In my case the nvidia driver finally became a more significant hindrance to my system, than a graphically accelerated benefit when correctly configured.
In my case, the issue is with the screensaver, either gnome-screensaver or xscreensaver. When I try to come back from it, either the computer hangs with the disk light flashing, or I get a mouse cursor over the (stopped) screensaver. Sometimes I can get to an alternate TTY to kill either Xorg or compiz, and log in again, but sometimes I have to reboot. I finally took them all out and just didn't have a screensaver.
Then, there was a kernel update, so I tried again. The moment I opened up the screensaver properties to configure it, it hung, requiring a hard reboot. After yanking things out, I did some hunting. I soon found a forum for nVidia users and there were twelve pages of threads about this issue! It's a long-known bug in the drivers that they don't play nice with some of the screensaver modules, annd AFAICT the company's not doing didly-squat about it.
I also read at -1, just in case there's some abuse to be corrected. Most of the time, however, I spend my points on posts that haven't been moderated yet. I'd much rather seek out under-appreciated posts than waste my mod points going ME TOO! by pushing a post up even further.
In case you haven't noticed (and you may not) moderators are now getting three times as many mod points. That means that the trolls have to work three times as hard and post three times as many stupid, off-topic, offensive or otherwise inappropriate posts so that foolish moderators will waste all those mod points modding them down instead of using them to reward people for good posts. When I have mod points, I tend to ignore stupid posts if they're by AC, because it doesn't do any good. In this case, however, I'd gladly burn a mod point on the OP because the poster didn't post anonymously and would take a karma-hit for it. Of course, it's possible that it's just a throw-away account to be used until it's been down-modded to oblivion then abandoned as the troll starts a new one. So it goes.
Back in the late '60s, I did some work on the late, lamented IBM 1620. It had a clock-tick of 20 ms (That's milliseconds, not micro.) and somebody found out that different instructions generated different RF signals. If you put a transistor radio (remember them?) on the console, you could listen to them. There was a program that would take a set of notes and durations and generate a "program" that ran the appropriate instructions to "play" the tune, rather like a rather odd compiler.
Strictly speaking, the traditional tune for Baa Baa Black Sheep is the same as for The Alphabet Song. A number of years ago a friend of mine discovered that you can also sing it to the melody of Hatikvah.
If you really want to find out how to make programs as efficient as possible, read The Story of Mel. I've never heard of anybody who could optimize code so well. Find out if he's still alive, and if so, ask him your questions.
4 images from gravitational lensing, plus 1 image not distorted (straight through the lens) equals, in my book, 5.
Thank you! Yes, of course, there would be an image in the center because light coming straight at us won't be displaced. I'd never thought of that. Of course, that image will be blocked by whatever's causing the lensing, but it's going to exist. And, I'd guess, with more than one object, there will me one or more images similarly blocked.
Let's say that I send an encrypted file from somewhere in the US to Moscow, and it's routed through Sweden. Presuming that they bother to look at packets neither originating nor directed to anyplace under their authority, what could they do about it other than refuse to send the packets on? And, if they do, the Internet will just treat it as an outage and find another route that works.
There's something I don't understand here. If n > 1, the number of images is 5n-5, or 5(n-1). As n must be an integer (You can't have a fraction of a massive object.) that means that the number of images must be a multiple of 5. And yet, there's a picture of a set of 4 images of a quasar in the article. Not only that, somebody links to the Wikipedia article on gravitational lensing, and that shows a picture of an "Einstein Cross:" four images of a quasar surrounding a galaxy between it and us. Four, in both cases, not five. Yes, I realize that in both cases n = 1, but can anybody explain how you end up with four in that case?
You may be more right here than you realize. You see, most people think the US lost the war in Vietnam in the field. The fact is, that we never lost a battle there. What the NVA couldn't get in the field they won at the conference table because people back here thought we'd lost the war and forced the diplomats to give in. (Even the NVA generals agree with this, BTW.) Although I doubt it, it's possible that from a strictly objective viewpoint Vista is better than XP. However, as long as people think it's junk and refuse to use it, that won't matter. It will go down in history as a failure regardless of any technical merit.
I don't use it myself, but I have a friend who does. I mentioned once, shortly after SP1 came out that somebody had asked me if she should get Vista. "NO!" he cried. "Tell her not under any circumstances should she get Vista."
Alas, it was too late; by the time I got back to her, she'd bought a new computer with Vista. So it goes. The point of this is, I gather that if Vista were, in fact, half bad, it would be a vast improvement.
I had something similar happen, once, when I was doing tech support for an ISP. We were told to keep important data on out Network Share rather than our computers so that if anything happened, they could image our hard drives without data loss. It was only after that saved data vanished (With, I might add, about two years of saved tech tips.) that I found out that "We don't back up the Network Shares. You should have kept it on your own machine."
it primarily depends upon the recipients who don't know...
that there's more than one program they can use for their email. Most people use whatever program is pre-installed on their computer, and as more people use Windows than anything else, that generally means one form of Outlook or another. Either that, or they only know how to use webmaiil, and that's even worse when it comes to loading images and such without asking.
