I don't know anything about it either. It still would be nice to know why the best practices for planting crops have changed by Jesus's coming. How are they related?
Ok, I'll try analogy again. Think of it as a war. Adam and Eve declared war on God. All their descendants were born on that side of the war. Just like all those people that were born in Russia a few decades ago. They were automatically part of Russia, part of the enemy of the United States. Because of the actions of the people ruling them, and because their parents were Russian.
I think that is wrong too. People shouldn't be held accountable for the actions of their government, when they had no control over those actions.
You can't. The Bible gives us all the knowledge we need to know about God, but it doesn't tell us everything. Some there's no point to know, and some we probably wouldn't be able to grasp. Also, my definition of "supernatural" is not "inexplicable", but of something outside our universe. Because it is outside our universe, it is not bound by the natural laws that are in place in our uiverse. "supernatural" -> "outside nature".
I don't appreciate being told that there are things I don't need to know. When I learn them, I will make that decision for myself. So far, there has been nothing I have encountered that I wouldn't like to know. If we aren't able to understand any single part of God, then God cannot be understood completely (by us). That makes God a black box, at least to some extent. Furthermore, it also makes it impossible for me to rationally trust God completely. About inexplicable = supernatrual: If something cannot be completely explaned in natural terms, then some part must exist outside nature. If God can break natrual laws then God cannot be explained in terms of those laws.
Not opposing positions - just the people that say "there is no evidence". There's plenty of evidence. Now if you acknowledge there is some evidence, but don't believe it, or don't accept it, that's a different story
I don't beleve that there is any evidence. More specifically that I have not encountered anything that cannot ever be explained without invoking the supernatrual. There is a difference between not explainable now because I don't have the answer and never explainable because it is supernatural. I can hold this opposing belief without ignoring facts. I also don't see the Bible as anything but another book. What makes it special? I need independent, external, logical, unbiased evidence that proves its truth beyond a reasonable doubt. I've yet to find anything. (it could exist)
Now whose making an assertion without proof? Where is your evidence that homosexuality is not a personal choice? I believe it is a choice. But even if there is a genetic disposition to homosexuality, that doesn't mean it can't be sinful. I know people, who, by their backgrounds, have been predisposed towards drinking and violence. Most of them don't just say "it's out of my hands, might as well let it rule my life". They exercise self-control. In much the same way, I might say, a heterosexual with a tendancy to sleep around should exercise self-control. Much too big a deal is made out of homosexuality, IMO. Yes, it's a sin. But so is having an affair, or stealing, or bearing false witness. But there's not so much ranting against those as there is against homosexuality.
Sorry. I am making an assertion without backup. I searched, but couldn't find anything that really supports my position. Did you choose your sexual preference? Can you choose to change it? Are you capable of becoming sexually excited about any person, regardless of their sex? About self-control: Yes, I agree that people in general should exercise more control. People who have violent tendencies should use extra control to avoid being violent. The big diffe
I'm sorry I misinterpreted so many of your positions; thanks for clairifying.
No, they're literal. They talk about what sin is. The laws that can be ignored after Jesus are the ones that talk about ceremonial cleanliness - laws about food, laws about planting two types of plants in a field, laws about wearing certain types of clothes.
The laws that are no longer valid seem a bit arbitrary. What changed to make them obsolete? What purpose did they have in the first place? (two types of plants in a field?)
I'm not saying God cannot be understood.
If God can be completely understood, in every way, then God is not supernatural. Where can I go to get a literal description of God's internal workings, as unambiguous and complete as the source code for the Linux kernel?
If that seems impractical, remember that science is slowly reverse-engineering the universe. I can ask science for the universe's source.
Firstly, you don't have to be that old to start doing things wrong. Secondly, after Adam, all people were born sinful. Before Adam sinned, the default setting for humans was "following God". After Adam sinned, the default setting was switched to "rebelling against God".
How just can God's actions be just if the actions of two people can condemn an entire species? How can children be held accountable for the actions of their parents; parents seperated by at least 6000 generations?
People could choose to open their eyes and see themselves. But the fact is, we don't. We're stubborn and set in our ways.
That's nice; you've equated opposing positions with close-mindedness. Without actual support.
The cause of homosexuality (and every other sin, for that matter) is disobedience to God. That is the definition of sin. Outlawing homosexuality isn't going to get one homosexual into heaven. It's just going to make them complain about tyrannical Christians. The only way you're going to get a homosexual into heaven, is to show them the word of God.
Homosexuality isn't a choice. If someone believes that what they are (homosexual) is to be hated (since it's a sin), but they can't change it, that person will hate himself.
Yes, if you want to put it that way. God set up the circumstances that he knew would end up with some people in hell. However, those same circumstances gave man free will. God could not have given man free will without giving him the opportunity to rebel and go to hell.
