Most large scale systems that use SSD's to increase DB performance do so using DRAM (mainly) or SRAM based units with battery backup, RAM based RAID and controllers that dump the data to disk either on an ongoing basis or in the case of a power failure (using battery power to keep things up at least long enough to write a consistent snapshot to disk).
Yes, in 1996 the stock exchange I was working for started using a DEC Storageworks product, which was essentially a 1GB RAM disk with 1GB hard disk mirroring the RAM for backup, used in a great big VAX that's bigger than my fridge. I think it was 1GB, it might have been 2GB. Either way, it seemed pretty awesome at the time. I'd trust that for high transaction tasks much more than flash based storage at the moment.
Flash memory that works has a much longer MTBF than hard drives, but each cell fails at approximately 10000 writes.
The 10,000 number is what the really old flash devices were rated at. I've heard various numbers, which depend on the flash memory type and layering structure. I've seen numbers from the hundreds of thousands to millions. Cards which are large but slow, tend to use multiple layers of flash and are not as durable. Cards which are smaller but fast (the "Pro" and industrial cards), tend to use a single layer and last the longest.
I can't seem to find the document which details this at the moment.
I hope they one day manage to make flash as durable as DRAM, but still retain the non-volatile nature. I'd love to have solid state storage in my laptop (or everywhere for that matter).
Take a look at SysInternals tools, they have a tool to watch registry activity. Start it up and watch the lines of reads and writes quickly run off the screen. Lots and lots of activity ranging from steady activity to quick bulk bursts. You REALLY need to use the filter when using their registry watcher, because what you are interested in, will be drowned out by the flood of activity. Even when using the filter, depending on the application you are watching, there can be lots of activity.
I'm thinking that this activity is mostly confined to activity in RAM, with the registry cached and then changes are commited to disk perhaps at regular intervals and when someone logs out or shuts down. If your numbers are correct, then I can only assume that not every write to the registry is going to cause a timestamp update on the registry files themselves. Because the activity, including writes, was VERY high when I looked.
Does fragmentation matter when there are no heads to move?
The point is that the OS might THINK that a defrag is in order (OS assumes head movement latency is always an issue) and then goes right ahead and moves data around, in the process performing writes which in the case of solid state memory is not needed.
These companies however would not want to give to an operating system project that competes with them.
I don't think Apple and Microsoft would consider OpenBSD competition. Apple and Microsoft use OpenBSD software for free and much of what Apple and Microsoft provide, OpenBSD does not. Seems like a pretty sweet deal for Apple and MS to me.
Redhat on the other hand, comes closer perhaps to competing with OpenBSD (in their minds). However they have a larger install base, and support base of knowledgable users, certified or not. I doubt Redhat would be too worried about competition from OpenBSD, I think they'd be too busy worrying about Novell and SuSE. OpenBSD provides a very nice basic system for users to build on from the default install. Great for servers (as long as performance does not need to be of a higher importance than security), firewalls and even desktops for those who are willing to put in a little more effort and forgo 3D acceleration in X. OpenBSD is also completely familiar regardless of which supported arch you run it on.
(This following is not a response to anything you said, BTW) I have always personally found Theo to be fine to get along with. He snaps at people who show stupidity, selfishness and laziness and at the end of the day makes very well thought out software. Making a single tool to manage RAID cards for example, instead of having lots of tools for each, much like ifconfig manages NIC's. The OpenBSD project puts great effort into thinking through foundations and then moves cautiously into laying them down and building on them. The quality of OpenBSD shows.
Pornography and violence is enjoyed by many adults legally in Australia, so there should be no stigma attached to that
But there is.
A stigma for wanting to watch material rated R? I don't think so.
Pornography does not have to be X rated and violence does not have to be the very worst of the worst that can be found on the net.
It doesn't matter - the same flag on an account is required to get the movie poster from "Lethal Weapon" as to get a full hour-long prison gang rape movie. The "don't filter my connection" request likely won't have a "why" associated. Combine that with sensationalistic media, and you've got an instant list of perverts and deviants, whether or not the people are actually deviant (not that there's anything wrong with that) or maybe just wanted unrestricted acess to medical imagery. They're all lumped into the same category, and *that* is what's frightening.
