When my daughter was 3, I was spending a lot of time working at home on my laptop. She was obsessed with it and insisted on pounding on the keyboard while I was working on it.
Ah yes, I did something similar with my niece when she was less than one, IIRC. During a visit from my younger brother and his little family I let her sit on my lap and play with her grandma's computer - banging away at the keyboard mostly but also moving the mouse. I might have let her do it a few times over the several-day visit. Well they went home but during the next of our regular phone calls I was firmly told not to let her do it again. My niece was now wanting to do the same on her parent's computer. While they were was using it. And she was getting upset because uncle softy (that's me) let her do it, but mummy and daddy wouldn't! Oh the joys of uncle-hood...
Once again the Enightenment category/icon is misused on a Slashdot story.
I guess it goes to show how long Slashdot has been around, that it has a category for the Enlightenment window manager. And how certain software packages can come and go. But I hear that E is being used on mobile phones now...
The trouble is, the new government doesn't really want to actually _do_ anything, their preference being to push pieces of paper around and bleat platitudes.
Just as soon as they form a taskforce to investigate which pieces of paper to push and which platitudes to bleat. I voted Labor last year and I'm still waiting for them to do much beyond repealing Work Choices. Fucking do something!
Ah, thank you! Someone finally explained the differences.
The larger chunk/block size of eDonkey would definitely make a difference. Perhaps it is larger in order to reduce the load on the servers, which have to track not only what files everyone has, but the parts of each file that everyone has. Having larger chunks cuts down on storage, processing, and transmission of chunk completion.
I notice that aMule has an option to change the amount of upstream bandwidth allocated to each upload 'slot'. But the FAQ says that clients are restricted to having at least 3 upload slots. So if you're still on lowly ADSL like me, each peer is only getting 1-2 KB/s, when it would arguably be better to focus on only one at a time.
eDonkey's credit/etc system does appear rather weak. When I first began using it, I had assumed that the servers stored some sort of 'reputation' for each client. After all, each client has a signature of some sort. But this is not the case unfortunately.
Ok, being web/HTTP-based, BitTorrent is easier to search. But eDonkey has its own system of credits, ratings, and scores. No P2P network today would be able to survive without some way of limiting the impact of leechers.
You assume wrong about my misconceptions. What you just described is basically, AFAIK, any modern P2P network. What did I write that made you think I don't know how P2P works? I've been using P2P since Gnutella (I never used Napster). Did you not notice my 3-digit user id? Young-uns today...
If I'm already uploading, someone should already be paying me back.
Then just who is this "someone"? The majority of home internet connections have been asymmetric for over a decade and AFAIK all modern P2P clients limit the download/upload ratio. If everyone is downloading three or four times what they're uploading, it just doesn't add up. How can BitTorrent, as it's been suggested, start downloading almost immediately when eDonkey supposedly takes longer? Is there something in the protocol/clients, or are there simply lots of BT users willing to sit around uploading?
with ed2k I enter in the 2000th position in 2000 different queues.
Ok, I'll give you that. It often takes a while to start a download, especially if it's not widely available. eDonkey seems to be setup for college students - run it 24/7 and everything is queued. I wonder how BitTorrent does it differently. Surely not every BT download starts immediately - there can't always be enough idle peers (with the content you want) to make that possible. Is your experience mainly with new or old content, or both?
Is it just me, or is the BitTorrent world slowly converging on features and an architecture that the eDonkey network has had for years?.
I mean, BitTorrent started out as a way to download big files, like Linux ISO's. Then people started making big torrent search web sites, similar to eDonkey servers. Then people made BitTorrent clients that had a queue of downloads (e.g utorrent), quite similar to eDonkey clients. Now these people have made Torrent searching distributed, just like eDonkey and Kademlia.
I've never been much impressed by BitTorrent (gee, can you tell?). Just what is it that makes it more popular than eDonkey/eMule? Is it just the reputation and hype that has built up around "Torrents"?
Because you're just pushing the problem somewhere else. The actual problem is homelessness; the homeless sleeping on park benches is just a symptom of the problem. The homeless obviously need somewhere to sleep. Making park benches uncomfortable to sleep on could (I imagine) make the homeless look somewhere else to sleep. Like people's front/backyards. It's the law of unintended consequences.
What society should be doing it helping these people. You can't just treat them like pests and hope they go away. They're still people, they just don't have a home.
...partitioning is a good idea for any disk. It prevents fragmentation...
How do you figure that? Modern Unix filesystems actively avoid fragmentation by being careful about allocating blocks to files. With more free space, a filesystem has more options as to where to place a new file. It's better to have one big filesystem with 10G free, than four or five with only about 2-3G free each.
