My point is that tty-based scheduling works fine if both groups among which you want to distinguish have a different tty.
With make -j64, this is ok: The make will have been started from a terminal (it's not important whether it's a Linux (console) terminal or within an X window), whereas most other GUI programs won't. So they can be distinguished from each other.
But in case of dvdstyler, it won't have a tty if it has been started directly through the menus, and so the scheduler cannot put it in a different group than all the other GUI apps (which also lack a tty).
Of course, if you start dvdstyler from the command line (from a konsole), this won't apply.
You can easily check which tty (if any) a program has associated by doing a ps auxww and looking at the 7th column (where it will say ? for "no tty" or name the tty (such as pts/9)
It creates "groups" based on the tty and then tries to even out the CPU utilization between groups.
Works fine if there are groups than can be distinguished by tty (such as the kernel compilation which has one, versus most interactive apps, which don't, or have a different one).
But it won't necessarily work if the task creating the load is also a ttyless GUI task (such as programs such as dvdstyler)
The patch being talked about is designed to automatically create task groups per TTY in an effort to improve the desktop interactivity under system strain.
I guess this works because the task loading up the machine will have been launched from a konsole, and thus be tied to a specific tty (the make -j64 example given later), so a tty-based scheduler can appropriately downgrade it.
But what if the "loading" task has been launched directly from the GUI (such as dvdstyler)? It won't have a tty attached to it, and will be indistinguishable from all the other tty-less tasks launched from the GUI (such as the firefox where you browse your webmail), or worse, Firefox itself creating the load (such as happens when you've got too many Facebook or Slashdot tabs open at once...)
If the net had evolved in a way that, for example, made it impossible for black people to use, or gay people, or atheists, or mormons, would you be equally opposed to correction under government edict?
Think about screen reader technology for the blind. Today even the best of these can not even handle a mildly complex page. I've tried them out at a friends house. They are crap.
Is it due to page size or page complexity? If it's complexity, CSS allows nowadays to have a rather linear HTML, and leave all intricacies of layout in the CSS.
If on the other hand it's size, then the responsibility of solving this lies within the reader. Some readers just linearly read the page, without a possibility of skipping or in-page navigation. Well, reader authors: just fricking add skipping!
But it doesn't stop at your content. You are also responsible for all the advertising on your site, even when you don't create that advertising. Why should you serve a page without advertising to the blind? If that's how you make money for your site, you need to serve the ads to everyone.
How would serving an ad-less page to the blind be worse than not serving a page at all? The blind may not become a revenue source, but they will speak positively about the page, that you didn't annoy them with pointless flash or other barriers, and their positive opinion might convince some of their sighted friends to visit the page, who will see the ads.
How do you serve music to the deaf? Hmmm mmmm dum de dumm ta ta de da mmmm de mmmm?
Obviously some content is not useful for everybody. But don't use that as an excuse to deliberately block access to content. A deaf person may not be able to hear music, but he might still want to buy tickets for a concert. Maybe he's buying them for his kids. Or maybe he's feeling the bass. Or maybe the performance is as much visual than auditory. Or maybe he's just enjoying the crowd.
Yes, ticketpod.nl, that means you!
And how do you serve online game content to the guy typing with his one hand, or his feet.
Same as above. Not all content may be useful to everybody. But please don't force people to play games just in order to be able to navigate your site.
The tools don't yet exist to do this in any economical way.
The problem with MAC spoofing is the incredibly difficult time the person who gets spoofed will have proving their innocence. And of course the legal types on the plaintiffs side will attempt to tell a jury that a MAC address uniquely identifies a machine, and if the poor innocent spoofee gets a normal non tech-savvy lawyer they will probably succeed.
Until they accuse the son of an influential senator or other important person.
This of course resulted in a slashdot ban of one of our address blocks.
Wow, he must have done some pretty impressive trolling then:-)
I'm no angel myself (my specialty back in the day was goatsing articles linked by Slashdot's stories if they happened to be hosted on an ASP or Cold Fusion server...), but never did this result in anything more than a temporary posting block of my IP range. Wait 24 hours, and you are ok. In the meantime, for urgent posts, there are proxies and/or ssh tunnels.
I told him if he wants to troll he better get an account with our competitor. Apparently, they had already kicked him off their network and sent his little bastard ass to us.
Hehe:-)
To the kids credit he never troll slashdot again after I re-enabled his account.