*That* is a reason why I believe many people won't mind. Regardless of what level of material they want to view, they can always claim that they just want to view R rated material. In Australia, you need a court order to have your net connection activity archived. ISP's and media outlets will be risking it all if they break the law by trying to get that detailed information. There would be MASSIVE ramifications for them if that information went public. They would be breaching privacy laws and a court order which details who can witness that information, down to individuals. I have been such an individual. Those involved with making that information public would face PRISON time.
You honestly believe that this list won't be used in criminal investigations?
I never said that.
The entire reason for requiring registration to view 'adult material' is that the backers of this legislation are of the impression that this material makes you a violent person or a sexual predator.
No it isn't. Where did you get that idea? This is to prevent children from viewing inappropriate material on the net.
I'm not saying that this registry will be the first stop in an investigation, but I'm skeptical that it won't be used in narrowing down a list of people to bring in for questioning.
If adults need to opt-out of a filter so that they can download a Rage Against the Machine song or a hollywood movie trailer, where the opt-out is "are you of adult age and wish to view material fit only for adults?", then I believe lots of people will do it. I will do it on day one. That should be a big list. I don't have a problem with being questioned in the name of bringing someone to justice. In this day and age of high tech evidence gathering, I would not be worried that I am on a list of people who wish to view materials which warrant an R rating.
I've followed a few Australian cases where Australian police worked hard for YEARS to find who commited a crime and gather enough evidence against them for a conviction. If they don't have strong evidence, the criminal typically gets off. Just being on a list of people who wish to view material of an R rating or above is not something to worry about. If it causes you to be asked some questions, you answer them and get on with your life.
The key difference is that while a lot of people may watch those programs on TV when they're on, it becomes a whole different issue when you have to actually call up your ISP and ask for "more pornography, please!" It's hard to fault someone for watching a show that's on TV, but I can easily see someone using the fact that somebody else is on the "Porn List" to make them look like a deviant.
You're ellaborating way too much into something which is a non issue. The level of violence in Pulp Fiction is an example of violence which children would not be allowed to watch. Pornography and violence is enjoyed by many adults legally in Australia, so there should be no stigma attached to that. From levels just above what children are not supposed to see, to beyond. Pornography does not have to be X rated and violence does not have to be the very worst of the worst that can be found on the net.
But once again, I do agree that opt-in should be prefered over opt-out and that the option of opt-in should be very well publicised by the ISP documentation and staff members on the phone, etc at customer sign up time, so that people who want it know about it.
Your neighbor got murdered, and you filed an 'I want violent pictures' request. Hello Mr. Person Of Interest.
First off, it's not 'I want violent pictures', rather it's 'I want media of an adult nature'. As in, media that would otherwise be deemed not suitable for children to view. That's the majority of adult Australians. Pulp Fiction for example with and R 18+ rating might be an example of adult material.
Second, they need PROOF of who murdered who. They're not interested in locking innocent people up. Especially when that means that a murderer gets off and stays amongst the public. I have lots of police friends and I work in a law enforcement related role, sometimes with police officers (computer forensics). People don't just get locked up or raided because they wish to view adult material.
While I would call that very repressive. But maybe that's because I'm from the US where I don't need to opt-out to be given freedom of speech/expression.
This has nothing to do with freedom of speech/expression and everything to do with trying to prevent children from viewing inappropriate content. And that is all. This is just throw away bullshit. Just the cries of a dying animal (the Australian Labor Party). ASIO (our domestic spy agency) has some powers which are kept secret from the public. So a law like this is not needed to be disguised when the powers-that-be are already very powerful.
Your President does not want you to see soldier coffins from Iraq. But you think the US media is open and free and without bias or external restraint?
since obviously by definition there has to be a list at their ISP -- of "Social Deviants who Like Violence and Pornography"?
It does not have to be a list. It can be a flag against the persons account, which is as personal as their other personal details. I do however prefer opt-in. BTW, "Social Deviants who Like Violence and Pornography" will be anyone who enjoys watching TV programs which fall above a certain censorship rating. A LOT of normal people.
If it is criminal for Australians to view violence and porn
Nobody mentioned viewing violent or pornographic media to be criminal. No politician, it's not in the story, just you, flying off into la la land.
The government would not provide an "opt in" to criminal activity. That would be a crime in itself, by the government. Maybe you should read the story.
I wonder if anyone who "opts-out" of the ISP filter will be more likely to have their internet usage monitored and their home raided?
