People can talk about Florida all they want. It was a result of outdated technology and a ballot that was confusing to read. Combine that with an elder population that has a difficult time adjusting to electronic voting and you'll get problems that are difficult to solve in the next election.
Push Polling
Intimidation
Harrassment
Purging the rolls of minorities
These are the reasons that our elections are being monitored. This is not about hanging chads.
However, these problems are a result of people making poor decisions in one state. The other states had no problems and the voting was done fairly and properly. Trying to show the similarities of problems in America and Iraq when it was run by Saddam is irresponsible. That was a country where people's voted did not count. In our country, people after the fact sat down and counted each vote by hand. If it was clear who the person voted for, that candidate got the vote. If it was unclear who they voted for, then the ballot had to be discounted. This is fair! If you can't determine who someone voted for, then they don't get the vote.
Not in the slightest did anything like that happen. First of all, other states have experienced problems with voting. Michigan is already having problems. This kind of behaviour is unacceptable in a democracy.
Again, this is a slap in the face of America to make it look like we have a dictator in office like Iraq had and many other countries still have. That is not the case at all. If you think it is and you hate Bush, then Clinton would have had the same "dictatorship" because he got in office under the same rules. I don't think anyone would consider Clinton a dictator. And I don't think Bush is capable of rising to such a high power. I don't think he's smart enough to do it.
Clinton's clear vicotry and Bush's selection by the Supreme Court are not exactly "under the same rules". There was never any question about Clinton's victory. The process worked the way it was supposed to. Bush's selection was not ordinary and was not played by the same rules at all.
You are forgetting libraries. Most of the time you are not just loading one binary into memory. You load the main program and all of its libraries, which can be very large in size. The difference between a 4200 RPM HD with 2 MB cache and a 7200 RPM HD with 8 MB cache is very large and the binary size DOES come into play.
It is bull and I won't retract my statements. I have compiled the GIMP with GCC 3.4 and half of his examples concerned hardened GCC which probably had more of an effect on the compliation of those programs than which version of GCC was used. Until you or he can prove otherwise it is bull.
But icc *doesn't* extend! It's gcc that has all the incompatible non-standard extensions! It's easy to transfer code developed on icc to gcc, but it's not as easy to transfer code developed on gcc to icc!
Intel have embraced the C++ standard. GNU have extended it. Which of those approaches is more likely to lead to lock-in?
You're missing the point. ICC is proprietary. If they choose to embrace and extend then there is nothing anyone can do about it. When GCC does it, anyone can copy the features if they please. There is no way that GCC can lock you in.
You say that like only gods can work on gcc. Believe it or not there are actually people out there that still know how to code. It seems like more and more people with little to no tech skills are joining the open source community but that doesn't mean that no knows how to code anymore. If you can't do it, you can hire someone who can. If icc breaks you're screwed, unless you have enough clout to sway intel.
I use Gentoo, and after gcc-3.4 was released, I frequently encountered programs that refused to compile with 3.4. If anything, proprietary software (especially Microsoft's) tends to emphasize backwards compatibility over all other considerations.
Bull. I use gcc 3.4 on Gentoo and have only encountered a few issues with it. Overall gcc 3.4 produces much better code than previous versions.
I thought in the docs it says not to use distcc for the bootstrap process. Perhaps I am wrong but I thought I remember seeing that. Then again, it's been quite a while since I've installed Gentoo. Distcc works fine for me after installation though.
GCC 4.0 has libmudflap and -fmudflap for C and C++. While this isn't exactly the same as stack smashing protection, it is still very effective and much more efficient.
Last time I checked GCC 4.0 wasn't stable.
It's not entirely without reason that IBM still hasn't posted ProPolice for inclusion in the FSF GCC mainline. The patch against SUSE's hammer branch has been floating around literally for years, but they know really only very few people truely believe it makes a difference.
That's crap. Propolice does exaclty what it is supposed to do. It doesn't protect against all stack smashing attacks but no one ever claimed that it did.
This is great news! I am immediately going to go out and drink as much beer as possible before they change their minds and decide beer is bad for you again.
Does it need to? NO. It has a plug-in style interface where any of this can be added without having to format and start over. Reiser4 is light years ahead of NTFS and it will be for some time.
My impression is that Reiser4 will never be accepted into Linux as it currently stands
People said the same thing about XFS.
