It's just that windows doesn't give you a built in way to see all those sensors.
Do a little googling. I know I have pretty graphs, with HDD temerature for each of my hard disks, CPU temp, and Motherboard temp. I also get graphs of fan speed.
On linux install sensord with the graph option. And also install munin.
They haven't had a release in 11 months, I don't think there are any really major bugs in there. It's probably one of those, it's stable, but I'm not happy with it, so I'm calling it beta projects.
And crashing IE by using javascript is probably not a javascript bug..... IE has lots of reasons it might crash.
I installed that, and suddenly I was able to write standard css, and not go crazy trying to make IE work.
It's actually quite wonderful. I don't know why Microsoft can't aford to fix it's own bugs, and needs other people to do it for them, but hey, at least it works.
That's why you should not require people to change their password.
Yes I know everyone tells you it's important - they are wrong. Unless you are in the millitary requiring poeple to frquently change their passwords leads to WEAKER passwords.
I've seen it over and over, they'll pick easy to remember (and thus crack) passwords, write them down, use the same password everywhere, all kinds of bad things.
Make them set ONE good password, and leave it like that.
"Of course someone could make a map of the same area - they just have to collect their own data instead of ripping off someone else's data (or licence the existing data)."
That's not really true. You can not copyright a basic fact (where a road, landmass, etc. is). So yes, you can rip off the mapping data.
However cartographers mess with them - they create fake roads and add them to the map - if you copy that you did violate the copyright, because that fake road is not a basic fact.
Replying to myself: I may have switched horizontal and vertical in my post. I can see it going either way, but probably switched makes more sense.
Also the top middle bottom stuff, they should take an offset: eg: middle-10px; not sure of how to write that in good CSS sytax though. And baseline, and the rest of the aligners are legal as well.
Why did you forget to include the ability horizontally align multiple items?
It's the main thing that's missing from CSS. Was it too hard to implement or write syntax for?
I'm thinking something like:
horizontal-align-to: .
eg: horizontal-align-to: #box middle top; Will align the top of this element to the middle of #box.
The same for vertical align would be nice as well. For horizontal elements restrict it to elements within a parent (and allow ID's (or use class name) to be duplicated within different parents, to make repeating multiple rows easier). For vertical it must be set on a block level element.
Alternate syntax:
On the reference element: horizontal-align-to: #name_me position; On the to be aligned one: horizontal-align-from: #his_name position;
So: horizontal-align-to: #rowman top; horizontal-align-from: #rowman middle;
Will align the middle of the element, to the top of rowman.
Re:Cheaper isn't everything
on
The Art of SQL
·
· Score: 1
And you missed my point.
For this particular book, why do you need to purchase from them? You know what the book is, so no service needed, and selection is also not aplicable.
So how is buying this book from them (which is what you recomended) any different then charity?
Re:Cheaper isn't everything
on
The Art of SQL
·
· Score: 1
In fact, if you have access to a local, independently-owned bookseller in your area, you should be buying your books there instead of online.
Stacey's Books in San Francisco doesn't give me Amazon's 34 percent discount -- in fact, it gives me 10 percent -- but it is a wonderful resource and not one I'd like to see disappear.
How about if people buy their books online, or where ever, and then send Stacey's Books some charity?
Personally I don't see how that's different.
The concept of buying someplace with a higher price to "support them" (as opposed to some other benefit, like service or selection) is no different then charity, so why not just skip the buying step and send the charity directly?
"How do you determine exactly when a fetus has life? It is not an easy question to answer."
The Jewish answer here is quite interesting. Acording to Jewish halacha a fetus is alive when it's born! Specifically when it takes it's first breath, because it is at that moment that it gets a soul.
And yet Judaism forbids abortion anyway. It's not beause you are killing an actual life but because killing a _potential_ life is also forbidden! This is a concept that seems to have totally escaped the notice of pro/con abortion debaters. They all argue when life begins, but no one seems to talk about if killing a potential life is a problem.
Note that there is no obligation to create the life, it's only if it's already there that you are not alowed to stop it.
A life has potential life, when, if you did nothing (bad) to it it would live. So an IVF egg is not life because you have no obligation to implant it into someone. But a fetus, if you don't kill it, will normally eventually be born, so you are not alowed to kill it.
The origin for the halacha comes from rules on the death penalty. After a trial, if someone is found guily and gets the death penalty, delay is not permitted. The penalty must be carried out that day. (The trial can last as long as it needs to of course.) If a pregnant women is to get the death penalty what do you do? The answer is that you don't wait, because the fetus is considered part of her.
Another source is if someone is attacking someone else, and accidentally kills a fetus. (i.e. they were negligent and endangered the woman) The penalty is different then if they had killed the woman, because a fetus is not a person yet.
LIGHT IS NOT MOVING BACKWARD! Only the "pulse" is.
Look at the simulator and just imagine changing the waves slightly so that the pulse moves backward instead of forward.
The "science" here is not new at all, and the real kicker is this piece of nonsense: "Boyd is already working on ways to see what will happen if he can design a pulse without a leading edge."
