When folks go to use their PayPal debit cards, the payment is rejected, but the charge actually goes through and PayPal is deducting the amount from their account
Now that's just evil in so many ways.
It makes me glad that I don't trust them any more than I need to.
They're just getting ready to invoke line 4531 of the service agreement (that thing in the 5 line scrollbar you agreed to) which says that if they seize your account and all the money therein you agree to settle your case through binding arbitration via email.
Non-Fedora users complained about the last one, that such small updates (like test1->test2 or test2->test3) to a single distribution shouldn't be front page material.
If you go into your preferences, you can make it appear on your front page.
Not that much in the release notes have changed since Test2.
According to diff: Kernel and e2fsprogs support for online growing of ext3 file systems.
C++ and TCL bindings are no longer contained in the compat-db package. Applications requiring these bindings must be ported to the currently-shipping DB library.
Fedora Core 2.92 Test 3 has switched from a static/dev/ directory to one that is dynamically managed via udev. This allows device nodes to be created on demand as drivers are loaded.
The Supreme court will most certainly find that any technology allowing the free communication of raw data facilitates piracy and is therefore illegal. This includes web browsers, email, phone lines, the post office, and the like. And so we should arrest or sue the providers of each. Nevermind that the constitution intended for the reach of copyrights and patents to be extremely limited. Not.
The media lobby isn't about fighting piracy. Many P2P providers have offered proposals on how to legitimize P2P, as has happened with past technologies such as audio recording, radio, television, and vcr's. Each time publishers sued and shouted claims of "piracy" and Congress has had to step in to force a solution that doesn't involve the destruction of the new, superior technology.
The media lobby fights to protect their control. Your music doesn't doesn't reach store shelves if they don't get a 97% cut. Yes, recording artists average about 3% in the end. Some even lose money after the hidden fees. All they want to do is get their music out, and gigs pay most of their income. Technologies like P2P offer a way to circumvent the control of the media companies over distribution.
Most P2P traffic is piracy because the media companies have refused to cooperate in working out reasonable licensing plans, as has happened with EVERY new distribution technology that they couldn't control. As was done with radio, Congress will likely need to step in and make it happen.
Yes, anyone who believes we shouldn't be ignorant of the possibility that we are messing up our environment is an irrational left wing commie. Like, we already know the world is going to end with the Apocalypse right? So even entertaining the idea that something else may contribute to our demise is just silly. Of course you'd be surprised what you can live through.
It really depends on your definition of AI. If it only means that it's designed to react intelligently, in a predefined fashion, you could say that most software out there has a bit of AI. But another definition may be to say if you told it how to react, it's only predefined intelligence, and if it has the job of figuring it out on its own, it's artificial intelligence.
I used to play Robot Battle, and many of my robots were designed to adapt to their opponents through a combination of trial and error and detection of common strategies. With the latter, I told it how to detect a given situation and respond to it, making it predefined intelligence. But with the former, it had to find out the best way to react, with the only input being the success or failure of its choices, which would fall under artificial intelligence.
15 correct predictions: 1/2^15=1 in 32768 Some ways to interpret:
incumbent vs challenger
republican vs democrat
the inverse of each
=4, making it 1 in 8192 X big teams (I have no idea how many, not a sports fan). Lets say 64.
So 1 in 128 of a big sports team randomly predicting 15 elections in a row correctly, or somewhat greater considering the average odds of winning (team or president) is not exactly 50-50.
And there are easily a couple hundred other possible predictors that people could identify with.
So lets say the odds were 0.99 in 1 of finding something like this.
... but I think it's time to start seeing distros NOT contain every software package, desktop environment, etc, under the sun.
But after I install every package under the sun (at least everything on the install CD's), my hard disk still has 95% free space. I bet I could install most of sourceforge without having too many packages.
I guess it was bound to happen, to either gnome or kde. As it matter less and less which you choose, and the argument for consistency wins.
Compact keyboards might work, but I myself have trouble working with any keyboard that deviates even the slightest bit from "standard". Very slow, lots of mistakes and profanity. And I have a feeling I'm not the only person who dislikes small keyboards. I can't imagine giving people less space than is needed for a standard keyboard and a mouse pad anyways.
If you have a TV, you probably will watch it. If you just have a PC, odds are you won't watch TV on it, unless you bought a TV tuner to put into it. PC's without TV tuners won't be watching broadcast TV.
True, but I think the main reason I stick with Intel is the quality of the driver software
Their Linux driver support hasn't been too good for me, for any of their non-cpu products. Imagine setting up a file server on gigabit and getting 20kb/s when you try to upload. Struggled with that for a while. It was related to using the 2.6 kernel, 2.4 works fine, but the problem was Intel specific. And on the desktop, with their integrated i845 video, using OpenGL will crash the system after a couple minutes. I'm sure there are workarounds for both problems, but quality driver support suggests you shouldn't need undocumented workarounds to get each and every piece of Intel hardware to work correctly.