People in Australia don't get raided without good reason and don't get watched without good evidence that they need to be watched.
A wiretap cannot be placed on just anybody and a reason for being wiretapped being "oh they 'opted in' to view porn and violent media" is not good enough legally.
Just who defines "violent" or "pornographic" material? What is "violent" or "pornographic" material?
The usual boards who rate material not suitable for children or people who do not wish to see such content.
Frankly, people who are smart will eventually get around it anyway...
As in, "smart enough to inform their ISP that they do want to view that material" and thus it is enabled for them? How smart do you have to be to do that, or read a story? Hell, how smart do you even have to be to just read the headlines of a story?
While children are protected and consenting adults are happily viewing that material, people like you will be complaining about freedom, etc because you did not get the facts that were right in front of you. Or were you just hoping for a quick first post that looked well thought out and hit a popular/. nerve?
So name a network TV drama that illustrated the death of Iraqi children by showing their deaths. It hasn't happened. The other half of your argument is nonexistent.
So social sensibilities can only be weighed up in a single area? The whole range of social issues should not be considered and different areas compared? That's pretty short sighted.
The US Government is ok with sending people to war, knowing that there will be deaths on both sides, including innocents. There is plenty of public support for that. Yet, the president does not want US soldier bodies to be shown to that same public, a reality and consequence of what the Government wants to be supported. And apparently teenage sexual acts are so terrible a thing to be portrayed on television, as to command a fine in the billions? A portrayal of pleasant experiences had by teenagers is terrible, but this war is ok, something to be proud of, but don't dare show the bodies?
That is a comparison of what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. Where killing and dying for a cause that could not be proven (US/Iraq war II) is acceptable, but portrayal of teenage sexual acts on TV is not.
The death of children is an acceptable consequence to rid Iraq of WMD's which don't exist, but the reality of teenage hormones is not.
This has everything to do with that FCC fine and how it illustrates extremely wonky US ideals.
Let me get this this right. US has gone to war against a nation with no real proof that that nation had any intent of means to harm the US, with the result being thousands of innocent people being killed, including Iraqi children, men, women and patriotic young US men and women. Ok, check.
A portayal of a group of young people having a pleasant and consenting interaction with each other? Bad! Evil! Fine them billions! Riiiiiigh-T.
So violence on TV? Good. War based on lies? Good. Innocent lives being killed for Bush and his rich friends? Really good. Consenting sex? BAD.
Install one of the quietly animated background images and prepare to watch the Apple guys drool.
You can have animated desktops in OSX. You can also sometimes set a screensaver as your desktop image. Apparently the realistic looking fish tank screensaver looks incredible as a desktop background in OSX.
As if everybody have to point out in EVERY story about OS X how half the OS is a verbatim copy of OSS code.
Apple took the great things from OSS, portions of stable kernel and userland, and then added their own awesome GUI onto it. I would really doubt that much of the OSX GUI is actually copied OSS code.
That parts of jet fighters that the US had sold to other countries can be controlled remotely. He claimed that the US could disable the fire control computer of an enemy jet fighter from a US AWACS for example. Anyone know any more about this?
I've also heard that a certain big American corp that makes lots of things, including crypto hardware, puts backdoors or weaknesses in their products to be sold to other countries. Why on Earth would nations like some of those in the middle east and other nations less friendly to the US, buy computerized military hardware from the US!? Seems crazy to me.
What's the problem with using programmable keyboards?
The issue is not the keyboard, not Linux and not WINE. The issue is that this guy was playing the game in an automated fashion, without actually being present in the game. This would have been cheating regardless of how he went about it. He's WATCHING A MOVIE and thoughtlessly pressing keyboard macro buttons over and over again without interacting with the game. To build a character up. I'm amazed how he justifies some areas of a character that can be built up as being significant, yet not what HE was building up at the time. Then why was he even bothering? As if his actions were worth nothing to his character?
Linux and WINE are a sob story, sent to/. to get some zealot support behind him. I hope that is noticed and this cheater fails to get this reversed. I hate cheaters. From out and out cheat mod users to stat padders like him.
Speaking of the M95, how do you think it compares with the new sniper rifle? It seems to me that the M95 is better. With it I get kills with 2 shots or a single head shot, whereas with this new rifle I put rounds into people all day (I see the hit cross) and every now and then some die. And of course there is the ability to take out aircraft pilots and gunners.