Not just some generic 'some people will go to hell' but God must know exactly which people will go, what sins committed, and when, before it all happens. Every detial. Since God does not do things by accident, God must have sent all those people deliberately to hell. God must have chosen exactly which people, chosen which sins they were to commit, and when they were to commit them. If God created them, he must have known every single detail of the consequences of that creation act. These people would have absoultely zero free will to resist; it is their unavoidable destiny. God has already exercised complete control, fully knowing those consequences in detial; no further intervention is necessary or possible (for us).
Free will cannot exist in this environment. I see it as another gaping hole in the idea of the supernatural. Some ideas are just nonsense.
Well, if they created those laws, why wouldn'y they? My "proof" of the presence of a higher being would be existence itself. I have yet to find a scientific explanation for the existence of reality. Science is fundamentally inequipped to deal with such a question, IMO. Science deals with chains of cause and effect. It cannot come up with a "first cause". The only scientific explanation is that the universe just always has existed - a claim which is just as impervious to disproving as Christian claims.
Nope; science can't explain a paradox (first cause). Science can make no statement about first cause; its existance, or wether it will be discovered. Science can (eventually) provide explinations for the causes of specific things, like this galaxy and the universe.
Firstly, the rules given to Christians aren't any particular problem of the legal system. The rules given to God's people only apply to God's people, the same way American law only applies to Americans. The answer to the second question is a bit complicated. The purpose of the law given in the Old Testament was three-fold (at least three, maybe more I can't think of)....
Are you saying that the ten commandments aren't completely literal? I always thought they were meant to be taken literally and absolutely.
Every unbeliever dies. So does every believer for that matter. How, when and why that happens is God's business, not mine, except in specific instances.
So God is a black box that cannot be understood? How can I trust something that cannot be understood? Science can, and has been, providing exact explinations for everything.
Maybe, but the bulk of the Bible was not written for non-believers.
Are you saying that the Bible is being taken out of context? Shouldn't a perfect book provide any context necessary to understand it correctly, at least for its design life?
Ok, here's where our analogy breaks down. The analogy of parent -> child was supposed to mirror the authority of God -> man. The people in the garden where not children - they were innocent, not naieve. They were just as intelligent, aware, and informed of the facts as any adult today.
You said earlier that It was OK for [the children] to die because they were sinful. Is being a child a special circumstance, or not? When did those Egyptian infants have an oppurtunity to sin?
And in Jesus' time, heaps of people saw his miracles. And they didn't believe. It demonstrates the truth of what Jesus said - you can smack people around the head with signs and miracles all you want, but unless God opens their eyes, its not going to do any good.
If God has to specifically open their eyes, then it isn't the person's choice until that happens.
Trying to compel belief is an exercise in futility. In fact, it's one reason why I don't particularly mind laws allowing homosexuality. I still think it's immoral - but outlawing it isn't going to convert anyone. Outlawing sin is just repressing the symptom, not treating the cause.
And what do you beleve is the cause of homosexuality? How would you propose it be better 'treated'?
Premise 1: God knows all; past, present and future.
Premise 2: God is intelligent.
Premise 3: Everything God does is deliberate. (not by accident or coersion)
Argument 1: God can predict (exactly) the results of his actions since he knows the future and is intelligent.
Argument 2: Anything that happens as a result of God's actions is also deliberate, since everything that God does directly is deliberate and God knows exactly what will happen as a result of his actions. Conclusion: People go to hell because God deliberately put them there (indirectly).
Re:The Kernel Can Take a Hint
on
Is Swap Necessary?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Don't blame XP's kernel. When you open a file in Windows that you plan on reading sequentially, you're supposed to use FILE_FLAG_SEQUENTIAL_SCAN. This is a big hint that you won't be seeking randomly or backwards, so only a little read-head caching should occur. By default, the cache manager thinks you will want to access the file randomly, so it stores as much as it can for your convenience. It is the program copying the file (probably explorer in this case) for not providing that hint.
Actually, copying a file shouldn't be buffered at all; it should use an IO completion port and multiple (mabye 10) concurrent async IO operations to copy the file witn no buffering.
Yes, the virtual address space is 2^32 or 4GiB. However, modern operating systems (both Linux and WinNT) provide a seperate address space for each process. Each process is limited to 4GiB of total address space (don't forget kernel space too), but the entire system is usually limited to 64TB.
If you really wanted your Windows (NT4 or later) machine to not even start without a password, run syskey.exe from your windows\system32 directory. Press Update. You can have it require a password, or external key (from a floppy disk-ewwwww) before startup.
Why do you blame yourself? Have you tried a bootable distro? I have no idea why you are getting issues like those (keyboard in X!!!) as I have never scene a problem. Mostly if we need a linux box at work we just throw linux on and we are done.