Get a grip. Wikipedia allows anonymous editing.No laws are being broken. Stop taking yourself so seriously. It's *not* becoming, and really, you look like a fool.
Why not just require user registration for IPs that come from Verizon?
Last I checked, Wikipedia registration was a joke. You can just make up a funny user name and a password, and you are ready to roll. No e-mail-based verification, no nothing. You can voluntarily add an e-mail to your registration, but this is only if we want to get notification (for when somebody undoes one of your edits, etc.), but this e-mail is by no means mandatory. Just leave it blank if you want to stay anonymous.
In fact, if I happen to vandalize, I usually register, as this makes me more anonymous (no IP address displayed for all to see which might be traced back to me).
When I do serious edits, on the other hand, I usually don't bother registering.
I love the idea of being able to make anonymous edits, but seriously wouldn't it make their lives easier by just requiring it for everyone?
Nice Freudian slip, indeed you register in order to be anonymous:-)
and his attorneys claimed the real owner was a man the client met in a sauna and paid $850 in cash.
Did they wipe off the sauna bench, and throw the condom into the trash at least?
This mystery seller had no address, no phone number, and was completely untraceable.
The mystery seller probably just preferred to stay in the closet...
When I subpoenaed the phone company for any unlisted phone number for this man, "Micheal Zubitskiy", the other side's lawyers tried to quash the subpoena.
... and rightfully so. How would you feel if the opposing party tried to nose around about what you do in bed? My God, Slashdot where have you left the respect for "thy neighbour's privacy"?
Problem with this approach is that the telcos would be punishing themselves more than they'd punish the lazy government employee who is supposed to read the reports.
Indeed, telcos need to dedicate manpower (or slow down their service to paying customers) to play that little game, whereas government can just throw 99% of these bogus reports into the trash where they belong, and only randomly spot check the remaining 1% to make sure that they are not just "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" repeated all over.
No, the most probably thing that will happen is that telcos will lie low, conveniently "forgetting" to report most changes, especially those that are trivial, hard to document, or on high pressure projects, and only submit one or two token change reports per year. Everybody will be happy, and the government bum paid for reading them will be just as lazy, and won't notice that between the report of the change from A to B, and the report of the change from C to D, the report from B to C was missing...
Not complying to such a regulation as a company is harder as there are just a few companies.
Companies do it differently. Rather than not complying at all, they "half comply". Just be sure to still occasionally file a report. It doesn't have to be the most significant or relevant network change. Just the one that is easiest to document. As long as the government hears from you from time to time, you should be fine.
This is really not that much different from the numerous other corporate processes. Have to fill in a weekly timesheet? How many people do you know who report their websurfing, coffee breaks, etc.? No, a timesheet doesn't need to be truthful, it only needs to add up to 40 hours (... or whatever else your theoretical weekly work time is...)
Well from the crown it may leech into your mouth which is bad.
From the filling it may leech into your bloodstream (which is worse...), and into your mouth (usally a small dot of filling is exposed...).
So, I'd say there is more reason to be concerned about a filling than about a crown.
The current terms of service (which you accept when you get this thing) are that the program is safe by definition. The user has to keep the pc free of viruses. Zerodays are the users fault as well, what so ever.
Lemme guess... and the app is only available for windows.
So basically they tell you "you have to expose your computer to attacks, but you (not we) are responsible when it does get attacked and your id stolen".
That was ten years ago, when the waiter had to take your card backstage to get the imprimt.
Nowadays, they do have those small portable readers which they bring right to your table. The card no longer leaves your sight...
...not that it would matter though, because there is no way to tell whether this is a legitimate reader or just some skimming device... especially since there are hundreds of different makes and looks of these readers.
Hehe, I actually know a guy who failed the yearly "technical control" of his car due to headlight fluid.
You see, when the big day came up, the car was rather dirty. He didn't care. But his wife cared: "You can't show the car around in that state!"
So she washed it...
But the headlights were not 100% watertight...
So he failed the "technical control" due to "water in the headlights"...
Slashdot Mirror
With make -j64, this is ok: The make will have been started from a terminal (it's not important whether it's a Linux (console) terminal or within an X window), whereas most other GUI programs won't. So they can be distinguished from each other.
But in case of dvdstyler, it won't have a tty if it has been started directly through the menus, and so the scheduler cannot put it in a different group than all the other GUI apps (which also lack a tty).
Of course, if you start dvdstyler from the command line (from a konsole), this won't apply.