So while you have yet to see a bad Intel driver, I have yet to see a working Intel driver.
You can get a good gigabit nic for about $25 now, and not one of the early ones that'll max out at 10% because of cpu needs.
A gigabit nic alone won't help much on existing 100mbit networks, but for another $180 of so you can get a 24 port 100mbit switch with 2 gigabit ports for servers or additional switches, eliminating the bottlenecks from simultaneous users or having to chain switches together over 100mbit.
It's not officially a Good Idea, but is fine for some environments.
Just take into account that server and desktop hardware are designed with different goals in mind. Server hardware is meant for 100% uptime, even in the case of most hardware failures, and have good scalability under high loads, while desktop hardware aims to give you the best bang for your buck, understanding that your data is typically much less valuable.
I'm guessing you'll be using IDE drives.
Some of the more expensive (usually scsi) hard disks and controllers have a battery backed cache that can ensure that your writes are preserved in the event of a power loss. The lack of this requires you to sacrifice a great deal of write performance if you wish to ensure integrity. The sacrifice is a bit less if the hard disk preserves write order, which ensures integrity to the extent that the filesystem is capable, though you'll still lose data. Combining a desktop ups with a desktop server, set up to power down safely before the ups runs out and come back up afterwards, is sometimes enough to let you sleep some nights.
The mtbf (mean time between failure) ratings for hard drives intended for desktop and server use are calculated differently. For servers, a consistent high load is assumed. For desktops, a low load and lots of sleep time are assumed. So a 1 million hour server HD might be equivalent to a 2 million hour desktop HD, and most desktop HD's are rated at like 300000 hours.
Also, mtbf is not an estimate of how long a hard disk will last, just the chances of a fairly new drive going out unexpectedly. Like if they tested new hard disks for 500 hours to weed out the duds, then took 1000 of the survivors and tested them for another 1000 hours, and 4 went dead, they could claim an mtbf of 1000*1000/4=250000 hours AFAIK. But you can be sure most of them won't last that long, that's almost 30 years at full load. Like saying if 4 kids in 1000 die between ages 5 and 15, you can claim humans have an mean time between failure of 10*1000/4=2500 years. The real estimated lifetime of a hard disk may be roughly proportional how long the manufacturer is willing to warranty it for. Hard disks intended for server use tend to be warranteed for much longer.
If you use a desktop, max out the ram to minimize disk use and schedule very regular incremental backups, as full backups will also greatly increase disk use. A desktop server will last the longest if it almost only touches the hard disk to perform necessary writes. And be aware that cheap desktops have a high lemon rate.
If you buy a Dell PowerEdge 400sc, their cheapest line of servers, you're actually getting low end desktop hardware in an easy-access case for the about same price as their similar desktops, plus integrated gigabit. So using a desktop as a server isn't too horrible, if it's not vital.
A good raid 5 file server with scsi drives, plenty of ecc ram, and a reduntant power supply can live almost forever without maintenance. They've been accidentally sealed behind walls without anyone noticing until many years later.
I use Dev-C++ for much of my Windows C/C++ develop. It's good enough but not awesome, crashes or pauses from time to time while typing. I also have VC++ 6 and VS.NET.
Those rules were put in place in response to Perot. If he didn't appear so senile in the end we might have ended up with a third party president. He took a lot of votes from both parties, and came closer than most would have expected. The two parties reacted to prevent third parties from entering the debates in the future, arguably because the growth of a third party has the effect of hurting whichever party they are most similar to. Thus, the republicans have an incentive to support the greens, and vice versa.
They had two options to resolve the issue of third parties causing an unfair election. One, they could ban the third parties, or two, they could upgrade our electoral system to handle more than two parties. The decision makers being the two major parties, the former option looked pretty nice despite the latter being the fairest of the solutions.
We're not "really" a democracy if our choices to elect our future leaders are restricted by our current leaders. We're punished if we want a third option. People who voted green gave the last election to the republicans, the furthest party from what they wanted. Rather than moving forward, we're less free to choose our leaders than before the CPD's new rules.
Slashdot Mirror
It may actually work out to their benefit. They'll suspend all of our accounts for launching a DDOS attack against them.
When folks go to use their PayPal debit cards, the payment is rejected, but the charge actually goes through and PayPal is deducting the amount from their account
Now that's just evil in so many ways.
It makes me glad that I don't trust them any more than I need to.
typo. "scrolling textbox"
They're just getting ready to invoke line 4531 of the service agreement (that thing in the 5 line scrollbar you agreed to) which says that if they seize your account and all the money therein you agree to settle your case through binding arbitration via email.