Oh, you're right - I was quickly scanning through Wikipedia articles and overlooked that info about the K5. It's interesting because it still uses the same basic method - converting x86 instructions to RISC instructions (29k in this case). But AMD still bought NexGen and the K6 was much better as a result.
Around 40% I believe of the original Pentium was x86 translation layer.. it was the first chip to use a RISC-like internal setup.
No it wasn't. The later Pentium Pro was the first Intel processor to use this method. The Nexgen Nx586 was the first ever (for x86 at least). AMD bought Nexgen and used them to create the K5 (launched slightly after the PPro).
While GSM started many years ago, it is not a single technology. It has been enhanced with new technologies over the years - GPRS in 1997 and EDGE in 1999. These provide 2.5/2.75G services. UMTS is a proper 3G technology - it uses a new W-CDMA modulation but still uses the GSM protocols and networks. GSM lives on.
As far as using S3 on its own - it would make a good store for static content. You have a site, say www.example.com, but have a separate host for static files e.g static.example.com. This has long been common practice - having a simple light-weight web server for static files (style sheets, icons and other images, etc). For S3 you setup a CNAME record in your DNS that points to s3.amazonaws.com and create a 'bucket' in S3 with the hostname (static.example.com). Bingo, cheap and scalable off-site storage for your website. I'm not sure if S3 would be best for small files though. It would probably be better suited to bigger media files like podcasts/vodcasts, FLV/MP4 videos for playing in flash, etc.
Those that doubt this theory get little or no funding
Except for the ones that got oil money.
Just as the theory at one time said that the earth is flat, that the sun revolves around the earth...
Except the Flat Earth theory is a myth - "with extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat.". It certainly wasn't a scientific theory. And even if it was, there's nothing wrong with science accepting new evidence and abandoning an old theory. You sound a lot like the anti-science right-wing Christians with their line about "science is always changing its mind about things, but the bible has never changed!"
...and twice that we are experiencing global cooling
Global cooling is also a theory that never had significant scientific support. By the time the media covered it in the mid-1970's, the cooling trend had stopped and there were major concerns about the effects of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
It is also interesting to note that those that favor the theory that humans cause global warming are the same people who told me in 1972 that our landfills would be full by 1990 and are the advocates of large government control...with by extension leaves us less free.
Oh I see. Some ambiguous group of "them" were wrong a long time ago on a totally different matter, and apparently hold differing political views, so therefore you're right on this matter. Well how about you go and research your ideas better before making sweeping claims?
Cache memories are consuming most of the die in your typical high-performance CPU, these days.
On single-threaded CPU's, perhaps. But look at the Sun UltraSPARC T1 and T2. They are multithreaded - each core rotates between up to four threads on each clock cycle. When a cache miss occurs, it simply pulls the affected thread from rotation and continues with the remaining threads while fetching the data in the background. This means cache misses have a much smaller impact on performance than they do on single-threaded CPU's. Thus they need much less cache to maintain performance and throughput.
Putting main memory on the die just isn't practical, except for application-specific embedded microprocessors. It would be expensive and wouldn't actually give you much of a speed increase. Cache is a way of using a small amount of fast memory to speed up some slow memory. The nice thing about it is that the speed increase is out of proportion to its size because of common access patterns. And it's transparent.
At present time, the 98th Soyuz flight is docked to the International Space Station.
True. But there have also been 26 unmanned flights in the Soyuz programme. And don't forget the Progress spacecraft, derived from the Soyuz spacecraft and used for resupply. According to Wikipedia there have been 42 original Progress flights, 61 Progress M's, and 11 Progress M1's. That's another 114 flights, taking the total of Soyuz + Progress to almost twice as many flights as the STS.
Then there's the Soyuz rocket that is used to launch all of those, as well as other payloads. According to Starsem, who also use the rocket to launch commercial payloads, the Soyuz launch system has been used 1727 times. I don't have figures on how many of those have failed, but I bet the rate is better than the STS.
The Soyuz program is over forty years old and may not be as sexy as the shuttle. But both the rocket and spacecraft are good, simple designs that have had a long time to work most of the bugs out. You'd have to be stupid to not at least consider using them.