You can easily check which tty (if any) a program has associated by doing a ps auxww and looking at the 7th column (where it will say ? for "no tty" or name the tty (such as pts/9)
It creates "groups" based on the tty and then tries to even out the CPU utilization between groups.
Works fine if there are groups than can be distinguished by tty (such as the kernel compilation which has one, versus most interactive apps, which don't, or have a different one).
But it won't necessarily work if the task creating the load is also a ttyless GUI task (such as programs such as dvdstyler)
The patch being talked about is designed to automatically create task groups per TTY in an effort to improve the desktop interactivity under system strain.
I guess this works because the task loading up the machine will have been launched from a konsole, and thus be tied to a specific tty (the make -j64 example given later), so a tty-based scheduler can appropriately downgrade it.
But what if the "loading" task has been launched directly from the GUI (such as dvdstyler)? It won't have a tty attached to it, and will be indistinguishable from all the other tty-less tasks launched from the GUI (such as the firefox where you browse your webmail), or worse, Firefox itself creating the load (such as happens when you've got too many Facebook or Slashdot tabs open at once...)
Good luck, Mister Gorsky!
If the net had evolved in a way that, for example, made it impossible for black people to use, or gay people, or atheists, or mormons, would you be equally opposed to correction under government edict?
Tell that to the bright people at ticketpod.nl ...
So you are fine with totally redesigning the net under government edict.
I'm not.
Neither am I.
Nor is forkazoo, as far as I can see. At least, nothing in the post you replied to indicated that he was.
Think about screen reader technology for the blind. Today even the best of these can not even handle a mildly complex page. I've tried them out at a friends house. They are crap.
Is it due to page size or page complexity? If it's complexity, CSS allows nowadays to have a rather linear HTML, and leave all intricacies of layout in the CSS.
If on the other hand it's size, then the responsibility of solving this lies within the reader. Some readers just linearly read the page, without a possibility of skipping or in-page navigation. Well, reader authors: just fricking add skipping!
But it doesn't stop at your content. You are also responsible for all the advertising on your site, even when you don't create that advertising. Why should you serve a page without advertising to the blind? If that's how you make money for your site, you need to serve the ads to everyone.
How would serving an ad-less page to the blind be worse than not serving a page at all? The blind may not become a revenue source, but they will speak positively about the page, that you didn't annoy them with pointless flash or other barriers, and their positive opinion might convince some of their sighted friends to visit the page, who will see the ads.
How do you serve music to the deaf? Hmmm mmmm dum de dumm ta ta de da mmmm de mmmm?
Obviously some content is not useful for everybody. But don't use that as an excuse to deliberately block access to content. A deaf person may not be able to hear music, but he might still want to buy tickets for a concert. Maybe he's buying them for his kids. Or maybe he's feeling the bass. Or maybe the performance is as much visual than auditory. Or maybe he's just enjoying the crowd.
Yes, ticketpod.nl, that means you!
And how do you serve online game content to the guy typing with his one hand, or his feet.
Same as above. Not all content may be useful to everybody. But please don't force people to play games just in order to be able to navigate your site.
The tools don't yet exist to do this in any economical way.
HTML and CSS have been existing for ages.
The problem with MAC spoofing is the incredibly difficult time the person who gets spoofed will have proving their innocence. And of course the legal types on the plaintiffs side will attempt to tell a jury that a MAC address uniquely identifies a machine, and if the poor innocent spoofee gets a normal non tech-savvy lawyer they will probably succeed.
Until they accuse the son of an influential senator or other important person.
most people are good and decent. really
But we are speaking about the (US) police here...
Leaving out all philosophical idealism, I see vandalism from some registered users. Registration won't stop the assholes.
Indeed. The smart vandals register, as this makes them more anonymous, not less. Indeed, registration hides your IP.
This of course resulted in a slashdot ban of one of our address blocks.
Wow, he must have done some pretty impressive trolling then :-)
I'm no angel myself (my specialty back in the day was goatsing articles linked by Slashdot's stories if they happened to be hosted on an ASP or Cold Fusion server...), but never did this result in anything more than a temporary posting block of my IP range. Wait 24 hours, and you are ok. In the meantime, for urgent posts, there are proxies and/or ssh tunnels.
I told him if he wants to troll he better get an account with our competitor. Apparently, they had already kicked him off their network and sent his little bastard ass to us.
Hehe :-)
To the kids credit he never troll slashdot again after I re-enabled his account.