("Breaks POSIX", "Incompatible with Linux VFS", etc.) Which means it is probably a little premature to start planning World Domination for it.
That doesn't seem to be too much of a problem for Linus or Andrew. They even seem willing to accept Reiser4 now and work out the details later. The Posix/VFS issues can be fleshed out by moving some Reiser4 features into the VFS. The only real problem now if figuring out who is going to give first. Some people are already using Reiser4 and if it turns out to be as great as it is supposed to be then I'm sure Linus will change his mind. After all Linux may be his project but he doesn't control where it goes.
You're right and I emphasized the wrong part of Reiser4. I know that NTFS has metadata. My point is that you don't need a WinFS type structure for Reiser4. Reiser4 is a lot further along than NTFS in implementing a WinFS type system because most of the features are built-in. Files that can be treated as directories and the plug-in nature of Reiser4 make it almost trivial to get WinFS functionality without the overhead of WinFS. The metadata is a small but important part of it. The real breakthrough is not the metadata itself but the structure around it and that allows it to be indexed in such a flexible way.
Right now, Reiser hasn't even conviced Linus and Viro to include Reiser4 into the stock kernel.
I wish they would implement Reiser4 but it is asking a lot to include a whole new filesystem into the kernel right now. Remember all the issues with XFS? My guess is that we will see Reiser4 in the vanilla kernel before 2.8 because 2.6 has been changing rapidly, much more rapidly than previous kernels, it will take a little time though.
True but Reiser4 is available now. Someone just needs to build a front-end into Gnome/KDE.
Other examples of vaporware in Linux:
- integrated NVidia or ATI drivers
This doesn't fit the definition of Vaporware because no one ever claimed it was going to happen. Besides, you have to download the drivers for Windows too.
- working USB 2 of Firewire support
Works for me, I don't know what problem you are having.
- fast boot-up times
25 seconds including init on a 700Mhz machine is fast enough for me.
Except it is relevant because Reiser4 has metadata built-in. WinFS is supposed to be built on top of NTFS but its (NTFS+WinFS) purpose is similar to that of Reiser4.
Slashdot Mirror
Push Polling
Intimidation
Harrassment
Purging the rolls of minorities
These are the reasons that our elections are being monitored. This is not about hanging chads.
However, these problems are a result of people making poor decisions in one state. The other states had no problems and the voting was done fairly and properly. Trying to show the similarities of problems in America and Iraq when it was run by Saddam is irresponsible. That was a country where people's voted did not count. In our country, people after the fact sat down and counted each vote by hand. If it was clear who the person voted for, that candidate got the vote. If it was unclear who they voted for, then the ballot had to be discounted. This is fair! If you can't determine who someone voted for, then they don't get the vote.
Not in the slightest did anything like that happen. First of all, other states have experienced problems with voting. Michigan is already having problems. This kind of behaviour is unacceptable in a democracy.
Again, this is a slap in the face of America to make it look like we have a dictator in office like Iraq had and many other countries still have. That is not the case at all. If you think it is and you hate Bush, then Clinton would have had the same "dictatorship" because he got in office under the same rules. I don't think anyone would consider Clinton a dictator. And I don't think Bush is capable of rising to such a high power. I don't think he's smart enough to do it.
Clinton's clear vicotry and Bush's selection by the Supreme Court are not exactly "under the same rules". There was never any question about Clinton's victory. The process worked the way it was supposed to. Bush's selection was not ordinary and was not played by the same rules at all.
Boonies? I live in the city and we have oil heat. It's quite common in the northeast.
SpamAssassin looks for Vipul's Razor if it is present on your system. There is no need for configuration. Just install it and it should work.
You are forgetting libraries. Most of the time you are not just loading one binary into memory. You load the main program and all of its libraries, which can be very large in size. The difference between a 4200 RPM HD with 2 MB cache and a 7200 RPM HD with 8 MB cache is very large and the binary size DOES come into play.
It is bull and I won't retract my statements. I have compiled the GIMP with GCC 3.4 and half of his examples concerned hardened GCC which probably had more of an effect on the compliation of those programs than which version of GCC was used. Until you or he can prove otherwise it is bull.
Intel have embraced the C++ standard. GNU have extended it. Which of those approaches is more likely to lead to lock-in?
