I agree. There is nothing better than just putting that b0rked process to the 2nd CPU while you find out how to shut it down (which can be next to impossible on a uniprocessor system)...
Unmanned helicopters and jets frankly scare the shit out of me.
Considering the amount of space that is taken up with seating the pilot and all of the human --> computer interface devices take up, just imagine the power of an unmanned helicopter equipped with 16 hellifire missiles being flown into an enemy convoy. It could detect, blow the shit out of the tanks and trucks and then switch to infared and gun down the remaining survivors with a nice chaingun. Add laser missile defense systems on to these and not even the best RPG can take it down.
I also think this would be an incredibly good solution, but sadly, it wouldn't work for multiple reasons.
Let's say for every soldier there is one communication device that needs 'hooked in' to this uber-network.
Now just imagine there has to be enough capacity to do 1,000 end-to-end 'calls' accross the network.
You soon realize that with a country the size of Iraq, it wouldn't work. The routing overheads would be absolutley insane, probably 95% or so of the traffic. I mean we _still_ don't have a good solution to ad-hoc routing on wifi to build small communities of 100 or so internet enabled homes.
Now even if you don't want to use VoIP or similar, and instead just record messages and copy them everywhere, you are basically just using brute force to solve the other problem. It also would require every comm device to have a hard drive, something that doesn't work too well in the middle of Iraq.
There has been around 1,200 military US deaths in Iraq (compared to the British forces which I don't think is even past 10 or 20 now, even though they have around 15% of the amount of US troops deployed).
Times that by 33 and you get 39,600 civilian deaths.
As for putting armour on a truck, is this really such a crazy idea? Always in every battle there has been a problem with the supply convoys being to vulnrable on the last mile. Why not just take an existing tank, gut out its insides and let it do the last mile run of supplies. Yes it is more expensive but you would instantly solve a centuries old problem. Perhaps it just ain't sexy enough.?
LOL. Sorry, but that is absolutley ridiculous - inside a tank you basically have no room whatsoever thanks to a freaking huge engine and all the storage for the rounds. Now you are suggesting that you 'gut it out', but there really ain't much you can 'gut out' before you just have a big plank of metal.
Guess why its so cheap? Because it's all inventory that is old. The 2.8GHz CPU and Mobo will both by 533mhz versions, RAM most likely too slow to run on a 800mhz FSB and a 40GB HDD and CD drive cost about $30, and Dell probably can't shift those anymore.
Yes, I agree. Hopelessly mis-marketed. The reason the iMac worked with 'teens' is because it didn't really aim at them. Teens don't like stuff that is aimed at them.
Agreed. Also, put the audio output to the stereo and the video to the TV - this means that you can listen to music on the speakers and turn the TV only when you want to change tracks or add more stuff.
He is referring to the analogue system. Most analogue TVs are old and therefore not widescreen.
However, 60% of homes now receive digital TV and I'd say a good 80-90% of the new content in it. The only thing that isn't seems to be foreign sporting events (like the damn olympics!)
No, sorry, but that's a flawed assumtion. I'd guess it costs probably about $0.05 to produce the chip (max) and all the rest goes on transport and retailer markup.
Surely if you had to charge the battery _aswell_ as use the AC adapter to power the laptop, you are going to be putting much more stress on it? Therefore, you will be at risk of the capacitors going shit, and catching on fire.
I'll agree with you. Mozilla is a bit on the heavy side for phone/PDA use. However, I just don't see why people expect that a _desktop_ browser should work on a Nokia Phone. I think a separate (or heavily cut down) rendering engine is a better idea, specialized exactly for small screens.
Oh dear, not the old 'Opera's JS support is good - honest!' crap.
I'll give you one guess on why "About the only website that the current version Opera has a problem with is Gmail, because of all its weird code, and even then there are simple workarounds for that. The issue is fixed in the latest beta, which means that even that problem is only temporary."
doesn't work in Opera (and IE5 and below), but works in everything else... no ideas? Guess what - it's Opera's JS (or more specifically, DOM Level 2) support. Opera's DOM support is worse than IE for gods sake!
And no, the problem is not fixed in the new beta. They implemented a bunch more stuff very quickly, but still the spellchecker and other small, but important, features don't work.
Opera's UI is horrible, frankly. It's just too damn bloated. Too much stuff in it. I don't care if the download is small, the reason is because it uses UPX encoding which sacrifices memory usage for disk space - Firefox could get itself down to 3MB or so if it used it, but they think that considering nearly 60% of the US (and a good 40-50% of Europe; even more in most of Asia) are on Broadband, that using more RAM to save a couple of seconds download time is a bit stupid.