He sort of redeems himself by saying: If I do that then it won't work. But just asking the question seems to me that he doesn't understand what's happening here, and is far too excited about something rather simple.
"Worse yet, someone pointed out (who? I want to give you credit) that an active adversary could trivially inject fake signals into your radio telescopes and control the contents of your one time pad."
Um, that was the article that pointed it out!
But in any case very insightful post with the key size estimate.
"This is true by default, but is not a requirement."
I know. It's just a good idea to do so.
"By using a command like mke2fs -j -b 1024 -m 0 -N 2000000/dev/hdb1 one can have a 1K sized blocks. I argue that with mostly continous filesystems, the block size is largely irrelevant to performance."
And there you have the difference between theory and reality:) Actual testing finds you to be wrong. Remember there is 4 times the overhead in dealing with smaller block sizes - and also that when you don't match the page size of the CPU in question it adds even more overhead. You have a blocks in use map that is 4 times larger, and for every file the block list is 4 times larger. That wastes a little bit of space, and more overhead.
"A small block size reduces the wasted space at the ends of files. For me, going from 4K to 1K gave me 4 GB more free space on my 160 GB drive for my current files - 2.5%."
No it didn't. If you assume a maximum waste of 3K per file that would mean you have more then 1 million (1,048,576) files! I somehow doubt that. Esecially in light of the next paragraph:
The actual savings came from using -N 2000000. You significantly reduced the number of inodes you have on the hd. inodes take up space and that's where your 4GB came from. And here's the best part - if you really do have millions of files on the system you are in trouble because you only have 2 million inodes!
"It may be that Linux will provide 1K filesystem blocks on top of the 4K phsyical blocks. Performance will be worse. However, the original ext filesystem provided half K blocks, and that option is now moribund."
I quite double that it would do so. Why would anyone want that? Performance would be embarassing. And half K blocks are no problem when the sector size is half a K. You can't have a block size smaller then the sector size.
"For new systems, this standard is fine. However, I run my machines into the ground, and the better ones have lasted fifteen years. Given that my current machine could last another ten years, it would be a shame to have to toss it into the landfill in five years because the disk drives can't be replaced. Progress is good. Forced upgrades are not."
Did you even read the RTF? First of all the large sector sizes are only for large hd's. Buy a small one and you'll be fine. Second, they have backward compatibility modes - not for the hardware, but for the OS (i.e. windows) which can't deal with unexpected sector sizes. Linux can handle the sector sizes no problem, so no land fill for you.
Slashdot Mirror
better video
Um, yah, that's already there.
It's just that windows doesn't give you a built in way to see all those sensors.
Do a little googling. I know I have pretty graphs, with HDD temerature for each of my hard disks, CPU temp, and Motherboard temp. I also get graphs of fan speed.
On linux install sensord with the graph option. And also install munin.
Here's the sourceforge link: http://sourceforge.net/projects/ie7/
They haven't had a release in 11 months, I don't think there are any really major bugs in there. It's probably one of those, it's stable, but I'm not happy with it, so I'm calling it beta projects.
And crashing IE by using javascript is probably not a javascript bug..... IE has lots of reasons it might crash.
'Don't worry, IE7 will solve all of your problems."
Well, actually it does. Except I'm talking about this IE7: http://dean.edwards.name/IE7/
I installed that, and suddenly I was able to write standard css, and not go crazy trying to make IE work.
It's actually quite wonderful. I don't know why Microsoft can't aford to fix it's own bugs, and needs other people to do it for them, but hey, at least it works.
That's why you should not require people to change their password.
Yes I know everyone tells you it's important - they are wrong. Unless you are in the millitary requiring poeple to frquently change their passwords leads to WEAKER passwords.
I've seen it over and over, they'll pick easy to remember (and thus crack) passwords, write them down, use the same password everywhere, all kinds of bad things.
Make them set ONE good password, and leave it like that.
"Of course someone could make a map of the same area - they just have to collect their own data instead of ripping off someone else's data (or licence the existing data)."
That's not really true. You can not copyright a basic fact (where a road, landmass, etc. is). So yes, you can rip off the mapping data.
However cartographers mess with them - they create fake roads and add them to the map - if you copy that you did violate the copyright, because that fake road is not a basic fact.
He didn't reply to my +5 moderated question: http://interviews.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=189 030&cid=15570901
/.replied to it, and he didn't answer either.
Did I achive perfection? Is there nothing that can be said about what I wrote? No one on
Maybe it wasn't a question? It was though, - of the "do you think this is a good idea" type. And maybe "why didn't anyone else think of this".
Replying to myself: I may have switched horizontal and vertical in my post. I can see it going either way, but probably switched makes more sense.
Also the top middle bottom stuff, they should take an offset: eg: middle-10px; not sure of how to write that in good CSS sytax though. And baseline, and the rest of the aligners are legal as well.
Why did you forget to include the ability horizontally align multiple items?
It's the main thing that's missing from CSS. Was it too hard to implement or write syntax for?
I'm thinking something like:
horizontal-align-to: .
eg: horizontal-align-to: #box middle top; Will align the top of this element to the middle of #box.