I would suspect it goes something like this:
/etc/yum.conf to point to the new repository.
1) Edit your
2) yum -ty update
Then hope for the best, and check the mailing list archives for fixes to problems others have run across using this method.
Non-Fedora users complained about the last one, that such small updates (like test1->test2 or test2->test3) to a single distribution shouldn't be front page material.
If you go into your preferences, you can make it appear on your front page.
Red Hat didn't link to the release notes either. Had to go hunting.
Dotgnu is starting to look pretty good. Installed it last week.
I didn't see a link in the announcement.
/dev/ directory to one
Release Notes
Not that much in the release notes have changed since Test2.
According to diff:
Kernel and e2fsprogs support for online growing of ext3 file systems.
C++ and TCL bindings are no longer contained in the compat-db package.
Applications requiring these bindings must be ported to the
currently-shipping DB library.
Fedora Core 2.92 Test 3 has switched from a static
that is dynamically managed via udev. This allows device nodes to be
created on demand as drivers are loaded.
The Supreme court will most certainly find that any technology allowing the free communication of raw data facilitates piracy and is therefore illegal. This includes web browsers, email, phone lines, the post office, and the like. And so we should arrest or sue the providers of each. Nevermind that the constitution intended for the reach of copyrights and patents to be extremely limited. Not.
The media lobby isn't about fighting piracy. Many P2P providers have offered proposals on how to legitimize P2P, as has happened with past technologies such as audio recording, radio, television, and vcr's. Each time publishers sued and shouted claims of "piracy" and Congress has had to step in to force a solution that doesn't involve the destruction of the new, superior technology.
The media lobby fights to protect their control. Your music doesn't doesn't reach store shelves if they don't get a 97% cut. Yes, recording artists average about 3% in the end. Some even lose money after the hidden fees. All they want to do is get their music out, and gigs pay most of their income. Technologies like P2P offer a way to circumvent the control of the media companies over distribution.
Most P2P traffic is piracy because the media companies have refused to cooperate in working out reasonable licensing plans, as has happened with EVERY new distribution technology that they couldn't control. As was done with radio, Congress will likely need to step in and make it happen.
Yes, anyone who believes we shouldn't be ignorant of the possibility that we are messing up our environment is an irrational left wing commie. Like, we already know the world is going to end with the Apocalypse right? So even entertaining the idea that something else may contribute to our demise is just silly. Of course you'd be surprised what you can live through.
"CO2 is not a greenhouse gas! My daddy said so."
My intent was to show that they are likely completely unrelated. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough.
I invoke the Gamblers' Fallacy.
Where? Did I attempt to predict the future somewhere?
Either they (some sports team) win or lose. 50/50 chance.
Bush wins out of Bush or Kerry. 50/50 chance for either.
Are all things created equal?
It really depends on your definition of AI. If it only means that it's designed to react intelligently, in a predefined fashion, you could say that most software out there has a bit of AI. But another definition may be to say if you told it how to react, it's only predefined intelligence, and if it has the job of figuring it out on its own, it's artificial intelligence.
I used to play Robot Battle, and many of my robots were designed to adapt to their opponents through a combination of trial and error and detection of common strategies. With the latter, I told it how to detect a given situation and respond to it, making it predefined intelligence. But with the former, it had to find out the best way to react, with the only input being the success or failure of its choices, which would fall under artificial intelligence.
15 correct predictions: 1/2^15=1 in 32768
Some ways to interpret:
incumbent vs challenger
republican vs democrat
the inverse of each
=4, making it 1 in 8192
X big teams (I have no idea how many, not a sports fan). Lets say 64.
So 1 in 128 of a big sports team randomly predicting 15 elections in a row correctly, or somewhat greater considering the average odds of winning (team or president) is not exactly 50-50.
And there are easily a couple hundred other possible predictors that people could identify with.
So lets say the odds were 0.99 in 1 of finding something like this.
... but I think it's time to start seeing distros NOT contain every software package, desktop environment, etc, under the sun.
But after I install every package under the sun (at least everything on the install CD's), my hard disk still has 95% free space. I bet I could install most of sourceforge without having too many packages.
I guess it was bound to happen, to either gnome or kde. As it matter less and less which you choose, and the argument for consistency wins.
Compact keyboards might work, but I myself have trouble working with any keyboard that deviates even the slightest bit from "standard". Very slow, lots of mistakes and profanity. And I have a feeling I'm not the only person who dislikes small keyboards. I can't imagine giving people less space than is needed for a standard keyboard and a mouse pad anyways.
If you have a TV, you probably will watch it.
If you just have a PC, odds are you won't watch TV on it, unless you bought a TV tuner to put into it. PC's without TV tuners won't be watching broadcast TV.