We supposedly have Truth in Advertising laws already on the books, but super-fast, all-you-can-eat, Internet connections are still being advertised. I'd start by applying the existing law to those claims.
It wouldn't do any good, because of the weasel words in the advertisements. You see, they don't say you'll get N Mbits/second, they say, "...up to N Mbits/second." And, what they say is true, because your equipment is capable of handling that much bandwidth and your cable connection can carry it if it's provided. Of course, what they don't tell you is that they don't have enough bandwidth available to give every customer a connection like that, so the fact that your equipment could handle it is irrelevant. It's just like a car manufacturer telling you that their newest line can go from 0->150 mph in X seconds, but not reminding you that the legal limit is 65. What they say is true, even though they don't tell you all the truth.
I don't know how popular this law is in France, but it seems to me that if it's unpopular by the majority of people, it simply won't work. If the majority want it, they'll make it (for the most part) work.
We're talking about France here. It's quite possible for it to work even if most of the people hate it. After all, almost nobody actually liked the Third Republic and it lasted for seventy years.
Well, I've recently gone from dual boot with Windows most of the time and Linux once in a while to Linux with Windows there for the one or two things I can't do. (My router runs Linux but can only be updated by IE -- go fig!) For me, this is the year of Linux on the Desktop.
the failed design of tacoma bridge didn't had any legal consequences -
The newsreel footage of the disaster is still fascinating. It's so good that it was used as stock footage in Atom Man vs. Superman, the second Superman serial, in 1950. They used it as an episode-ending cliffhanger, with Superman bracing the bridge long enough for the one car still on the bridge to get off. (There actually is a car racing to get clear before the collapse!) Very compelling, even when you know what they did.
That's because the summary is nothing more than a quote from TFA. Not that that's unusual, mind you, most of the articles on Slashdot are nothing more than quotes of what somebody else wrote without anything by the submitter except maybe, a brief comment.
The summary says that they're also looking for something to stop boats up to 40 feet long with "minimum collateral damage" from up to 100 meters away. Fat chance. Do these flyboys really think there's a way to put such a kill switch on a sailboat?? If so, they're far too dumb to be trusted with weapons of any nature, let alone multi-million dollar airplanes.
Slashdot Mirror
In my case, the issue is with the screensaver, either gnome-screensaver or xscreensaver. When I try to come back from it, either the computer hangs with the disk light flashing, or I get a mouse cursor over the (stopped) screensaver. Sometimes I can get to an alternate TTY to kill either Xorg or compiz, and log in again, but sometimes I have to reboot. I finally took them all out and just didn't have a screensaver.
Then, there was a kernel update, so I tried again. The moment I opened up the screensaver properties to configure it, it hung, requiring a hard reboot. After yanking things out, I did some hunting. I soon found a forum for nVidia users and there were twelve pages of threads about this issue! It's a long-known bug in the drivers that they don't play nice with some of the screensaver modules, annd AFAICT the company's not doing didly-squat about it.
I also read at -1, just in case there's some abuse to be corrected. Most of the time, however, I spend my points on posts that haven't been moderated yet. I'd much rather seek out under-appreciated posts than waste my mod points going ME TOO! by pushing a post up even further.
In case you haven't noticed (and you may not) moderators are now getting three times as many mod points. That means that the trolls have to work three times as hard and post three times as many stupid, off-topic, offensive or otherwise inappropriate posts so that foolish moderators will waste all those mod points modding them down instead of using them to reward people for good posts. When I have mod points, I tend to ignore stupid posts if they're by AC, because it doesn't do any good. In this case, however, I'd gladly burn a mod point on the OP because the poster didn't post anonymously and would take a karma-hit for it. Of course, it's possible that it's just a throw-away account to be used until it's been down-modded to oblivion then abandoned as the troll starts a new one. So it goes.
Back in the late '60s, I did some work on the late, lamented IBM 1620. It had a clock-tick of 20 ms (That's milliseconds, not micro.) and somebody found out that different instructions generated different RF signals. If you put a transistor radio (remember them?) on the console, you could listen to them. There was a program that would take a set of notes and durations and generate a "program" that ran the appropriate instructions to "play" the tune, rather like a rather odd compiler.
Strictly speaking, the traditional tune for Baa Baa Black Sheep is the same as for The Alphabet Song. A number of years ago a friend of mine discovered that you can also sing it to the melody of Hatikvah.
If you really want to find out how to make programs as efficient as possible, read The Story of Mel. I've never heard of anybody who could optimize code so well. Find out if he's still alive, and if so, ask him your questions.