Still wrong on the "SATA II" front. The organisation that is now called "SATA IO" used to be called "SATA II" (I can't find what the acronym stood for). When they released the specs for SATA 3Gb/s, people saw "SATA II" and thought the two I's were roman numerals and concluded that this was SATA version 2. Unfortunately, this misunderstanding really caught on. It's been several years now and I still see hard drives and other gear (motherboards, PCI cards, enclosures, etc) being marked as "SATA II" or "SATA 2" compatible. *sigh*
Slashdot Mirror
When my daughter was 3, I was spending a lot of time working at home on my laptop. She was obsessed with it and insisted on pounding on the keyboard while I was working on it.
Ah yes, I did something similar with my niece when she was less than one, IIRC. During a visit from my younger brother and his little family I let her sit on my lap and play with her grandma's computer - banging away at the keyboard mostly but also moving the mouse. I might have let her do it a few times over the several-day visit. Well they went home but during the next of our regular phone calls I was firmly told not to let her do it again. My niece was now wanting to do the same on her parent's computer. While they were was using it. And she was getting upset because uncle softy (that's me) let her do it, but mummy and daddy wouldn't! Oh the joys of uncle-hood...
Once again the Enightenment category/icon is misused on a Slashdot story.
I guess it goes to show how long Slashdot has been around, that it has a category for the Enlightenment window manager. And how certain software packages can come and go. But I hear that E is being used on mobile phones now...
Just as soon as they form a taskforce to investigate which pieces of paper to push and which platitudes to bleat. I voted Labor last year and I'm still waiting for them to do much beyond repealing Work Choices. Fucking do something!
Ah, thank you! Someone finally explained the differences.
The larger chunk/block size of eDonkey would definitely make a difference. Perhaps it is larger in order to reduce the load on the servers, which have to track not only what files everyone has, but the parts of each file that everyone has. Having larger chunks cuts down on storage, processing, and transmission of chunk completion.
I notice that aMule has an option to change the amount of upstream bandwidth allocated to each upload 'slot'. But the FAQ says that clients are restricted to having at least 3 upload slots. So if you're still on lowly ADSL like me, each peer is only getting 1-2 KB/s, when it would arguably be better to focus on only one at a time.
eDonkey's credit/etc system does appear rather weak. When I first began using it, I had assumed that the servers stored some sort of 'reputation' for each client. After all, each client has a signature of some sort. But this is not the case unfortunately.
Ok, being web/HTTP-based, BitTorrent is easier to search. But eDonkey has its own system of credits, ratings, and scores. No P2P network today would be able to survive without some way of limiting the impact of leechers.
You assume wrong about my misconceptions. What you just described is basically, AFAIK, any modern P2P network. What did I write that made you think I don't know how P2P works? I've been using P2P since Gnutella (I never used Napster). Did you not notice my 3-digit user id? Young-uns today...
Then just who is this "someone"? The majority of home internet connections have been asymmetric for over a decade and AFAIK all modern P2P clients limit the download/upload ratio. If everyone is downloading three or four times what they're uploading, it just doesn't add up. How can BitTorrent, as it's been suggested, start downloading almost immediately when eDonkey supposedly takes longer? Is there something in the protocol/clients, or are there simply lots of BT users willing to sit around uploading?
Ok, I'll give you that. It often takes a while to start a download, especially if it's not widely available. eDonkey seems to be setup for college students - run it 24/7 and everything is queued. I wonder how BitTorrent does it differently. Surely not every BT download starts immediately - there can't always be enough idle peers (with the content you want) to make that possible. Is your experience mainly with new or old content, or both?
Is it just me, or is the BitTorrent world slowly converging on features and an architecture that the eDonkey network has had for years?.
I mean, BitTorrent started out as a way to download big files, like Linux ISO's. Then people started making big torrent search web sites, similar to eDonkey servers. Then people made BitTorrent clients that had a queue of downloads (e.g utorrent), quite similar to eDonkey clients. Now these people have made Torrent searching distributed, just like eDonkey and Kademlia.
I've never been much impressed by BitTorrent (gee, can you tell?). Just what is it that makes it more popular than eDonkey/eMule? Is it just the reputation and hype that has built up around "Torrents"?
The eMule network has ed2k URI's which use a hash function to identify a specific file. I don't see them used much, but I'm not a big P2P'er.
Your mom is a classy lady!
Great, so it's a repeat of the GCC 2.96 debacle.
Oh, and the link went to the wrong journal entry. Here's the right one.
Because you're just pushing the problem somewhere else. The actual problem is homelessness; the homeless sleeping on park benches is just a symptom of the problem. The homeless obviously need somewhere to sleep. Making park benches uncomfortable to sleep on could (I imagine) make the homeless look somewhere else to sleep. Like people's front/backyards. It's the law of unintended consequences.