I notice that EA are now offering a subscription service which apparently is cheat resistant. This seems immoral to me. If they can fix the cheating, then we should not have to pay for it. Why do I get the feeling that we've paid for a game that was really a bait and switch tactic to get us hooked on a great game, which degrades to a broken point where we need to pay money to get back the experience we'd come to enjoy so much and already paid for?
I regret buying the Special Forces expansion and I might not buy another EA game again if this is what they're doing.
I wish EA would crack down on Battlefield 2 cheaters. They really ruin the game. I've had people on my side shoot me and then heal me, over and over while I chat for example. I run away, they chase me and keep doing it. The other day I was the victim of a new cheat I've not seen before, which I think would not get the culprit punished. A pilot in an AH1 was not pleased that I was his gunner, I have never been a gunner for him and he said nothing at all about it, however since the helipad was close to the perimiter of the allowed area of the map, he flew to it (without asking me to leave!) and held me out (being at the front of the AH1 as the gunner) to become hurt for "leaving the combat zone". Apparently he was within, so the detection of this seems to really come down to the soldier and not the vehicle.
If he had of said something like, "do you mind if blahblah is gunner? We're in a groove", etc etc, I'd have been fine and exited the cockpit as the reasonable person that I am. I'm also what I would consider to be a very lienient person when it comes to punishing.
Cheaters ruin the games for people who enjoy playing them as they're meant to be played. Pressing a macro button over and over again while you are not even watching the game is not how a game is meant to be played. This was a costly mistake for that guy. It seems harsh though. I think he should of got a few months, not permanent. Permanent should be something that comes from a 2nd offence. I WISH EA would carry out permanent bans. If they did it now I think almost everyone would be banned, because it seems that people are frustrated and cheating as a result to come back up to an even playing field. Meanwhile, I remain frustrated, hoping that some day PunkBuster will actually start working or they'll fix the game.
Slashdot Mirror
Most large scale systems that use SSD's to increase DB performance do so using DRAM (mainly) or SRAM based units with battery backup, RAM based RAID and controllers that dump the data to disk either on an ongoing basis or in the case of a power failure (using battery power to keep things up at least long enough to write a consistent snapshot to disk).
Yes, in 1996 the stock exchange I was working for started using a DEC Storageworks product, which was essentially a 1GB RAM disk with 1GB hard disk mirroring the RAM for backup, used in a great big VAX that's bigger than my fridge. I think it was 1GB, it might have been 2GB. Either way, it seemed pretty awesome at the time. I'd trust that for high transaction tasks much more than flash based storage at the moment.
Flash memory that works has a much longer MTBF than hard drives, but each cell fails at approximately 10000 writes.
The 10,000 number is what the really old flash devices were rated at. I've heard various numbers, which depend on the flash memory type and layering structure. I've seen numbers from the hundreds of thousands to millions. Cards which are large but slow, tend to use multiple layers of flash and are not as durable. Cards which are smaller but fast (the "Pro" and industrial cards), tend to use a single layer and last the longest.
I can't seem to find the document which details this at the moment.
I hope they one day manage to make flash as durable as DRAM, but still retain the non-volatile nature. I'd love to have solid state storage in my laptop (or everywhere for that matter).
I'm afraid I have to call FUD.
Take a look at SysInternals tools, they have a tool to watch registry activity. Start it up and watch the lines of reads and writes quickly run off the screen. Lots and lots of activity ranging from steady activity to quick bulk bursts. You REALLY need to use the filter when using their registry watcher, because what you are interested in, will be drowned out by the flood of activity. Even when using the filter, depending on the application you are watching, there can be lots of activity.
I'm thinking that this activity is mostly confined to activity in RAM, with the registry cached and then changes are commited to disk perhaps at regular intervals and when someone logs out or shuts down. If your numbers are correct, then I can only assume that not every write to the registry is going to cause a timestamp update on the registry files themselves. Because the activity, including writes, was VERY high when I looked.
Does fragmentation matter when there are no heads to move?
The point is that the OS might THINK that a defrag is in order (OS assumes head movement latency is always an issue) and then goes right ahead and moves data around, in the process performing writes which in the case of solid state memory is not needed.
These companies however would not want to give to an operating system project that competes with them.