Thank you! Yes, of course, there would be an image in the center because light coming straight at us won't be displaced. I'd never thought of that. Of course, that image will be blocked by whatever's causing the lensing, but it's going to exist. And, I'd guess, with more than one object, there will me one or more images similarly blocked.
The IP headers will tell you that.
I see. Then my best bet would be to send several hundred meg of random junk and let the work their little tails off trying to decrypt it?
Let's say that I send an encrypted file from somewhere in the US to Moscow, and it's routed through Sweden. Presuming that they bother to look at packets neither originating nor directed to anyplace under their authority, what could they do about it other than refuse to send the packets on? And, if they do, the Internet will just treat it as an outage and find another route that works.
Actually, it says that's true for n > 1. I'm asking if anybody understands the math behind the result for n = 1.
There's something I don't understand here. If n > 1, the number of images is 5n-5, or 5(n-1). As n must be an integer (You can't have a fraction of a massive object.) that means that the number of images must be a multiple of 5. And yet, there's a picture of a set of 4 images of a quasar in the article. Not only that, somebody links to the Wikipedia article on gravitational lensing, and that shows a picture of an "Einstein Cross:" four images of a quasar surrounding a galaxy between it and us. Four, in both cases, not five. Yes, I realize that in both cases n = 1, but can anybody explain how you end up with four in that case?
You may be more right here than you realize. You see, most people think the US lost the war in Vietnam in the field. The fact is, that we never lost a battle there. What the NVA couldn't get in the field they won at the conference table because people back here thought we'd lost the war and forced the diplomats to give in. (Even the NVA generals agree with this, BTW.) Although I doubt it, it's possible that from a strictly objective viewpoint Vista is better than XP. However, as long as people think it's junk and refuse to use it, that won't matter. It will go down in history as a failure regardless of any technical merit.
I don't use it myself, but I have a friend who does. I mentioned once, shortly after SP1 came out that somebody had asked me if she should get Vista. "NO!" he cried. "Tell her not under any circumstances should she get Vista."
Alas, it was too late; by the time I got back to her, she'd bought a new computer with Vista. So it goes. The point of this is, I gather that if Vista were, in fact, half bad, it would be a vast improvement.
I had something similar happen, once, when I was doing tech support for an ISP. We were told to keep important data on out Network Share rather than our computers so that if anything happened, they could image our hard drives without data loss. It was only after that saved data vanished (With, I might add, about two years of saved tech tips.) that I found out that "We don't back up the Network Shares. You should have kept it on your own machine."
that there's more than one program they can use for their email. Most people use whatever program is pre-installed on their computer, and as more people use Windows than anything else, that generally means one form of Outlook or another. Either that, or they only know how to use webmaiil, and that's even worse when it comes to loading images and such without asking.
Exactly. It's a fantasy, as even you admit. That means that it's impossible in the Real World, and not worth discussing.
It wouldn't do any good, because of the weasel words in the advertisements. You see, they don't say you'll get N Mbits/second, they say, "...up to N Mbits/second." And, what they say is true, because your equipment is capable of handling that much bandwidth and your cable connection can carry it if it's provided. Of course, what they don't tell you is that they don't have enough bandwidth available to give every customer a connection like that, so the fact that your equipment could handle it is irrelevant. It's just like a car manufacturer telling you that their newest line can go from 0->150 mph in X seconds, but not reminding you that the legal limit is 65. What they say is true, even though they don't tell you all the truth.
We're talking about France here. It's quite possible for it to work even if most of the people hate it. After all, almost nobody actually liked the Third Republic and it lasted for seventy years.
in Korea, only old people make "I, for one..." jokes. In Soviet Russia, OTOH, "I for one..." jokes make old people.
Well, I've recently gone from dual boot with Windows most of the time and Linux once in a while to Linux with Windows there for the one or two things I can't do. (My router runs Linux but can only be updated by IE -- go fig!) For me, this is the year of Linux on the Desktop.
Or, at the very least, disenballment to keep them from passing their genes on if they haven't already.
The newsreel footage of the disaster is still fascinating. It's so good that it was used as stock footage in Atom Man vs. Superman, the second Superman serial, in 1950. They used it as an episode-ending cliffhanger, with Superman bracing the bridge long enough for the one car still on the bridge to get off. (There actually is a car racing to get clear before the collapse!) Very compelling, even when you know what they did.
That's because the summary is nothing more than a quote from TFA. Not that that's unusual, mind you, most of the articles on Slashdot are nothing more than quotes of what somebody else wrote without anything by the submitter except maybe, a brief comment.
The summary says that they're also looking for something to stop boats up to 40 feet long with "minimum collateral damage" from up to 100 meters away. Fat chance. Do these flyboys really think there's a way to put such a kill switch on a sailboat?? If so, they're far too dumb to be trusted with weapons of any nature, let alone multi-million dollar airplanes.