There are a lot of things listed on one of the articles as "unnecessary for most home users". These things included: DHCP client and DNS client. How exactly are these unnecessary? Without them, most internet connections just plain will not work(some may get away without DHCP). The only time they are unnecessary is at times when they would not do any harm anyway (e.g. when not on a network at all).
A lot of the other "best practises" they list would render a lot of systems useless. Some of their suggestions are good, however they make a large number of very bad (and unnecessary) ones too.
How many more e-mails are you going to lose simply because it was accidentally deleted amongst a flood of spam? There is a good chance that it is more than 1/25,000. Then couple that with the fact that if someone has to spend 20 minutes of every hour manually filtering out the spam they are going to be able to deal with fewer of these legit e-mails than if they didn't have to. How many legitimate client e-mails are "missed" simply because someone didn't have the time to deal with them?
This was done by the police at a large LAN party. Basically they supposedly came around with a big bag and told everyone to put all their burned games into it. It could have just been a rumor though.
I am not in the U.S either, so perhaps ther laws are different in AU (perhaps they can "harmonize" that into it, and while they are at it, why don't they "harmonize" in some fair use provisions. If they are gonna make us equalize the copyright laws they should do it both ways).
Re:I wouldn't laugh about this too much
on
Latest SP2 News
·
· Score: 0
There's another reason not to smirk:
c) Although there are a couple of minor issues (yes they are minor) with SP2, there are still many other improvements which are very good. It isn't perfect, but it's most likely still far better than SP1.
"Once someone gives you a peice of software you do not require any licence at all to install and run it. Just like you don't need a license to read a book someone gives you. US law title 17 section 117 says installing and running your copy of software is not infringment - does not count as the creation of a new copy for copyright puproses. It is an entirely unrestricted and license-free use.
Copyright law is only concerned with the creation of new copies and distribution of those copies and public performances. Copyright law no more restricts use of copyrighted works than it restricts the reading of a book.
Copyright doesn't need to concern itself with use because it is kinda difficult to use something if you don't have a copy to use. Copyright law completely satisfies its function through the restrictions for anyone to give you a copy."
Does this mean that if somebody used my computer and downloaded 10 gig of mp3's to my hard disk, that I am legally allowed to keep and use those copies as I please? I have heard tales of people having copies of software and music confiscated regardless of whether they were copies given by somebody else or made by the person who posesses them, which makes it seem to me that possession of this stuff is illegal as well as distribution.
many of those distros do this for you, and even restore the symlinks when you update. I know at least Gentoo does it. The only thing that annoys me when updating in gentoo is that it doesn't do it for my search plugins.
What about software license agreements? These would HAVE to be changed, as at the moment a lot of major software (e.g. MS anything) requires you to purchase a license for every "copy" made, and use of this system would technically constitute a "copy". Hell, installing another "copy" of the same OS on multiple partitions needs a separate license. Sure, getting rid of that clause would be a good thing (I personally think it is a load of crap in the first place), but can you really see the big companies allowing that to happen?
What about the time it is going to take to get all of this data to the local machine, then the time it is going to take to put all the data back on the server afterwards. You are probably looking at AT LEAST 512 meg of data (albeit compressed) to copy over this 128kbps line just for the memory dump, then there is the actual software itself. Even if they managed to compress the total transfer down to 128MB, every time you log into a computer it is a wait of 2.3 hours long before you have a usable system on a 128kbps line. The same amount of waiting time when you log off before another person can use the computer.
Screen is useful in that you can suspend a session, and resume it anywhere else, e.g.:
$ screen
--- new shell is spawned ---
$ BitchX <nick> <server>
BitchX blah blah blah
<user1> hello
<user2> hi
<user1> blah
--- user presses CTRL+a, then presses d ---
--- screen session is now detached and user is back in old shell ---
$ logout
--- Now open a new ssh session from anywhere you like ---
$ screen -r
--- session from old screen is resumed ---
BitchX blah blah blah
<user1> hello
<user2> hi
<user1> blah
*snip*
NOTE: sections inside the --- --- are not literal text shown onscreen but descriptions of what happens.
You can have multiple screen sessions running at once, but you need to find out what the ID number of the screen sessions you want is for use in scren -r by running screen -list first.
That's only if they are dumb enough to allow you to register it yourself. It would work really well if they had a person/people authorised do it, and only that person/those people is/are allowed;)
How is it a poor ask slashdot article? The submitter had a question which I would say the majority of computer users do not know the answer to (due to the number of people who are always so surprised when I tell them that they have a worm already only 10 minutes after install). The submitter asked said question. This is exactly what "Ask Slashdot" is for.
Having said that, what you suggested does look like a pretty good answer, although I also have my doubts about the XP firewall (It's pretty good at stopping people from using their own computers though, so it might be good for stopping worms. Never tried it personally as I have always been hiding behind NAT).
It's not the GUI that's the problem, it's the unreliable parts under the GUI that cause the problem. For example, whenever I pull the power out of my computer and plug it back in again (after a proper shutdown of course), windows no longer recognises my mouse, wheras linux can. Instead, I have to use the keyboard to go to device manager and "upgrade" the driver. This "upgrade" (to the same version) takes about 3 minutes.