I blame myself because I do not (as yet) know what I am doing most of the time on a Linux box. I love Knoppix, and wish that fixed distros had that kind of hardware detection, but a live CD isn't a long term solution. About the X keyboard: I think it was shortly after I installed WINE (the next restart) and the keyboard quit under X; I might as well unplug it. Not even the lights worked. If I log out to close X and go back to the console, it works fine. I played with X's config files for hours with no effect, under RH9. I have since re-installed (yes, I'm sure it was fixable without resorting to that (like most Windows problems) but I couldn't figure out how.)
Odds have everythign to do with it apparently. It's not just my co-workers, it's friends, family, and random strangers on the street that find out I know anything about computers!!
I believe you, that most people can't run their computer without having tons of problems. I deal with them too. I don't think that Windows is any easier to keep running than Linux; only that it's possible if you really know what you are doing.
The problem is that for all intents and purpouses, Windows is a black box because oeping that box is very unpleasant.
To me, the/etc directory is unplesant. It's unpleasnt because it is unknown to me. I would even say I am a little afraid of it. The only remedy is for me to learn it. I could be wrong, but do you think that mabye the registry and Windows internals are unpleasant to you because you don't understand it?
Why would I want to go to all the effort you suggest?
To fix it without reinstalling? (overkill) To learn something? It still could be anything. Does Office have a repair function? It would be in add/remove programs. Re-installing only PowerPoint or Office should be enough to fix it; all of Windows is overkill.
I am done, I installed OpenOffice and have moved on with my life.
Good; whatever works. Personally, I use OpenOffice too, at home.
Is it really doing that though? Or is that a made up example.
Actually it was Gnome's panel, on the same RH9 install the first time I tried to use it (and thereafter). The problem I am having currently is with a FC1 install under VMWare 4 (the RH9 has its own computer). X won't start, it used to, but has since quit; I don't know what caused it. It tries to start about 5 times and then says it will disable the the X server for now until the configuration is fixed. I tried running the config scripts, but after entering redundant data, it still doesn't work. Another thing is that I would like to go back to the original display driver that came with the Fedora install but was replaced installing VMWare tools; they seem to have the same name, and I have no idea how to go back. It runs with either one, but the performance was much better with the original. Mabye it's newer? Sound is also broken; I can't remember if it ever worked.
Now let's talk about ability to fix. If a Linux app is really having an issue, it's far more feasible to do remote support on that problem by running a few commands (like ps) or send on a core file. Your suggestion of literally debugging what is wrong with Powerpoint or seeing what registry entries it uses is far more complex.
There are plenty of command line tools for Windows. pslist is equvalent to ps on UNIX. You can use those across telnet or SSH. Other tools support text output. Beyond that, there is Remote Assistance. Is there an eqivalent tool for
You aren't really helping your case much. What I said was that Linux stays "fresher longer", to put it another way. I said nothing like what you said, not even a little bit. I am saying that generally a box used in the same manner will need less repair on the Linux side of things.
Not in my expierence; my Linux installs always seem to get something broken (keyboard in X, sound, X in general, Gnome shell, UDMA) and I can't fix it. Who do I blame? Myself; I am not very good at Linux (yet).
I suggest you buy a lottery ticket because you sure are good at beating the odds!
Most people have different experiences, just judging by random samples of people at work.
Odds have nothing to do with it, and the number of people with different expierences is irrelevant. I'm sorry that your co-workers have so many problems; what are they doing wrong?
Well, what do you want? The code it displays when it crashes? Support people can't figure it out either actually looking at the computer, so I wouldn't waste your time - just another case of Windows flaking out, corrupting some vital bit of registry somewhere, and needing a reinstall. I'm sure that never happens with XP.
I'm sorry that the support people are incompetent, too. They probably aren't paid to acually fix problems, but to make them go away. Putting re-installation at the bottom of a cue sheet eases support costs.
Something specific has to be broken. Part of the problem is that you are treating Windows like some kind of black box that can't be diagnosed. You shouldn't give up so easily. What is the error message? Is it an unhandled exception or just a message box? Which process causes it? You said it's at startup: how is it started? Find out which objects are opened by the process, and what libraries are involved. You suspect the registry; find out which registry keys are opened and how.
What if I said: The KPanel of KDE crashes every time I start the computer, no matter what I do. This is RH9. How do I fix it? Is that enough information? If it's not enough information for Linux, how can it be enough for Windows?
One difference is that the source code is available for Linux, but not Windows. Is that really so big a difference? Sure, if I knew where to look, and knew what I was doing, and had the time, I could investigate the source to find the problem; even submit a patch and fix it myself. It's possible but not easy. It's also not like Windows and Office don't have any documentation.
It's sheer laziness that you don't have that table memorized well enough to do instant calculation of single digit multiplication, as it only actually has 36 unique and non-trivial entries. I'm assuming you know the method for multiplying by nine, which further reduces the entries you actually need to memorize to a mere 28.