I see many articles on 'Apache is less insecure because more sites got hacked with it on'. This is BS, because probably most of those sites were running insecure code (ie, passing $_GET straight into a exec() call or something as stupid).
Compared with IIS, where a bit of the good ol'../../ seems to give you root access far too often.
Solar power cells already do 180W/m^2. I think that's what the guy was getting at. Otherwise, take a look on google and you'll see you can get 135W panels that are around a meter by a meter.
Er no, becuase the government _can't_ stop the BBC from doing anything. They obviously have limitations like what frequency they can broadcast on.
Every 9 years (IIRC) the government reviews the BBC's progress and what funding method it should have.
Basically what I'm saying is the.gov.uk can't censor, change or stop the BBC from doing anything directly. They do not go to the government to approve TV shows, nor do they go to the gov to approve technology research.
This is in direct contradiction to social security in the US where the government controls it and could (probably) stop paying out tomorrow.
I know, becuase I am one of the many bugzilla triagers. I work whenever I can on the TE list, and its brain-numbingly boring marking hundreds of (now) invalid, UNCO from 2001 or so reports as worksforme.
However, a lot of bugs require senior developer approval/investigation. We can only do so much before we need someone with real code insight to tell us what's up. Now this wouldn't be a problem.. until you realize there are thousands of these types of bugs. With about a dozen devs with enough insight to be able to reasonably help with them, it would take far too much of their time when they could be coding some CSS3 or something.
For example, take a look at the current 1.0 firefox dependency graph. It is hundreds of bugs long, with some being 4 or 5 digit (= very old).
Re:Why MySQL? create user foo createdb;
on
Beginning PHP and MySQL
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
mySQL (seems) to have the same limitation. Every virtual host setup I've seen uses a seperate tool for DB creation (which is highly restricted to only create DBs with the username or similar before it).
Sadly, this is an issue of manpower (and money, obviously).
At the moment there just isn't enough full time mozilla developers. Moz Foundation just doesn't have enough cash to stump up for a few dozen full time, good programmers.
However, I do agree with you somewhat. I have seen too many bugs that have done the rollercoaster of being assigned to 'M18' (which is pre1.0), then go to '1.0', 1.2', '1.4', '1.5', '1.7', then finally '1.9alpha' (which is a mile off in itself)).
I wonder how much time people spend triaging bugs compared to actually fixing them.
Someone mentioned the XUL spoofing bug. Sadly, I wouldn't class that as a bug. It's a bit like saying a full screen flash movie that looked and acted like a windows desktop was a bug of internet explorer. I wouldn't agree with that.
I think (sadly) that Mozilla Foundation is going to have real issues after the AOL money runs dry. Not sure if donations can keep it up. We haven't really noticed the effects because all the attention has been shifted to Firefox, which is just a rewrite of the UI, and doesn't require the sort of engineering that writing a browser core does.
I'm going to be very interested to see if the foundation can fully implement a brand new, complex standard. I don't think they'll be able to with their current money situation, which sucks:(.
Totally. So many people have built really really complex systems, integrating VB (and other languages, but it's mainly VB), Palm + PocketPC all to make a seamless system (for example, a consultancy firm I was at had a custom Palm app, which when you sync'ed updated the outlook calander with all the events and checked off all the jobs that he had done on the custom VB event management software.
I think people forget that MS products really ain't designed for what most of us see them. They are designed to have huge APIs so enterprise customers standardize so much on them they just can't go back.
Just like Web Browsers I suppose, most of the effort isn't spent on the front end and UI. It's really the rendering core that counts for so much. A lot of people couldn't see one difference between IE5 and IE5.5, apart from the fact that the CSS support was so much better.
Re:How do we power these systems?
on
AMD 90nm Evaluated
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The power grid just isn't designed to cope with this though. Domestic users are supposed to be 'bursty', that is that every once in a while someone puts an cooker or kettle on. It wasn't designed for 3 computers all eating 300-500W (not insane when you think about it, if you have a good graphics card in each) 24/7. That is another 1.5KW put on the grid, from a single circuit.
Noticed a lot of power plant construction lately? Nope, neither have I. Infact all I hear about is plants being decommisioned because they are not economical to run, or safe to run.
I also wouldn't mind a 24 hour UPS for the entire _house_ in the form of some nicely filled up lead acid batteries:).