Windows drivers are also decidedly flaky; where else will you find a driver which inexplicably stops working for absolutely no reason? Numerous times? With different drivers for different hardware?
Yes, GUI's are good. Yes, windows does have a very good GUI. Too bad that the GUI runs on a foundation of sand. This is completely ignoring their business practises too (which is why they are considered evil, not because they use a GUI).
You will also notice that windows is the only modern operating system (of the big 3 at least) which has a fairly useless CLI (Longhorn apparently will have quite an impressive one though:) )
We're talking film frames here (With the motion blurring) not computer generated frames which we have already established are not the same (it's not real motion, so it doesn't behave like real motion).
Conventionally "refresh rate" (or "vertical scan rate") refers to the vertical synchronization frequency which determines how often the electron gun goes from the bottom of the screen to the top. This is what actually runs at ~60Hz(59.94Hz if you want to be picky), scanning 2 times per frame to provide the 29.97 actual frames/second of picture.
How does interlace trick the eye into seeing ~60 FPS if there are not 60 different frames? I would imagine there are still only ~30 frames/second in the picture(If the frames changed between fields it wouldn't it look something like watching an interlaced film on a progressive screen? Not to mention having to interpolate that many extra frames from a 24fps progressive film).
Interlace was originally introduced in order to overcome the fact that early CRT phosphors did not respond fast enough to handle 60 progressive frames, so instead they made do with the alternate lines. Perhaps this is what you meant by 60 "frames"?
For anyone interested in all of this stuff, there is a lot of information at this page, just click the links for NTSC or PAL or even SECAM. you can also learn about interlacing and refresh rates there too;)
That was essentially the point of the post. The guy before me was using refresh rates as an example of why you would notice artifacts at 30fps, I was trying to correct that. I still think that most of what I tried to say(except the NTSC PAL mixup) was correct, it just wasn't very clear what that was.
I agree that it probably shouldn't have been modded up as much as it did as it didn't provide the information in a good format, and many would probably walk away from it with the wrong idea.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I am pretty sure that if Q3A can't access the auth server it just lets you play.
I haven't tested this, but I know one of my fave games did that and I am pretty sure it was Q3A (neverwinter nights also does this for LAN games).
I find it amusing that your post references wikipedia as a comment to a story saying wikipedia isn't accurate.
There are a lot of things listed on one of the articles as "unnecessary for most home users". These things included: DHCP client and DNS client. How exactly are these unnecessary? Without them, most internet connections just plain will not work(some may get away without DHCP). The only time they are unnecessary is at times when they would not do any harm anyway (e.g. when not on a network at all).
A lot of the other "best practises" they list would render a lot of systems useless. Some of their suggestions are good, however they make a large number of very bad (and unnecessary) ones too.
"on a first-come-fist-served basis"
:P
Now if only that was how the USPTO worked
that would be an illegal operation!
Next they will try and ban cp, because it is capable of making illegal copies of itunes (only allowed one copy aren't you?).
How many more e-mails are you going to lose simply because it was accidentally deleted amongst a flood of spam? There is a good chance that it is more than 1/25,000. Then couple that with the fact that if someone has to spend 20 minutes of every hour manually filtering out the spam they are going to be able to deal with fewer of these legit e-mails than if they didn't have to. How many legitimate client e-mails are "missed" simply because someone didn't have the time to deal with them?
But that doesn't mean that it is. The fact that the law "should" say the right thing doesn't mean that because the law says something it is correct.
This was done by the police at a large LAN party. Basically they supposedly came around with a big bag and told everyone to put all their burned games into it. It could have just been a rumor though.
I am not in the U.S either, so perhaps ther laws are different in AU (perhaps they can "harmonize" that into it, and while they are at it, why don't they "harmonize" in some fair use provisions. If they are gonna make us equalize the copyright laws they should do it both ways).
There's another reason not to smirk:
c) Although there are a couple of minor issues (yes they are minor) with SP2, there are still many other improvements which are very good. It isn't perfect, but it's most likely still far better than SP1.
"Once someone gives you a peice of software you do not require any licence at all to install and run it. Just like you don't need a license to read a book someone gives you. US law title 17 section 117 says installing and running your copy of software is not infringment - does not count as the creation of a new copy for copyright puproses. It is an entirely unrestricted and license-free use. Copyright law is only concerned with the creation of new copies and distribution of those copies and public performances. Copyright law no more restricts use of copyrighted works than it restricts the reading of a book. Copyright doesn't need to concern itself with use because it is kinda difficult to use something if you don't have a copy to use. Copyright law completely satisfies its function through the restrictions for anyone to give you a copy."
Does this mean that if somebody used my computer and downloaded 10 gig of mp3's to my hard disk, that I am legally allowed to keep and use those copies as I please? I have heard tales of people having copies of software and music confiscated regardless of whether they were copies given by somebody else or made by the person who posesses them, which makes it seem to me that possession of this stuff is illegal as well as distribution.
many of those distros do this for you, and even restore the symlinks when you update. I know at least Gentoo does it. The only thing that annoys me when updating in gentoo is that it doesn't do it for my search plugins.