It's not just the result numbers, you also have to know the related factors. So that's 28 results, each associated with 2 factors or 28 * 3 = 84.
We are discussing an amount of data equivalent to a social security number, your date of birth, your street address, and five telephone numbers.
I don't have my SSN memorized and only one phone number (my own).
You state that you have memorized 'many' powers of two. This hoses your claim to not memorize data well.
I have those memorized because I actually use them.
You are going to have a hard time convincing anyone that given two hours, you can't remember that now and forever, 7 * 8 = 56.
I already know that one but sometimes I confuse it with the incorrect 5 * 6 = 78. If I try to spend 2 hours in a single day to brute force memorization, it will never work; my mind will flood itself with distractions.
I will accept that you choose not to do so, but your assertion that that choice stems from anything other than stubborn and willful laziness does not hold water with me.
Actually, it is my own negligence and lazyness that mainly prevents me from doing the work needed to memorize them. Yeah, I am not very qualified to judge the usefulness of a skill I don't posess. I have other memorized skills, including geometry formulas and third-world geography that I have never used outside of school. I don't need them to be memorized. I have resources available that I can use to look them up, if and when I actually need them.
The few extra seconds it takes me to calculate those numbers that would be saved by memorizing them would not be worth the time it would take to cultivate that skill (to me).
Keep in mind that it wouldn't be an issue if you hadn't claimed this skill to be 'worthless' and 'irrelevant'.
I'm sure it is essential for some things. In my case, I have decided for myself that the small amount of overhead it would eliminate isn't worth it to me. You can't know what is good for me based on my posts in slashdot. Or do you think that directly memorized multiplication is an essential skill for everyone, regardless of how much they will use it?
Apache isn't well optomized for Windows (it creates like 500 threads instead of an IO completion port or something). And it doesn't support the things you usually need Windows for like ASP.NET. Still, Apache is a good choice sometimes because of its improved security, or at least the ability to run as a restricted user. (IIS can't; that's partly why its such a security risk)
You hear that Windows? You're junking up my Apache logs. Grr.
Come on, that's hardly Windows causing that; the attacker is.
As for your repeated refusal to accept that many many people have to reinstall Windows all the time, far more than Linux people - I don't know why you can't recognize the reality of this situation.
Reality? More like fallacy. You are saying that because more users don't know how to fix Windows so just reinstall than Linux users that Linux is better? Because it has less idiots?
Your scenario about the Linux box getting slower ad slower after 18 months does not happen, you see - wheras it's just about a given on Windows (unless of course YOU are managing the PC - it's nice to know there's one well maintained Windows box on the planet).
My Windows installs don't slow down, get corrupted or otherwise break down, either. My main computer hasn't blue screened in more than a year, and I use it all the time. I don't restart it because 'it's slow', either.
Here's an example problem for you. MS Office apps crash all the time on my computer at work. Just crash on startup, no matter what I do [...] It's a W2K box, got any thoughts on how to fix this?
You managed to provide almost no information. No one can help you with that description.
Download tools from SysInternals. Autoruns will list everything that gets started. Check that out for unnecessary entries. Process explorer will show all running processes and exactly where cpu time is spent, down to the thread, with stack information. Filemon can show all disk activity down to the lowest level; even writes to the file table. There are many others, try them out.
As for stuff that already comes with Windows:
Look at the Event Viewer; what is causing the crashes? Is it a specific driver that could be replaced/upgraded? Include bus drivers listed under system devices. Ignore driver signing; there are bad signed drivers and good unsigned drivers out there. Generic drivers will be more stable but might be slower. In XP, run verifier.exe to run some extra checks on drivers (restart requried) to help identify problems. Using the checked build of the kernel can also be quite useful, if you know any kernel debugging. If possible, buy hardware from vendors that write quality drivers. (sounds like Linux; buy hardware for the software support.)
Run spybot/adaware to rid the computer of spyware, and institute protection from future infection by running IE and the shell as a lesser user. Runas, psexec, and SUD can help with this.
Otherwise, try to figure out when and how the computer is slow. Is the hard drive running all the time? Mabye the computer is low on memory and it's time to stop some unnecessary services? Is it CPU usage caused by some rogue process that you can track down with Process Explorer?
You can run Windows without the GUI. (WARNING: this will make Windows fairly useless) Find the key "HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\SubSystems\Required" This lists the subsystems that are started automatically. Remove 'Windows' from the list and delete the 'kmode' key. Now, upon restart, the win32 subsystem won't be started; the computer will stall because it doesn't have anything to do. (winlogon may crash because the GINA depends on win32) The main problem with running without win32 is that there are (almost) no applications that can interface directly to the native system call interface (ntdll.dll) without using win32. This includes most services. Some practical examples of Windows without win32 include: The second part of the first phase of setup, the text mode part in 50 line VGA mode where you partition disks, the full kernel with all the bus drivers are running, but with no win32. The recovery console.