I don't think Apple and Microsoft would consider OpenBSD competition. Apple and Microsoft use OpenBSD software for free and much of what Apple and Microsoft provide, OpenBSD does not. Seems like a pretty sweet deal for Apple and MS to me.
Redhat on the other hand, comes closer perhaps to competing with OpenBSD (in their minds). However they have a larger install base, and support base of knowledgable users, certified or not. I doubt Redhat would be too worried about competition from OpenBSD, I think they'd be too busy worrying about Novell and SuSE. OpenBSD provides a very nice basic system for users to build on from the default install. Great for servers (as long as performance does not need to be of a higher importance than security), firewalls and even desktops for those who are willing to put in a little more effort and forgo 3D acceleration in X. OpenBSD is also completely familiar regardless of which supported arch you run it on.
(This following is not a response to anything you said, BTW) I have always personally found Theo to be fine to get along with. He snaps at people who show stupidity, selfishness and laziness and at the end of the day makes very well thought out software. Making a single tool to manage RAID cards for example, instead of having lots of tools for each, much like ifconfig manages NIC's. The OpenBSD project puts great effort into thinking through foundations and then moves cautiously into laying them down and building on them. The quality of OpenBSD shows.
Pornography and violence is enjoyed by many adults legally in Australia, so there should be no stigma attached to that
But there is.
A stigma for wanting to watch material rated R? I don't think so.
Pornography does not have to be X rated and violence does not have to be the very worst of the worst that can be found on the net.
It doesn't matter - the same flag on an account is required to get the movie poster from "Lethal Weapon" as to get a full hour-long prison gang rape movie. The "don't filter my connection" request likely won't have a "why" associated. Combine that with sensationalistic media, and you've got an instant list of perverts and deviants, whether or not the people are actually deviant (not that there's anything wrong with that) or maybe just wanted unrestricted acess to medical imagery. They're all lumped into the same category, and *that* is what's frightening.
*That* is a reason why I believe many people won't mind. Regardless of what level of material they want to view, they can always claim that they just want to view R rated material. In Australia, you need a court order to have your net connection activity archived. ISP's and media outlets will be risking it all if they break the law by trying to get that detailed information. There would be MASSIVE ramifications for them if that information went public. They would be breaching privacy laws and a court order which details who can witness that information, down to individuals. I have been such an individual. Those involved with making that information public would face PRISON time.
You honestly believe that this list won't be used in criminal investigations?
I never said that.
The entire reason for requiring registration to view 'adult material' is that the backers of this legislation are of the impression that this material makes you a violent person or a sexual predator.
No it isn't. Where did you get that idea? This is to prevent children from viewing inappropriate material on the net.
I'm not saying that this registry will be the first stop in an investigation, but I'm skeptical that it won't be used in narrowing down a list of people to bring in for questioning.
If adults need to opt-out of a filter so that they can download a Rage Against the Machine song or a hollywood movie trailer, where the opt-out is "are you of adult age and wish to view material fit only for adults?", then I believe lots of people will do it. I will do it on day one. That should be a big list. I don't have a problem with being questioned in the name of bringing someone to justice. In this day and age of high tech evidence gathering, I would not be worried that I am on a list of people who wish to view materials which warrant an R rating.
I've followed a few Australian cases where Australian police worked hard for YEARS to find who commited a crime and gather enough evidence against them for a conviction. If they don't have strong evidence, the criminal typically gets off. Just being on a list of people who wish to view material of an R rating or above is not something to worry about. If it causes you to be asked some questions, you answer them and get on with your life.
The key difference is that while a lot of people may watch those programs on TV when they're on, it becomes a whole different issue when you have to actually call up your ISP and ask for "more pornography, please!" It's hard to fault someone for watching a show that's on TV, but I can easily see someone using the fact that somebody else is on the "Porn List" to make them look like a deviant.
You're ellaborating way too much into something which is a non issue. The level of violence in Pulp Fiction is an example of violence which children would not be allowed to watch. Pornography and violence is enjoyed by many adults legally in Australia, so there should be no stigma attached to that. From levels just above what children are not supposed to see, to beyond. Pornography does not have to be X rated and violence does not have to be the very worst of the worst that can be found on the net.
But once again, I do agree that opt-in should be prefered over opt-out and that the option of opt-in should be very well publicised by the ISP documentation and staff members on the phone, etc at customer sign up time, so that people who want it know about it.