What about software license agreements? These would HAVE to be changed, as at the moment a lot of major software (e.g. MS anything) requires you to purchase a license for every "copy" made, and use of this system would technically constitute a "copy". Hell, installing another "copy" of the same OS on multiple partitions needs a separate license. Sure, getting rid of that clause would be a good thing (I personally think it is a load of crap in the first place), but can you really see the big companies allowing that to happen?
What about the time it is going to take to get all of this data to the local machine, then the time it is going to take to put all the data back on the server afterwards. You are probably looking at AT LEAST 512 meg of data (albeit compressed) to copy over this 128kbps line just for the memory dump, then there is the actual software itself. Even if they managed to compress the total transfer down to 128MB, every time you log into a computer it is a wait of 2.3 hours long before you have a usable system on a 128kbps line. The same amount of waiting time when you log off before another person can use the computer.
Screen is useful in that you can suspend a session, and resume it anywhere else, e.g.:
$ screen
--- new shell is spawned ---
$ BitchX <nick> <server>
BitchX blah blah blah
<user1> hello
<user2> hi
<user1> blah
--- user presses CTRL+a, then presses d ---
--- screen session is now detached and user is back in old shell ---
$ logout
--- Now open a new ssh session from anywhere you like ---
$ screen -r
--- session from old screen is resumed ---
BitchX blah blah blah
<user1> hello
<user2> hi
<user1> blah
*snip*
NOTE: sections inside the --- --- are not literal text shown onscreen but descriptions of what happens.
You can have multiple screen sessions running at once, but you need to find out what the ID number of the screen sessions you want is for use in scren -r by running screen -list first.
Even windows98 is a step up from ME in terms of long-term stability.
So tcp stacks would now have to sniff all packets to ensure that copyrighted material wasn't being transmitted?
I've seen a bunch of SP1 installs that take at least 30 minutes AFTER the download.
That's only if they are dumb enough to allow you to register it yourself. It would work really well if they had a person/people authorised do it, and only that person/those people is/are allowed ;)
How is it a poor ask slashdot article? The submitter had a question which I would say the majority of computer users do not know the answer to (due to the number of people who are always so surprised when I tell them that they have a worm already only 10 minutes after install). The submitter asked said question. This is exactly what "Ask Slashdot" is for.
Having said that, what you suggested does look like a pretty good answer, although I also have my doubts about the XP firewall (It's pretty good at stopping people from using their own computers though, so it might be good for stopping worms. Never tried it personally as I have always been hiding behind NAT).
It's not the GUI that's the problem, it's the unreliable parts under the GUI that cause the problem. For example, whenever I pull the power out of my computer and plug it back in again (after a proper shutdown of course), windows no longer recognises my mouse, wheras linux can.
:) )
Instead, I have to use the keyboard to go to device manager and "upgrade" the driver. This "upgrade" (to the same version) takes about 3 minutes.
Windows drivers are also decidedly flaky; where else will you find a driver which inexplicably stops working for absolutely no reason? Numerous times? With different drivers for different hardware?
Yes, GUI's are good. Yes, windows does have a very good GUI. Too bad that the GUI runs on a foundation of sand. This is completely ignoring their business practises too (which is why they are considered evil, not because they use a GUI).
You will also notice that windows is the only modern operating system (of the big 3 at least) which has a fairly useless CLI (Longhorn apparently will have quite an impressive one though
We're talking film frames here (With the motion blurring) not computer generated frames which we have already established are not the same (it's not real motion, so it doesn't behave like real motion).
Conventionally "refresh rate" (or "vertical scan rate") refers to the vertical synchronization frequency which determines how often the electron gun goes from the bottom of the screen to the top. This is what actually runs at ~60Hz(59.94Hz if you want to be picky), scanning 2 times per frame to provide the 29.97 actual frames/second of picture.
;)
How does interlace trick the eye into seeing ~60 FPS if there are not 60 different frames? I would imagine there are still only ~30 frames/second in the picture(If the frames changed between fields it wouldn't it look something like watching an interlaced film on a progressive screen? Not to mention having to interpolate that many extra frames from a 24fps progressive film).
Interlace was originally introduced in order to overcome the fact that early CRT phosphors did not respond fast enough to handle 60 progressive frames, so instead they made do with the alternate lines. Perhaps this is what you meant by 60 "frames"?
For anyone interested in all of this stuff, there is a lot of information at this page, just click the links for NTSC or PAL or even SECAM. you can also learn about interlacing and refresh rates there too
That was essentially the point of the post. The guy before me was using refresh rates as an example of why you would notice artifacts at 30fps, I was trying to correct that. I still think that most of what I tried to say(except the NTSC PAL mixup) was correct, it just wasn't very clear what that was. I agree that it probably shouldn't have been modded up as much as it did as it didn't provide the information in a good format, and many would probably walk away from it with the wrong idea.
it's close enough. If your eye can't notice the difference between 30 and 40 then it sure as hell can't tell the difference between 29.97 and 30