Complete replacement of the ACL with a root based system. By default nothing else has any privileges unless expressly granted.
No access already is the default. ACLs are much more flexable than the all or nothing root based model.
New files should never be executable. The ability to execute should be a privilege that must be explicitly granted. This means no more.exe's,.com's,.vbs, etc,...
And what does executability have to do with filename extensions? Besides you can make nothing executable without explicit permission with Software Restriction Policies. Use it to create a whitelist of executable binaries.
User's should have the ability to disable non-essential functions of any kind, such as IE. They should not be integrated into essential OS functions.
Software already exists that uninstalls IE. The only thing that IE is integrated in is the shell (no 'essential OS functions'). If you want to use a different shell, go right ahead.
User's should be able to kill any and every process. Have you ever tried to kill MS processes? There are dozens of them treated like kernel processes. A process could have a huge gaping security hole in it; yet, you can't kill it.
Yes, and I haven't had a problem. Task manager won't let you kill some things (yes this is stupid) but other things like Process Explorer and pskill will.
Heck, you aren't even allowed to know what it's doing with 33% of your CPU.
What is 'it'? Have you tried to debug the process? What services (if any) is it hosting? Which thread is using the time? Is it reading from any files? What objects does it have open? Did you ask any of these questions?
All ports should be closed by default. Sounds easy, but disabling MS's networking abilities by defaults scare's Redmond. Their ActiveX and central administration initiatives run counter to this.
Yes ports should be closed. I don't believe in your conspiracy about MS's fears, though.
It needs to implement PAM and other pluggable security technogolgies so administrators can choose best of breed instead of being stuck with one that has holes in it.
If you can't multiply single-digit numbers in your head, I strongly recommend that you take the piddling few hours it would take to learn how.
First, I can multiply small integers in my head. I just don't have the entire table of results memorized. I have some of them and methods to get to the rest. Second, as a rule, I don't memorize data well. I should know: I have already spent maybe 60 hours over weeks in elementary school trying to learn them.
Now, I'll agree that hackers can usually fall back on their computers, but other professionals don't always have that luxury. Accountants, financiers, and carpenters spring immediately to mind as people who benefit considerably from instant mind-math.
Yes. If I actually needed them to be that fast for something like those other professions, I would spend the time to learn them (or pick it up on the job). I have memorized many powers of 2 while using them that wouldn't be so useful to a carpenter.
And where did I say that I couldn't multiply at all? I can do multiplication in my head fine, however I do not have the entire table of small integer results memorized. It is possible to multiply without memorizing the answer; brute force is not the only answer. Talk about a straw man.
Careless spelling and careless arithmetic are often indicators of sloppy thinking.
So when you see a superficial spelling error, you think to yourself: This person is obviously an idiot; a sloppy thinker. I should ignore what they are saying. You would rather attack the delivery rather than the issue itself?
They're also impolite -- the rest of us have to think harder than should be necessary in order to take your meaning.
Impolite? Boo hoo! I can see if the entire statement has no structure, most of the words are grossly misspelled and the meaning is heavily obfuscated, but there is no need to be pedantic. Sometimes you have to do a little work to get at an insightful meaning. I would hate for you to have to think harder than necessary.
Don't be surprised to find that some readers will not put forth the extra effort, when they see that a writer does not put forth even the minimum effort.
So if 'some readers' are doing it, it must OK and minimum effort is equivalent to perfection?
I don't know about you, but I can't store lists of temporary numbers mentally. I will forget them. To this end, when I compare prices I bring my HP48 or some paper with me. I can do multiplication in my head, I just don't have a memorized table.
I'm not good at brute force memorization of data; I have to deal with that. Concepts on the other hand...
Oh I can do multiplication fine, I just don't have the entire matrix of answers memorized. There's a big difference between not being able to do it at all and not doing it quickly. I have some of the times tables memorized, and I can easily figure the rest out.
As for memorization, assuming you can add numbers (which, oddly enough, requires memorizing a table, just not a times table, and it's not usually taught via a table...), you can always turn A x B into add A to itself B times, so 2 x 3 = 2 + 2 + 2 (or equivalently, 3 + 3).
I use this kind of trick all the time. I agree that fast addition involves memorization too, and I have some of that memorized too.
Sheesh. I never said I couldn't multiply at all.
Re:I'm with Tannebaum about microkernels
on
More From Tanenbaum
·
· Score: 1
Loadable modules? A module is only loadable when the module build exactly matches the kernel build. The only thing they accomplish is code memory savings.