Your neighbor got murdered, and you filed an 'I want violent pictures' request. Hello Mr. Person Of Interest.
First off, it's not 'I want violent pictures', rather it's 'I want media of an adult nature'. As in, media that would otherwise be deemed not suitable for children to view. That's the majority of adult Australians. Pulp Fiction for example with and R 18+ rating might be an example of adult material.
Second, they need PROOF of who murdered who. They're not interested in locking innocent people up. Especially when that means that a murderer gets off and stays amongst the public. I have lots of police friends and I work in a law enforcement related role, sometimes with police officers (computer forensics). People don't just get locked up or raided because they wish to view adult material.
While I would call that very repressive. But maybe that's because I'm from the US where I don't need to opt-out to be given freedom of speech/expression.
This has nothing to do with freedom of speech/expression and everything to do with trying to prevent children from viewing inappropriate content. And that is all. This is just throw away bullshit. Just the cries of a dying animal (the Australian Labor Party). ASIO (our domestic spy agency) has some powers which are kept secret from the public. So a law like this is not needed to be disguised when the powers-that-be are already very powerful.
Your President does not want you to see soldier coffins from Iraq. But you think the US media is open and free and without bias or external restraint?
since obviously by definition there has to be a list at their ISP -- of "Social Deviants who Like Violence and Pornography"?
It does not have to be a list. It can be a flag against the persons account, which is as personal as their other personal details. I do however prefer opt-in. BTW, "Social Deviants who Like Violence and Pornography" will be anyone who enjoys watching TV programs which fall above a certain censorship rating. A LOT of normal people.
How about people who don't want to see that content call their ISP -- or specify it when they sign up for service -- rather than the other way around?
That sounds reasonable to me.
If it is criminal for Australians to view violence and porn
Nobody mentioned viewing violent or pornographic media to be criminal. No politician, it's not in the story, just you, flying off into la la land.
The government would not provide an "opt in" to criminal activity. That would be a crime in itself, by the government. Maybe you should read the story.
I wonder if anyone who "opts-out" of the ISP filter will be more likely to have their internet usage monitored and their home raided?
People in Australia don't get raided without good reason and don't get watched without good evidence that they need to be watched.
A wiretap cannot be placed on just anybody and a reason for being wiretapped being "oh they 'opted in' to view porn and violent media" is not good enough legally.
Australia seems to be more repressive than US
Any adult who wants it, only needs to "opt out" of the filter at the ISP level and they get it. I hardly call that repressive.
Just who defines "violent" or "pornographic" material? What is "violent" or "pornographic" material?
/. nerve?
The usual boards who rate material not suitable for children or people who do not wish to see such content.
Frankly, people who are smart will eventually get around it anyway...
As in, "smart enough to inform their ISP that they do want to view that material" and thus it is enabled for them? How smart do you have to be to do that, or read a story? Hell, how smart do you even have to be to just read the headlines of a story?
While children are protected and consenting adults are happily viewing that material, people like you will be complaining about freedom, etc because you did not get the facts that were right in front of you. Or were you just hoping for a quick first post that looked well thought out and hit a popular
So name a network TV drama that illustrated the death of Iraqi children by showing their deaths. It hasn't happened. The other half of your argument is nonexistent.
So social sensibilities can only be weighed up in a single area? The whole range of social issues should not be considered and different areas compared? That's pretty short sighted.
The US Government is ok with sending people to war, knowing that there will be deaths on both sides, including innocents. There is plenty of public support for that. Yet, the president does not want US soldier bodies to be shown to that same public, a reality and consequence of what the Government wants to be supported. And apparently teenage sexual acts are so terrible a thing to be portrayed on television, as to command a fine in the billions? A portrayal of pleasant experiences had by teenagers is terrible, but this war is ok, something to be proud of, but don't dare show the bodies?
That is really fucked up.
what does that have to do with an FCC fine?
That is a comparison of what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. Where killing and dying for a cause that could not be proven (US/Iraq war II) is acceptable, but portrayal of teenage sexual acts on TV is not.
The death of children is an acceptable consequence to rid Iraq of WMD's which don't exist, but the reality of teenage hormones is not.
This has everything to do with that FCC fine and how it illustrates extremely wonky US ideals.