... or he learned about tor...
A little jail time might be in order as well
Get a grip. Wikipedia allows anonymous editing.No laws are being broken. Stop taking yourself so seriously. It's *not* becoming, and really, you look like a fool.
You forgot about "depending upon where he happens to hail from. ". In some places, you can be jailed for claiming you're God
Why not just require user registration for IPs that come from Verizon?
Last I checked, Wikipedia registration was a joke. You can just make up a funny user name and a password, and you are ready to roll. No e-mail-based verification, no nothing. You can voluntarily add an e-mail to your registration, but this is only if we want to get notification (for when somebody undoes one of your edits, etc.), but this e-mail is by no means mandatory. Just leave it blank if you want to stay anonymous.
In fact, if I happen to vandalize, I usually register, as this makes me more anonymous (no IP address displayed for all to see which might be traced back to me).
When I do serious edits, on the other hand, I usually don't bother registering.
I love the idea of being able to make anonymous edits, but seriously wouldn't it make their lives easier by just requiring it for everyone?
Nice Freudian slip, indeed you register in order to be anonymous :-)
and his attorneys claimed the real owner was a man the client met in a sauna and paid $850 in cash.
Did they wipe off the sauna bench, and throw the condom into the trash at least?
This mystery seller had no address, no phone number, and was completely untraceable.
The mystery seller probably just preferred to stay in the closet...
When I subpoenaed the phone company for any unlisted phone number for this man, "Micheal Zubitskiy", the other side's lawyers tried to quash the subpoena.
... and rightfully so. How would you feel if the opposing party tried to nose around about what you do in bed? My God, Slashdot where have you left the respect for "thy neighbour's privacy"?
just fire off emails every time something changes, every time someone gets a new DHCP address...
Careful there... the spooks might actually enjoy these... instant IP-to-subscriber mapping!
Oh, and here I was hoping that Paul Chambers is gay...
Indeed, telcos need to dedicate manpower (or slow down their service to paying customers) to play that little game, whereas government can just throw 99% of these bogus reports into the trash where they belong, and only randomly spot check the remaining 1% to make sure that they are not just "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" repeated all over.
No, the most probably thing that will happen is that telcos will lie low, conveniently "forgetting" to report most changes, especially those that are trivial, hard to document, or on high pressure projects, and only submit one or two token change reports per year. Everybody will be happy, and the government bum paid for reading them will be just as lazy, and won't notice that between the report of the change from A to B, and the report of the change from C to D, the report from B to C was missing...
Not complying to such a regulation as a company is harder as there are just a few companies.
Companies do it differently. Rather than not complying at all, they "half comply". Just be sure to still occasionally file a report. It doesn't have to be the most significant or relevant network change. Just the one that is easiest to document. As long as the government hears from you from time to time, you should be fine.
This is really not that much different from the numerous other corporate processes. Have to fill in a weekly timesheet? How many people do you know who report their websurfing, coffee breaks, etc.? No, a timesheet doesn't need to be truthful, it only needs to add up to 40 hours (... or whatever else your theoretical weekly work time is...)
How about stuff like "Do us all a favour, go fuck a power outlet"...
That'd be a really teeny dick... How about "Do us all a favour, go fuck a light socket"? Already more plausible...
Methinks someone mipselled Phosphorescence effect...
Well from the crown it may leech into your mouth which is bad.
From the filling it may leech into your bloodstream (which is worse...), and into your mouth (usally a small dot of filling is exposed...).
So, I'd say there is more reason to be concerned about a filling than about a crown.
The current terms of service (which you accept when you get this thing) are that the program is safe by definition. The user has to keep the pc free of viruses. Zerodays are the users fault as well, what so ever.
Lemme guess... and the app is only available for windows.
So basically they tell you "you have to expose your computer to attacks, but you (not we) are responsible when it does get attacked and your id stolen".
But for that, they would not need to add that security hole. They could just install it from the regular update server of the app.
Plausible deniability!
Do you ever eat at nice restaurants?
That was ten years ago, when the waiter had to take your card backstage to get the imprimt.
Nowadays, they do have those small portable readers which they bring right to your table. The card no longer leaves your sight...
You see, when the big day came up, the car was rather dirty. He didn't care. But his wife cared: "You can't show the car around in that state!"
So she washed it...
But the headlights were not 100% watertight...
So he failed the "technical control" due to "water in the headlights"...