What society should be doing it helping these people. You can't just treat them like pests and hope they go away. They're still people, they just don't have a home.
How do you figure that? Modern Unix filesystems actively avoid fragmentation by being careful about allocating blocks to files. With more free space, a filesystem has more options as to where to place a new file. It's better to have one big filesystem with 10G free, than four or five with only about 2-3G free each.
Oh, you're right - I was quickly scanning through Wikipedia articles and overlooked that info about the K5. It's interesting because it still uses the same basic method - converting x86 instructions to RISC instructions (29k in this case). But AMD still bought NexGen and the K6 was much better as a result.
No it wasn't. The later Pentium Pro was the first Intel processor to use this method. The Nexgen Nx586 was the first ever (for x86 at least). AMD bought Nexgen and used them to create the K5 (launched slightly after the PPro).
While GSM started many years ago, it is not a single technology. It has been enhanced with new technologies over the years - GPRS in 1997 and EDGE in 1999. These provide 2.5/2.75G services. UMTS is a proper 3G technology - it uses a new W-CDMA modulation but still uses the GSM protocols and networks. GSM lives on.
If by "third world" you mean most of the world, then yes. Otherwise you're a stupid troll.
It's Roughly Drafted fanboy nonsense. That's really all that needs to be said.
As far as using S3 on its own - it would make a good store for static content. You have a site, say www.example.com, but have a separate host for static files e.g static.example.com. This has long been common practice - having a simple light-weight web server for static files (style sheets, icons and other images, etc). For S3 you setup a CNAME record in your DNS that points to s3.amazonaws.com and create a 'bucket' in S3 with the hostname (static.example.com). Bingo, cheap and scalable off-site storage for your website. I'm not sure if S3 would be best for small files though. It would probably be better suited to bigger media files like podcasts/vodcasts, FLV/MP4 videos for playing in flash, etc.
Except for the ones that got oil money.
Except the Flat Earth theory is a myth - "with extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat.". It certainly wasn't a scientific theory. And even if it was, there's nothing wrong with science accepting new evidence and abandoning an old theory. You sound a lot like the anti-science right-wing Christians with their line about "science is always changing its mind about things, but the bible has never changed!"
Global cooling is also a theory that never had significant scientific support. By the time the media covered it in the mid-1970's, the cooling trend had stopped and there were major concerns about the effects of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Oh I see. Some ambiguous group of "them" were wrong a long time ago on a totally different matter, and apparently hold differing political views, so therefore you're right on this matter. Well how about you go and research your ideas better before making sweeping claims?
On single-threaded CPU's, perhaps. But look at the Sun UltraSPARC T1 and T2. They are multithreaded - each core rotates between up to four threads on each clock cycle. When a cache miss occurs, it simply pulls the affected thread from rotation and continues with the remaining threads while fetching the data in the background. This means cache misses have a much smaller impact on performance than they do on single-threaded CPU's. Thus they need much less cache to maintain performance and throughput.
Putting main memory on the die just isn't practical, except for application-specific embedded microprocessors. It would be expensive and wouldn't actually give you much of a speed increase. Cache is a way of using a small amount of fast memory to speed up some slow memory. The nice thing about it is that the speed increase is out of proportion to its size because of common access patterns. And it's transparent.
True. But there have also been 26 unmanned flights in the Soyuz programme. And don't forget the Progress spacecraft, derived from the Soyuz spacecraft and used for resupply. According to Wikipedia there have been 42 original Progress flights, 61 Progress M's, and 11 Progress M1's. That's another 114 flights, taking the total of Soyuz + Progress to almost twice as many flights as the STS.
Then there's the Soyuz rocket that is used to launch all of those, as well as other payloads. According to Starsem, who also use the rocket to launch commercial payloads, the Soyuz launch system has been used 1727 times. I don't have figures on how many of those have failed, but I bet the rate is better than the STS.
The Soyuz program is over forty years old and may not be as sexy as the shuttle. But both the rocket and spacecraft are good, simple designs that have had a long time to work most of the bugs out. You'd have to be stupid to not at least consider using them.
Still wrong on the "SATA II" front. The organisation that is now called "SATA IO" used to be called "SATA II" (I can't find what the acronym stood for). When they released the specs for SATA 3Gb/s, people saw "SATA II" and thought the two I's were roman numerals and concluded that this was SATA version 2. Unfortunately, this misunderstanding really caught on. It's been several years now and I still see hard drives and other gear (motherboards, PCI cards, enclosures, etc) being marked as "SATA II" or "SATA 2" compatible. *sigh*
You forgot the jewel-encrusted chalice.