No, Windows(NT) isn't a 'true' microkernel; it's more like a layered client/server model. However, NT has much better shared (DLL) library support; you can use drivers from NT 3.1 in WS2k3 (NT 5.2). You can use the same binary WDM driver on both Win98 (v4.1) and Win2k+(NT 5.0), two very different OSs. Many basic parts of NT are loadable modules, things that cannot be.ko in Linux, like the Hardware Abstraction Layer (hal.dll), or the entire system call interface (ntdll.dll). Let's see you use a binary kernel module from the earliest Linux version that supported loadable modules (2.0?) in a 2.6 kernel.
Since Linux was designed to have its source files available, this isn't much of a problem. Windows has to have lots of binary compatibilty, just becuase it is designed to be closed.
Here is a good statement of what Linux kernel modules were designed to do.
You're right, and I don't want to defend ignorance. Although, this isn't so much ignorance as lack of a skill. Mabye ignorance of how fast times tables can help me?
I wanted to comment on the cheap shot in the article summary. The ability to multiply small integers quickly doesn't seem to be too useful for what I want to do, in my expierence.
I guess I don't want to spend time on raw memorization (something I'm not very good at) when I don't see much benefit. If I don't live up to the standards of a 'true' hacker for that, I'm sorry.
You best be patching Windows. It takes less than 5 minutes for your box to be compromised.
Yeah, if you forget to check the (recommended) built-in firewall checkbox. Do you open a Linux box to the internet without a firewall and lots of services open?
They are amazed that my boxes rarely (hardware problems sometimes, like defective ram) crash,
My computers running XP don't crash either. No viruses/worms either.
Windows XP still tends to get stale. Things slow down over time. Stuff gets corrupt.
That's odd, none of that ever happens to me. I've never reinstalled an NT based OS.
God help you if you get a nefarious virus.
You can only get a virus thru your own negligence. Besides, priveledge seperation can protect everything.
My WinXP box _needs_ to be reformated and reinstalled about every 4-6 months.
What are you doing to it? My laptop (P4M1.6, 256MB DDR266, cheapo S3 integrated video in VIA northbridge) has had XP on it for nearly 3 years; I have lots of stuff installed, including office 2k, several games, visual studio 2003. Never reinstalled. No slowdowns. My uptime was 60 days before I upgraded the video drivers. It hasen't crashed in over a year. I've never had a virus, worm, malware infection, etc. I'm not running a local firewall, or virus scanner. The NAT router protects me from all incoming attacks; priveledge seperation and knowing what I am doing from the rest.
The registry starts to get hosed, the system starts to slow down and it just gets ugly.
What do you mean by a hosed registry? Do you think it's corrupted? What makes you think so? The registry is journalled; I've never seen a corrupted registry hive from a NT install (the 9xs are a different story). Mabye you just mean it has too many entries?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know anything about it either. It still would be nice to know why the best practices for planting crops have changed by Jesus's coming. How are they related?
I think that is wrong too. People shouldn't be held accountable for the actions of their government, when they had no control over those actions.
I don't appreciate being told that there are things I don't need to know. When I learn them, I will make that decision for myself. So far, there has been nothing I have encountered that I wouldn't like to know.
If we aren't able to understand any single part of God, then God cannot be understood completely (by us). That makes God a black box, at least to some extent. Furthermore, it also makes it impossible for me to rationally trust God completely.
About inexplicable = supernatrual: If something cannot be completely explaned in natural terms, then some part must exist outside nature. If God can break natrual laws then God cannot be explained in terms of those laws.
I don't beleve that there is any evidence. More specifically that I have not encountered anything that cannot ever be explained without invoking the supernatrual. There is a difference between not explainable now because I don't have the answer and never explainable because it is supernatural. I can hold this opposing belief without ignoring facts.
I also don't see the Bible as anything but another book. What makes it special? I need independent, external, logical, unbiased evidence that proves its truth beyond a reasonable doubt. I've yet to find anything. (it could exist)
Sorry. I am making an assertion without backup. I searched, but couldn't find anything that really supports my position.
Did you choose your sexual preference? Can you choose to change it? Are you capable of becoming sexually excited about any person, regardless of their sex?
About self-control: Yes, I agree that people in general should exercise more control. People who have violent tendencies should use extra control to avoid being violent. The big diffe
If that seems impractical, remember that science is slowly reverse-engineering the universe. I can ask science for the universe's source.How just can God's actions be just if the actions of two people can condemn an entire species? How can children be held accountable for the actions of their parents; parents seperated by at least 6000 generations?That's nice; you've equated opposing positions with close-mindedness. Without actual support.Homosexuality isn't a choice. If someone believes that what they are (homosexual) is to be hated (since it's a sin), but they can't change it, that person will hate himself.Not just some generic 'some people will go to hell' but God must know exactly which people will go, what sins committed, and when, before it all happens. Every detial. Since God does not do things by accident, God must have sent all those people deliberately to hell. God must have chosen exactly which people, chosen which sins they were to commit, and when they were to commit them. If God created them, he must have known every single detail of the consequences of that creation act. These people would have absoultely zero free will to resist; it is their unavoidable destiny. God has already exercised complete control, fully knowing those consequences in detial; no further intervention is necessary or possible (for us).