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. There is nothing better than just putting that b0rked process to the 2nd CPU while you find out how to shut it down (which can be next to impossible on a uniprocessor system)...
Unmanned helicopters and jets frankly scare the shit out of me.
Considering the amount of space that is taken up with seating the pilot and all of the human --> computer interface devices take up, just imagine the power of an unmanned helicopter equipped with 16 hellifire missiles being flown into an enemy convoy. It could detect, blow the shit out of the tanks and trucks and then switch to infared and gun down the remaining survivors with a nice chaingun. Add laser missile defense systems on to these and not even the best RPG can take it down.
I also think this would be an incredibly good solution, but sadly, it wouldn't work for multiple reasons.
Let's say for every soldier there is one communication device that needs 'hooked in' to this uber-network.
Now just imagine there has to be enough capacity to do 1,000 end-to-end 'calls' accross the network.
You soon realize that with a country the size of Iraq, it wouldn't work. The routing overheads would be absolutley insane, probably 95% or so of the traffic. I mean we _still_ don't have a good solution to ad-hoc routing on wifi to build small communities of 100 or so internet enabled homes.
Now even if you don't want to use VoIP or similar, and instead just record messages and copy them everywhere, you are basically just using brute force to solve the other problem. It also would require every comm device to have a hard drive, something that doesn't work too well in the middle of Iraq.
Sorry, your math is totally out.
There has been around 1,200 military US deaths in Iraq (compared to the British forces which I don't think is even past 10 or 20 now, even though they have around 15% of the amount of US troops deployed).
Times that by 33 and you get 39,600 civilian deaths.
LOL. Sorry, but that is absolutley ridiculous - inside a tank you basically have no room whatsoever thanks to a freaking huge engine and all the storage for the rounds. Now you are suggesting that you 'gut it out', but there really ain't much you can 'gut out' before you just have a big plank of metal.
Firefox will do some of those, it's in the web features. Quite handy.
Guess why its so cheap? Because it's all inventory that is old. The 2.8GHz CPU and Mobo will both by 533mhz versions, RAM most likely too slow to run on a 800mhz FSB and a 40GB HDD and CD drive cost about $30, and Dell probably can't shift those anymore.
Yes, I agree. Hopelessly mis-marketed. The reason the iMac worked with 'teens' is because it didn't really aim at them. Teens don't like stuff that is aimed at them.
Agreed. Also, put the audio output to the stereo and the video to the TV - this means that you can listen to music on the speakers and turn the TV only when you want to change tracks or add more stuff.
He is referring to the analogue system. Most analogue TVs are old and therefore not widescreen.
However, 60% of homes now receive digital TV and I'd say a good 80-90% of the new content in it. The only thing that isn't seems to be foreign sporting events (like the damn olympics!)
No, sorry, but that's a flawed assumtion. I'd guess it costs probably about $0.05 to produce the chip (max) and all the rest goes on transport and retailer markup.
(I know the grandparent was a joke, BTW).
Surely if you had to charge the battery _aswell_ as use the AC adapter to power the laptop, you are going to be putting much more stress on it? Therefore, you will be at risk of the capacitors going shit, and catching on fire.
I'll agree with you. Mozilla is a bit on the heavy side for phone/PDA use. However, I just don't see why people expect that a _desktop_ browser should work on a Nokia Phone. I think a separate (or heavily cut down) rendering engine is a better idea, specialized exactly for small screens.
Oh dear, not the old 'Opera's JS support is good - honest!' crap.
I'll give you one guess on why "About the only website that the current version Opera has a problem with is Gmail, because of all its weird code, and even then there are simple workarounds for that. The issue is fixed in the latest beta, which means that even that problem is only temporary."
doesn't work in Opera (and IE5 and below), but works in everything else... no ideas? Guess what - it's Opera's JS (or more specifically, DOM Level 2) support. Opera's DOM support is worse than IE for gods sake!
And no, the problem is not fixed in the new beta. They implemented a bunch more stuff very quickly, but still the spellchecker and other small, but important, features don't work.
Opera's UI is horrible, frankly. It's just too damn bloated. Too much stuff in it. I don't care if the download is small, the reason is because it uses UPX encoding which sacrifices memory usage for disk space - Firefox could get itself down to 3MB or so if it used it, but they think that considering nearly 60% of the US (and a good 40-50% of Europe; even more in most of Asia) are on Broadband, that using more RAM to save a couple of seconds download time is a bit stupid.