You're missing the point. ICC is proprietary. If they choose to embrace and extend then there is nothing anyone can do about it. When GCC does it, anyone can copy the features if they please. There is no way that GCC can lock you in.
I haven't compiled any of those programs except the gimp and it worked fine.
You say that like only gods can work on gcc. Believe it or not there are actually people out there that still know how to code. It seems like more and more people with little to no tech skills are joining the open source community but that doesn't mean that no knows how to code anymore. If you can't do it, you can hire someone who can. If icc breaks you're screwed, unless you have enough clout to sway intel.
Bull. I use gcc 3.4 on Gentoo and have only encountered a few issues with it. Overall gcc 3.4 produces much better code than previous versions.
It's called embrace and extend.
Who cares about memory when hard drives are so slow? Reading from laptop HDs is especially painful and binary size does come into play.
I thought in the docs it says not to use distcc for the bootstrap process. Perhaps I am wrong but I thought I remember seeing that. Then again, it's been quite a while since I've installed Gentoo. Distcc works fine for me after installation though.
Why?
Nobody cares about stack smashing protection anymore these days.
OpenBSD
Hardened Gentoo
GCC 4.0 has libmudflap and -fmudflap for C and C++. While this isn't exactly the same as stack smashing protection, it is still very effective and much more efficient.
Last time I checked GCC 4.0 wasn't stable.
It's not entirely without reason that IBM still hasn't posted ProPolice for inclusion in the FSF GCC mainline. The patch against SUSE's hammer branch has been floating around literally for years, but they know really only very few people truely believe it makes a difference.
That's crap. Propolice does exaclty what it is supposed to do. It doesn't protect against all stack smashing attacks but no one ever claimed that it did.
Uhhh, no it's not. It's a country. It's in South America, the continent.
Sense of humor where are you???
This is great news! I am immediately going to go out and drink as much beer as possible before they change their minds and decide beer is bad for you again.
It's already been shown. Remember Cygnus, Redhat, etc.
Does it need to? NO. It has a plug-in style interface where any of this can be added without having to format and start over. Reiser4 is light years ahead of NTFS and it will be for some time.
People said the same thing about XFS.
("Breaks POSIX", "Incompatible with Linux VFS", etc.) Which means it is probably a little premature to start planning World Domination for it.
That doesn't seem to be too much of a problem for Linus or Andrew. They even seem willing to accept Reiser4 now and work out the details later. The Posix/VFS issues can be fleshed out by moving some Reiser4 features into the VFS. The only real problem now if figuring out who is going to give first. Some people are already using Reiser4 and if it turns out to be as great as it is supposed to be then I'm sure Linus will change his mind. After all Linux may be his project but he doesn't control where it goes.
You're right and I emphasized the wrong part of Reiser4. I know that NTFS has metadata. My point is that you don't need a WinFS type structure for Reiser4. Reiser4 is a lot further along than NTFS in implementing a WinFS type system because most of the features are built-in. Files that can be treated as directories and the plug-in nature of Reiser4 make it almost trivial to get WinFS functionality without the overhead of WinFS. The metadata is a small but important part of it. The real breakthrough is not the metadata itself but the structure around it and that allows it to be indexed in such a flexible way.
I wish they would implement Reiser4 but it is asking a lot to include a whole new filesystem into the kernel right now. Remember all the issues with XFS? My guess is that we will see Reiser4 in the vanilla kernel before 2.8 because 2.6 has been changing rapidly, much more rapidly than previous kernels, it will take a little time though.
True but Reiser4 is available now. Someone just needs to build a front-end into Gnome/KDE.
Other examples of vaporware in Linux:
- integrated NVidia or ATI drivers
This doesn't fit the definition of Vaporware because no one ever claimed it was going to happen. Besides, you have to download the drivers for Windows too.
- working USB 2 of Firewire support
Works for me, I don't know what problem you are having.
- fast boot-up times
25 seconds including init on a 700Mhz machine is fast enough for me.
What alternate reality are you living in?
Except it is relevant because Reiser4 has metadata built-in. WinFS is supposed to be built on top of NTFS but its (NTFS+WinFS) purpose is similar to that of Reiser4.
Well if you want to get more specific, Journalists tend to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative.
DEMOCRAT. Jesus, I didn't think I would have to spell it out for you.