Free will cannot exist in this environment.
I see it as another gaping hole in the idea of the supernatural. Some ideas are just nonsense.
Premise 1: God knows all; past, present and future.
Premise 2: God is intelligent.
Premise 3: Everything God does is deliberate. (not by accident or coersion)
Argument 1: God can predict (exactly) the results of his actions since he knows the future and is intelligent.
Argument 2: Anything that happens as a result of God's actions is also deliberate, since everything that God does directly is deliberate and God knows exactly what will happen as a result of his actions.
Conclusion: People go to hell because God deliberately put them there (indirectly).
Don't blame XP's kernel. When you open a file in Windows that you plan on reading sequentially, you're supposed to use FILE_FLAG_SEQUENTIAL_SCAN. This is a big hint that you won't be seeking randomly or backwards, so only a little read-head caching should occur. By default, the cache manager thinks you will want to access the file randomly, so it stores as much as it can for your convenience. It is the program copying the file (probably explorer in this case) for not providing that hint.
Actually, copying a file shouldn't be buffered at all; it should use an IO completion port and multiple (mabye 10) concurrent async IO operations to copy the file witn no buffering.
Yes, the virtual address space is 2^32 or 4GiB. However, modern operating systems (both Linux and WinNT) provide a seperate address space for each process. Each process is limited to 4GiB of total address space (don't forget kernel space too), but the entire system is usually limited to 64TB.
If you really wanted your Windows (NT4 or later) machine to not even start without a password, run syskey.exe from your windows\system32 directory. Press Update. You can have it require a password, or external key (from a floppy disk-ewwwww) before startup.
I blame myself because I do not (as yet) know what I am doing most of the time on a Linux box. I love Knoppix, and wish that fixed distros had that kind of hardware detection, but a live CD isn't a long term solution.
About the X keyboard: I think it was shortly after I installed WINE (the next restart) and the keyboard quit under X; I might as well unplug it. Not even the lights worked. If I log out to close X and go back to the console, it works fine. I played with X's config files for hours with no effect, under RH9. I have since re-installed (yes, I'm sure it was fixable without resorting to that (like most Windows problems) but I couldn't figure out how.)
I believe you, that most people can't run their computer without having tons of problems. I deal with them too. I don't think that Windows is any easier to keep running than Linux; only that it's possible if you really know what you are doing.
To me, the /etc directory is unplesant. It's unpleasnt because it is unknown to me. I would even say I am a little afraid of it. The only remedy is for me to learn it.
I could be wrong, but do you think that mabye the registry and Windows internals are unpleasant to you because you don't understand it?
To fix it without reinstalling? (overkill) To learn something?
It still could be anything. Does Office have a repair function? It would be in add/remove programs. Re-installing only PowerPoint or Office should be enough to fix it; all of Windows is overkill.
Good; whatever works. Personally, I use OpenOffice too, at home.
Actually it was Gnome's panel, on the same RH9 install the first time I tried to use it (and thereafter).
The problem I am having currently is with a FC1 install under VMWare 4 (the RH9 has its own computer). X won't start, it used to, but has since quit; I don't know what caused it. It tries to start about 5 times and then says it will disable the the X server for now until the configuration is fixed. I tried running the config scripts, but after entering redundant data, it still doesn't work. Another thing is that I would like to go back to the original display driver that came with the Fedora install but was replaced installing VMWare tools; they seem to have the same name, and I have no idea how to go back. It runs with either one, but the performance was much better with the original. Mabye it's newer?
Sound is also broken; I can't remember if it ever worked.
There are plenty of command line tools for Windows. pslist is equvalent to ps on UNIX. You can use those across telnet or SSH. Other tools support text output. Beyond that, there is Remote Assistance. Is there an eqivalent tool for
Something specific has to be broken. Part of the problem is that you are treating Windows like some kind of black box that can't be diagnosed. You shouldn't give up so easily. What is the error message? Is it an unhandled exception or just a message box? Which process causes it? You said it's at startup: how is it started? Find out which objects are opened by the process, and what libraries are involved. You suspect the registry; find out which registry keys are opened and how.
What if I said: The KPanel of KDE crashes every time I start the computer, no matter what I do. This is RH9. How do I fix it?
Is that enough information? If it's not enough information for Linux, how can it be enough for Windows?
One difference is that the source code is available for Linux, but not Windows. Is that really so big a difference? Sure, if I knew where to look, and knew what I was doing, and had the time, I could investigate the source to find the problem; even submit a patch and fix it myself. It's possible but not easy. It's also not like Windows and Office don't have any documentation.