I agree.
../../ seems to give you root access far too often.
I see many articles on 'Apache is less insecure because more sites got hacked with it on'. This is BS, because probably most of those sites were running insecure code (ie, passing $_GET straight into a exec() call or something as stupid).
Compared with IIS, where a bit of the good ol'
Solar power cells already do 180W/m^2. I think that's what the guy was getting at. Otherwise, take a look on google and you'll see you can get 135W panels that are around a meter by a meter.
Er no, becuase the government _can't_ stop the BBC from doing anything. They obviously have limitations like what frequency they can broadcast on.
.gov.uk can't censor, change or stop the BBC from doing anything directly. They do not go to the government to approve TV shows, nor do they go to the gov to approve technology research.
Every 9 years (IIRC) the government reviews the BBC's progress and what funding method it should have.
Basically what I'm saying is the
This is in direct contradiction to social security in the US where the government controls it and could (probably) stop paying out tomorrow.
I know, becuase I am one of the many bugzilla triagers. I work whenever I can on the TE list, and its brain-numbingly boring marking hundreds of (now) invalid, UNCO from 2001 or so reports as worksforme.
However, a lot of bugs require senior developer approval/investigation. We can only do so much before we need someone with real code insight to tell us what's up. Now this wouldn't be a problem.. until you realize there are thousands of these types of bugs. With about a dozen devs with enough insight to be able to reasonably help with them, it would take far too much of their time when they could be coding some CSS3 or something.
For example, take a look at the current 1.0 firefox dependency graph. It is hundreds of bugs long, with some being 4 or 5 digit (= very old).
mySQL (seems) to have the same limitation. Every virtual host setup I've seen uses a seperate tool for DB creation (which is highly restricted to only create DBs with the username or similar before it).
WTF? I get that too.
Do it yourself if you don't believe him (us)!
Sadly, this is an issue of manpower (and money, obviously).
:(.
At the moment there just isn't enough full time mozilla developers. Moz Foundation just doesn't have enough cash to stump up for a few dozen full time, good programmers.
However, I do agree with you somewhat. I have seen too many bugs that have done the rollercoaster of being assigned to 'M18' (which is pre1.0), then go to '1.0', 1.2', '1.4', '1.5', '1.7', then finally '1.9alpha' (which is a mile off in itself)).
I wonder how much time people spend triaging bugs compared to actually fixing them.
Someone mentioned the XUL spoofing bug. Sadly, I wouldn't class that as a bug. It's a bit like saying a full screen flash movie that looked and acted like a windows desktop was a bug of internet explorer. I wouldn't agree with that.
I think (sadly) that Mozilla Foundation is going to have real issues after the AOL money runs dry. Not sure if donations can keep it up. We haven't really noticed the effects because all the attention has been shifted to Firefox, which is just a rewrite of the UI, and doesn't require the sort of engineering that writing a browser core does.
I'm going to be very interested to see if the foundation can fully implement a brand new, complex standard. I don't think they'll be able to with their current money situation, which sucks
You mean.. check the KDE box at install time and chose KDE instead of Gnome on the login manager? Obviously highly informed...
Totally. So many people have built really really complex systems, integrating VB (and other languages, but it's mainly VB), Palm + PocketPC all to make a seamless system (for example, a consultancy firm I was at had a custom Palm app, which when you sync'ed updated the outlook calander with all the events and checked off all the jobs that he had done on the custom VB event management software.
I think people forget that MS products really ain't designed for what most of us see them. They are designed to have huge APIs so enterprise customers standardize so much on them they just can't go back.
Just like Web Browsers I suppose, most of the effort isn't spent on the front end and UI. It's really the rendering core that counts for so much. A lot of people couldn't see one difference between IE5 and IE5.5, apart from the fact that the CSS support was so much better.
The power grid just isn't designed to cope with this though. Domestic users are supposed to be 'bursty', that is that every once in a while someone puts an cooker or kettle on. It wasn't designed for 3 computers all eating 300-500W (not insane when you think about it, if you have a good graphics card in each) 24/7. That is another 1.5KW put on the grid, from a single circuit.
:).
Noticed a lot of power plant construction lately? Nope, neither have I. Infact all I hear about is plants being decommisioned because they are not economical to run, or safe to run.
I also wouldn't mind a 24 hour UPS for the entire _house_ in the form of some nicely filled up lead acid batteries
Most people have gas heating. Gas heating is far, far cheaper than horrible, ineffecient electric heating.