True, but I think the main reason I stick with Intel is the quality of the driver software
Their Linux driver support hasn't been too good for me, for any of their non-cpu products. Imagine setting up a file server on gigabit and getting 20kb/s when you try to upload. Struggled with that for a while. It was related to using the 2.6 kernel, 2.4 works fine, but the problem was Intel specific. And on the desktop, with their integrated i845 video, using OpenGL will crash the system after a couple minutes. I'm sure there are workarounds for both problems, but quality driver support suggests you shouldn't need undocumented workarounds to get each and every piece of Intel hardware to work correctly.
So while you have yet to see a bad Intel driver, I have yet to see a working Intel driver.
You can get a good gigabit nic for about $25 now, and not one of the early ones that'll max out at 10% because of cpu needs.
A gigabit nic alone won't help much on existing 100mbit networks, but for another $180 of so you can get a 24 port 100mbit switch with 2 gigabit ports for servers or additional switches, eliminating the bottlenecks from simultaneous users or having to chain switches together over 100mbit.
It's not officially a Good Idea, but is fine for some environments.
Just take into account that server and desktop hardware are designed with different goals in mind. Server hardware is meant for 100% uptime, even in the case of most hardware failures, and have good scalability under high loads, while desktop hardware aims to give you the best bang for your buck, understanding that your data is typically much less valuable.
I'm guessing you'll be using IDE drives.
Some of the more expensive (usually scsi) hard disks and controllers have a battery backed cache that can ensure that your writes are preserved in the event of a power loss. The lack of this requires you to sacrifice a great deal of write performance if you wish to ensure integrity. The sacrifice is a bit less if the hard disk preserves write order, which ensures integrity to the extent that the filesystem is capable, though you'll still lose data. Combining a desktop ups with a desktop server, set up to power down safely before the ups runs out and come back up afterwards, is sometimes enough to let you sleep some nights.
The mtbf (mean time between failure) ratings for hard drives intended for desktop and server use are calculated differently. For servers, a consistent high load is assumed. For desktops, a low load and lots of sleep time are assumed. So a 1 million hour server HD might be equivalent to a 2 million hour desktop HD, and most desktop HD's are rated at like 300000 hours.
Also, mtbf is not an estimate of how long a hard disk will last, just the chances of a fairly new drive going out unexpectedly. Like if they tested new hard disks for 500 hours to weed out the duds, then took 1000 of the survivors and tested them for another 1000 hours, and 4 went dead, they could claim an mtbf of 1000*1000/4=250000 hours AFAIK. But you can be sure most of them won't last that long, that's almost 30 years at full load. Like saying if 4 kids in 1000 die between ages 5 and 15, you can claim humans have an mean time between failure of 10*1000/4=2500 years. The real estimated lifetime of a hard disk may be roughly proportional how long the manufacturer is willing to warranty it for. Hard disks intended for server use tend to be warranteed for much longer.
If you use a desktop, max out the ram to minimize disk use and schedule very regular incremental backups, as full backups will also greatly increase disk use. A desktop server will last the longest if it almost only touches the hard disk to perform necessary writes. And be aware that cheap desktops have a high lemon rate.
If you buy a Dell PowerEdge 400sc, their cheapest line of servers, you're actually getting low end desktop hardware in an easy-access case for the about same price as their similar desktops, plus integrated gigabit. So using a desktop as a server isn't too horrible, if it's not vital.
A good raid 5 file server with scsi drives, plenty of ecc ram, and a reduntant power supply can live almost forever without maintenance. They've been accidentally sealed behind walls without anyone noticing until many years later.
I use Dev-C++ for much of my Windows C/C++ develop. It's good enough but not awesome, crashes or pauses from time to time while typing. I also have VC++ 6 and VS.NET.
Those rules were put in place in response to Perot. If he didn't appear so senile in the end we might have ended up with a third party president. He took a lot of votes from both parties, and came closer than most would have expected. The two parties reacted to prevent third parties from entering the debates in the future, arguably because the growth of a third party has the effect of hurting whichever party they are most similar to. Thus, the republicans have an incentive to support the greens, and vice versa.
They had two options to resolve the issue of third parties causing an unfair election. One, they could ban the third parties, or two, they could upgrade our electoral system to handle more than two parties. The decision makers being the two major parties, the former option looked pretty nice despite the latter being the fairest of the solutions.
We're not "really" a democracy if our choices to elect our future leaders are restricted by our current leaders. We're punished if we want a third option. People who voted green gave the last election to the republicans, the furthest party from what they wanted. Rather than moving forward, we're less free to choose our leaders than before the CPD's new rules.
My boss is having us research which MFG/POS system will work best for our company.