The few extra seconds it takes me to calculate those numbers that would be saved by memorizing them would not be worth the time it would take to cultivate that skill (to me).I'm sure it is essential for some things. In my case, I have decided for myself that the small amount of overhead it would eliminate isn't worth it to me. You can't know what is good for me based on my posts in slashdot. Or do you think that directly memorized multiplication is an essential skill for everyone, regardless of how much they will use it?
Notepad can't crash the computer by itself. I'm not aware of this bug, care to post a link about it?
Download tools from SysInternals.
Autoruns will list everything that gets started. Check that out for unnecessary entries.
Process explorer will show all running processes and exactly where cpu time is spent, down to the thread, with stack information.
Filemon can show all disk activity down to the lowest level; even writes to the file table.
There are many others, try them out.
As for stuff that already comes with Windows:
Look at the Event Viewer; what is causing the crashes? Is it a specific driver that could be replaced/upgraded? Include bus drivers listed under system devices. Ignore driver signing; there are bad signed drivers and good unsigned drivers out there. Generic drivers will be more stable but might be slower.
In XP, run verifier.exe to run some extra checks on drivers (restart requried) to help identify problems. Using the checked build of the kernel can also be quite useful, if you know any kernel debugging. If possible, buy hardware from vendors that write quality drivers. (sounds like Linux; buy hardware for the software support.)
Run spybot/adaware to rid the computer of spyware, and institute protection from future infection by running IE and the shell as a lesser user. Runas, psexec, and SUD can help with this.
Otherwise, try to figure out when and how the computer is slow. Is the hard drive running all the time? Mabye the computer is low on memory and it's time to stop some unnecessary services? Is it CPU usage caused by some rogue process that you can track down with Process Explorer?
You can run Windows without the GUI. (WARNING: this will make Windows fairly useless) Find the key "HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\SubSystems\Required" This lists the subsystems that are started automatically. Remove 'Windows' from the list and delete the 'kmode' key. Now, upon restart, the win32 subsystem won't be started; the computer will stall because it doesn't have anything to do. (winlogon may crash because the GINA depends on win32)
The main problem with running without win32 is that there are (almost) no applications that can interface directly to the native system call interface (ntdll.dll) without using win32. This includes most services.
Some practical examples of Windows without win32 include:
The second part of the first phase of setup, the text mode part in 50 line VGA mode where you partition disks, the full kernel with all the bus drivers are running, but with no win32.
The recovery console.
And where did I say that I couldn't multiply at all? I can do multiplication in my head fine, however I do not have the entire table of small integer results memorized. It is possible to multiply without memorizing the answer; brute force is not the only answer. Talk about a straw man.
You would rather attack the delivery rather than the issue itself?Impolite? Boo hoo! I can see if the entire statement has no structure, most of the words are grossly misspelled and the meaning is heavily obfuscated, but there is no need to be pedantic. Sometimes you have to do a little work to get at an insightful meaning. I would hate for you to have to think harder than necessary.So if 'some readers' are doing it, it must OK and minimum effort is equivalent to perfection?
I don't know about you, but I can't store lists of temporary numbers mentally. I will forget them. To this end, when I compare prices I bring my HP48 or some paper with me. I can do multiplication in my head, I just don't have a memorized table.
I'm not good at brute force memorization of data; I have to deal with that. Concepts on the other hand...
Sheesh. I never said I couldn't multiply at all.
Loadable modules? A module is only loadable when the module build exactly matches the kernel build. The only thing they accomplish is code memory savings.
.ko in Linux, like the Hardware Abstraction Layer (hal.dll), or the entire system call interface (ntdll.dll). Let's see you use a binary kernel module from the earliest Linux version that supported loadable modules (2.0?) in a 2.6 kernel.
No, Windows(NT) isn't a 'true' microkernel; it's more like a layered client/server model. However, NT has much better shared (DLL) library support; you can use drivers from NT 3.1 in WS2k3 (NT 5.2). You can use the same binary WDM driver on both Win98 (v4.1) and Win2k+(NT 5.0), two very different OSs.
Many basic parts of NT are loadable modules, things that cannot be
Since Linux was designed to have its source files available, this isn't much of a problem. Windows has to have lots of binary compatibilty, just becuase it is designed to be closed.
Here is a good statement of what Linux kernel modules were designed to do.
You're right, and I don't want to defend ignorance. Although, this isn't so much ignorance as lack of a skill. Mabye ignorance of how fast times tables can help me?
I wanted to comment on the cheap shot in the article summary. The ability to multiply small integers quickly doesn't seem to be too useful for what I want to do, in my expierence.
I guess I don't want to spend time on raw memorization (something I'm not very good at) when I don't see much benefit. If I don't live up to the standards of a 'true' hacker for that, I'm sorry.