that nasty GUI just to install the thing. Then you have to apply all the patches (because you didnt' get the latest distro over your net connection!). Then you have to go through and disable all the crap that you didn't want to run it with (Most things are disabled by default on *BSD, 30 second job on *BSD).
Go troll somewhere else coward, I will keep my *BSD.
Not many parents know what "online" is, or why they keep including the coffee cup holder on all the computers... "They really aren't designed well and my kids are the only ones that use that computer thing, and they don't drink coffee".
I'm not saying it's not a fun project with lots of thought and nifty science. I'm just questioning why we even got to this point in the first place... What crucial problem did we attempt to solve for $30 million dollars? I got a few problems the government can solve, break out the check book...
with regards to the bigass 30 million dollar battery set we just bought -- the extreme case presented is -51 deg C freezes pipes in a residential house in about 2 hours without power. And this battery can provide power for up to 15 minutes for the lowest estimate on usage, which is enough to get the diesel generators going. Why do we need the (30 million dollar) battery? If the most it takes is 15 minutes to get everyone happy again, then why do we need to buy that 15 minutes at a whopping cost of 30 million dollars??? I'm confused.
WILL NOT USE MS OFFICE if that is the case. I will also mandate PDF as the standard for collaboration among finance and HR people. They won't like it, but tough times....
If anything KILL the phones that use Windoze CE
on
Linux Gets Mobile(phone)
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I mean,
I accept that I have to take one or two times out of the week to patch my one Windows box, but if I had to do the same with my mobile on the same frequency??? And probably need Winblows desktop to run the program that upgrades the firmware of my phone???
God I can see it now... "Today an unprecedented weakness in Microsoft's Windows CE allowed attackers from all over the world to gain access to an unknown number of cell phone users personal contact information. Microsoft says it is looking into the matter and does not have a patch available, or a means for getting the patch onto the phone. In other news....."
I don't think people are reluctant about the idea. "Oh, you want to patch my box automagically? Right on." That's a great idea. I think the reason people are hesitant is because Micros~1 makes you click on that EULA which basically gives them access to any and all information they want to.
The other side of it is, "Well don't click the EULA dummy." Well then one (not I) can't use Micros~1 Windows! And even if you don't have a problem with that, recall that Micros~1 patches are known to really screw up machines sometimes.
An OS is an accessory, only there to abstract the
user to a point where they can be productive. It's
overhead should be low and it should be efficient
and as bug free as possible. EVEN IF Micros~1 is
only liable for 50% of crashes that is PATHETIC.
Think about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Hrmmm -- maybe they actually figured it out this time. They certainly have less weight worries than with the Osprey...
I used to live on the east coast and remember hearing about all of the ill-fated Osprey test flights.
YOU'RE MISSING A BIGGER POINT! Don't settle for crappy software!!! (face it, being more secure) than Windows doesn't mean crap)
Not much more than speculation here. Here's some more for ya. Looks like a fellow doomsayer is still talking about oil being harvest in at least 42 countries until 2080
http://dieoff.com/42Countries/42Countries.htm
Remember these curves will do nothing but adjust up as:
- demand grows
- technology improves (more efficient harvesting)
- new sources are found (improved GIS and research)
You care to back up your statement, or?? Civil war? It's always a mess, but the big money will always find a way to get at the black gold...
Lets put it this way -- If you took all the oil (some 200 years supply left at current consumption levels), and instead used it to produce hydrogen, your fossil fuel consumption levels would go WAY down (because cars aren't using them anymore) AND the plants generating the hydrogen would be able to cut emissions better than a car.
Suddenly you have a few millenia to figure out how to make electricity to produce hydrogen without gasoline. Think we can do it?
The day Bill Gates says Windows sucks and Linux is really the way to go.
Internal combustion engines have ALWAYS been inefficient. There have been attempts to make them more efficient, but there has NEVER been an engine based on gasoline that has exceeded even 35%. Even rotary engines are very poor producers of energy to a set of tires. Just the facts of life.
Anyone for Hydrogen?
Damn -- I thought Slashdot got a bad rap for posting old news -- this news is approximately 1.5 months OLD. Thanks again for the late-breaking information!
Go configure an Exchange Server you dolt.
Not necessarily...
Apparently (at least) thousands of (huge) companies have chosen TRON as their OS of choice. Populous and popular are essentially the same thing. I mean, how does something get to be populous -- generally by being the popular choice or prefence.
If Linux is truly more popular, wouldn't it stand that 5 or so years down the road that Linux will have replaced TRON in these applications?
Well -- I think this guy MAY have a valid point after all. The term "Firewall" has been thrown around ENTIRELY too much.
A SOFTWARE "Firewall" running on a Micros~1 box is NOT A FIREWALL. In fact if you trust that thing you should be locked away in private address space for the remainder of your WWW years...
A SOFTWARE "Firewall" running on any *nix machine is probably ok.
A HARDWARE "Firewall" running at the Layer 2 -> 4 is probably your best bet. There's an OS designed to handle packets and not to share time with other processes, it's sole purpose is to block packets.