Let me get this this right. US has gone to war against a nation with no real proof that that nation had any intent of means to harm the US, with the result being thousands of innocent people being killed, including Iraqi children, men, women and patriotic young US men and women. Ok, check.
A portayal of a group of young people having a pleasant and consenting interaction with each other? Bad! Evil! Fine them billions! Riiiiiigh-T.
So violence on TV? Good. War based on lies? Good. Innocent lives being killed for Bush and his rich friends? Really good. Consenting sex? BAD.
Install one of the quietly animated background images and prepare to watch the Apple guys drool.
You can have animated desktops in OSX. You can also sometimes set a screensaver as your desktop image. Apparently the realistic looking fish tank screensaver looks incredible as a desktop background in OSX.
As if everybody have to point out in EVERY story about OS X how half the OS is a verbatim copy of OSS code.
Apple took the great things from OSS, portions of stable kernel and userland, and then added their own awesome GUI onto it. I would really doubt that much of the OSX GUI is actually copied OSS code.
in a documentary...
That parts of jet fighters that the US had sold to other countries can be controlled remotely. He claimed that the US could disable the fire control computer of an enemy jet fighter from a US AWACS for example. Anyone know any more about this?
I've also heard that a certain big American corp that makes lots of things, including crypto hardware, puts backdoors or weaknesses in their products to be sold to other countries. Why on Earth would nations like some of those in the middle east and other nations less friendly to the US, buy computerized military hardware from the US!? Seems crazy to me.
What's the problem with using programmable keyboards?
/. to get some zealot support behind him. I hope that is noticed and this cheater fails to get this reversed. I hate cheaters. From out and out cheat mod users to stat padders like him.
The issue is not the keyboard, not Linux and not WINE. The issue is that this guy was playing the game in an automated fashion, without actually being present in the game. This would have been cheating regardless of how he went about it. He's WATCHING A MOVIE and thoughtlessly pressing keyboard macro buttons over and over again without interacting with the game. To build a character up. I'm amazed how he justifies some areas of a character that can be built up as being significant, yet not what HE was building up at the time. Then why was he even bothering? As if his actions were worth nothing to his character?
Linux and WINE are a sob story, sent to
Speaking of the M95, how do you think it compares with the new sniper rifle? It seems to me that the M95 is better. With it I get kills with 2 shots or a single head shot, whereas with this new rifle I put rounds into people all day (I see the hit cross) and every now and then some die. And of course there is the ability to take out aircraft pilots and gunners.
I notice that EA are now offering a subscription service which apparently is cheat resistant. This seems immoral to me. If they can fix the cheating, then we should not have to pay for it. Why do I get the feeling that we've paid for a game that was really a bait and switch tactic to get us hooked on a great game, which degrades to a broken point where we need to pay money to get back the experience we'd come to enjoy so much and already paid for?
I regret buying the Special Forces expansion and I might not buy another EA game again if this is what they're doing.
stat padding for hours
I wish EA would crack down on Battlefield 2 cheaters. They really ruin the game. I've had people on my side shoot me and then heal me, over and over while I chat for example. I run away, they chase me and keep doing it. The other day I was the victim of a new cheat I've not seen before, which I think would not get the culprit punished. A pilot in an AH1 was not pleased that I was his gunner, I have never been a gunner for him and he said nothing at all about it, however since the helipad was close to the perimiter of the allowed area of the map, he flew to it (without asking me to leave!) and held me out (being at the front of the AH1 as the gunner) to become hurt for "leaving the combat zone". Apparently he was within, so the detection of this seems to really come down to the soldier and not the vehicle.
If he had of said something like, "do you mind if blahblah is gunner? We're in a groove", etc etc, I'd have been fine and exited the cockpit as the reasonable person that I am. I'm also what I would consider to be a very lienient person when it comes to punishing.
Cheaters ruin the games for people who enjoy playing them as they're meant to be played. Pressing a macro button over and over again while you are not even watching the game is not how a game is meant to be played. This was a costly mistake for that guy. It seems harsh though. I think he should of got a few months, not permanent. Permanent should be something that comes from a 2nd offence. I WISH EA would carry out permanent bans. If they did it now I think almost everyone would be banned, because it seems that people are frustrated and cheating as a result to come back up to an even playing field. Meanwhile, I remain frustrated, hoping that some day PunkBuster will actually start working or they'll fix the game.