The argument? Writing apps for Windows on its API does not inspire a whole lot of confidence in the effectiveness of what you're writing. I'd be willing to bet some money that before your "Zone Alarm" software or whatever gets that packet to look at that Micros~1 has done some pre-parsing and processing for backdoor type stuff. If you want to inspect OpenBSD's 'pf' program, look at the source and decide if you like it or not. And well, the hardware firewalls -- that's why these people are in business. They protect networks.
(FINALLY) the MORAL of the story: Don't assign the term "Firewall" to something that DOES NOT DESERVE IT. It creates a FALSE sense of security.
"Tell me I'm wrong"
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=19990911 for every time Windows crashed...
Check out this User Friendly strip...
As much as the Micros~1 community likes acronyms, throw that one on the fire. Hell I bet it becomes one of the most widely used acronyms around!
Back to KDE(Desktop)/OpenOffice(Office Suite)/xmms(winamp)/Acrobat Reader(duh!)/NFS("File share")/Gimp(Photoshop).... Ahhh what a beautiful day. Isn't it?
Glad I'm not a Windows Operator (no such thing as a Windows Sys Admin)...
I'm going to be getting a G5 here in a little while and have a test suite that was written in-house to test mostly FP and int performance for use with benchmarking big number cruncher-type machines. I will be running my bench on a Wintel box and the G5. Unfortunately my intuition tells me that the x86 box will outperform the Apple. The Opteron is a GREAT chip -- Apple is still kind of playing catch up as is Sun... I'll try and post a /. article on my results.
Display makers telling you that you need two monitors instead of one? NO, really? They care about your productivity not that they'd double sales and profits, etc.
TAKE OUR BIOS!!!
Yes I think he was allowed to start using computers in Jan. of 2003
I hate milking a flameware and offtopic shit, but y'know it's religious!
Lessee -- *BSD is still taught at the university I went to. *BSD is being used in professional production environments (all 3 that I've worked at). And wouldn't you know it *BSD has *just* been installed on multiple servers for front-line services such as SMTP, NTP, FTP, SSH, among others, for a brand spankin new web presence with an OC3 pipe.
And the kicker -- I would use *BSD -ANY DAY- over most any main-stream linux distributions. Installs can be performed with a floppy and a network connection (in under 20 minutes, FULL INSTALL) compared to about 3 or 4 hours with Red Hat CD's. The reason? First you have to go through that nasty GUI just to install the thing. Then you have to apply all the patches (because you didnt' get the latest distro over your net connection!). Then you have to go through and disable all the crap that you didn't want to run it with (Most things are disabled by default on *BSD, 30 second job on *BSD).
Go troll somewhere else coward, I will keep my *BSD.
Not many parents know what "online" is, or why they keep including the coffee cup holder on all the computers... "They really aren't designed well and my kids are the only ones that use that computer thing, and they don't drink coffee".
I'm not saying it's not a fun project with lots of thought and nifty science. I'm just questioning why we even got to this point in the first place... What crucial problem did we attempt to solve for $30 million dollars? I got a few problems the government can solve, break out the check book...
with regards to the bigass 30 million dollar battery set we just bought -- the extreme case presented is -51 deg C freezes pipes in a residential house in about 2 hours without power. And this battery can provide power for up to 15 minutes for the lowest estimate on usage, which is enough to get the diesel generators going. Why do we need the (30 million dollar) battery? If the most it takes is 15 minutes to get everyone happy again, then why do we need to buy that 15 minutes at a whopping cost of 30 million dollars??? I'm confused.
WILL NOT USE MS OFFICE if that is the case. I will also mandate PDF as the standard for collaboration among finance and HR people. They won't like it, but tough times....
I mean, I accept that I have to take one or two times out of the week to patch my one Windows box, but if I had to do the same with my mobile on the same frequency??? And probably need Winblows desktop to run the program that upgrades the firmware of my phone??? God I can see it now... "Today an unprecedented weakness in Microsoft's Windows CE allowed attackers from all over the world to gain access to an unknown number of cell phone users personal contact information. Microsoft says it is looking into the matter and does not have a patch available, or a means for getting the patch onto the phone. In other news....."
the problem.
I don't think people are reluctant about the idea.
"Oh, you want to patch my box automagically? Right
on." That's a great idea. I think the reason
people are hesitant is because Micros~1 makes you
click on that EULA which basically gives them
access to any and all information they want to.
The other side of it is, "Well don't click the EULA
dummy." Well then one (not I) can't use Micros~1
Windows! And even if you don't have a problem
with that, recall that Micros~1 patches are
known to really screw up machines sometimes.
What a dilemna no?
An OS is an accessory, only there to abstract the user to a point where they can be productive. It's overhead should be low and it should be efficient and as bug free as possible. EVEN IF Micros~1 is only liable for 50% of crashes that is PATHETIC. Think about it.
Ahem -- Shoutcast -- SHHOOU(COUGH)UTTCAST. Better than any "radio station" -- Exploit that full 10 (or 100) MBit connection they got ya on.
Don't ever give a cell phone a publicly routable IP.