The same for vertical align would be nice as well. For horizontal elements restrict it to elements within a parent (and allow ID's (or use class name) to be duplicated within different parents, to make repeating multiple rows easier). For vertical it must be set on a block level element.
Alternate syntax:
On the reference element: horizontal-align-to: #name_me position;
On the to be aligned one: horizontal-align-from: #his_name position;
So:
horizontal-align-to: #rowman top;
horizontal-align-from: #rowman middle;
Will align the middle of the element, to the top of rowman.
And you missed my point.
For this particular book, why do you need to purchase from them? You know what the book is, so no service needed, and selection is also not aplicable.
So how is buying this book from them (which is what you recomended) any different then charity?
How about if people buy their books online, or where ever, and then send Stacey's Books some charity?
Personally I don't see how that's different.
The concept of buying someplace with a higher price to "support them" (as opposed to some other benefit, like service or selection) is no different then charity, so why not just skip the buying step and send the charity directly?
"Hmmm. Which category does slashdot fit into? That's what I thought..."
Don't you mean slackdot?
I'll give tou two tips:
1. Preview
2. Go into your prefs and change Comment Post Mode to 'Plain Old Text'.
You can't compare engins and hard disks.
You can fly with just one engine, but if any of your drives die you are lost.
If you raid5, then 1 drive can die, vs all but one of them in an airplane.
I suppose you could raid0 all 7 drives, then you could compare engines and drives.
Why'd you buy it? You can get a 24GB used hard disk for less then $25, so what's the benefit of tape?
"How do you determine exactly when a fetus has life? It is not an easy question to answer."
The Jewish answer here is quite interesting. Acording to Jewish halacha a fetus is alive when it's born! Specifically when it takes it's first breath, because it is at that moment that it gets a soul.
And yet Judaism forbids abortion anyway. It's not beause you are killing an actual life but because killing a _potential_ life is also forbidden! This is a concept that seems to have totally escaped the notice of pro/con abortion debaters. They all argue when life begins, but no one seems to talk about if killing a potential life is a problem.
Note that there is no obligation to create the life, it's only if it's already there that you are not alowed to stop it.
A life has potential life, when, if you did nothing (bad) to it it would live. So an IVF egg is not life because you have no obligation to implant it into someone. But a fetus, if you don't kill it, will normally eventually be born, so you are not alowed to kill it.
The origin for the halacha comes from rules on the death penalty. After a trial, if someone is found guily and gets the death penalty, delay is not permitted. The penalty must be carried out that day. (The trial can last as long as it needs to of course.) If a pregnant women is to get the death penalty what do you do? The answer is that you don't wait, because the fetus is considered part of her.
Another source is if someone is attacking someone else, and accidentally kills a fetus. (i.e. they were negligent and endangered the woman) The penalty is different then if they had killed the woman, because a fetus is not a person yet.
Sorry that's not what's happening.
2 0/20.html is what is happening.
This: http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/
LIGHT IS NOT MOVING BACKWARD! Only the "pulse" is.
Look at the simulator and just imagine changing the waves slightly so that the pulse moves backward instead of forward.
The "science" here is not new at all, and the real kicker is this piece of nonsense: "Boyd is already working on ways to see what will happen if he can design a pulse without a leading edge."
He sort of redeems himself by saying: If I do that then it won't work. But just asking the question seems to me that he doesn't understand what's happening here, and is far too excited about something rather simple.
".. And obviously replace your hostname with mine"
I think you got that backward.
Not exactly - you are forgetting the work/time involved in stripping out the pieces, cleaning them, and selling them.
Call Forwarding
It's better to use more JPEG compression. You can try it and see, but also think about it like this:
Both methods throw aways data, scaling throws away data blindly, JPEG compression throws aways the data least likely to be noticed.
To do a test - "compress" an image by scaling it, then try jpeg compressing with different quality levels until you match the file size. Compare.
BTW the higher the resolution of an image, the better it compresses.
Meaning this:
100x100 = 10,000 pixels.
1000x1000 = 1,000,000
The second one has 100 times as many pixels, yet, when you compress it, the file is only 10 times larger then the first - it's not 100 times larger.
Does higher resolution look 100 times better, or 10 times better? Don't know.
"Worse yet, someone pointed out (who? I want to give you credit) that an active adversary could trivially inject fake signals into your radio telescopes and control the contents of your one time pad."
Um, that was the article that pointed it out!
But in any case very insightful post with the key size estimate.
"sure, mass is one form of gravitational charge"
"And others are?"
Others are energy. Actually mass is NOT the the gravitational charge, energy is. And mass is just a special case of energy.
"This is true by default, but is not a requirement."
/dev/hdb1
:) Actual testing finds you to be wrong. Remember there is 4 times the overhead in dealing with smaller block sizes - and also that when you don't match the page size of the CPU in question it adds even more overhead. You have a blocks in use map that is 4 times larger, and for every file the block list is 4 times larger. That wastes a little bit of space, and more overhead.
I know. It's just a good idea to do so.
"By using a command like
mke2fs -j -b 1024 -m 0 -N 2000000
one can have a 1K sized blocks. I argue that with mostly continous filesystems, the block size is largely irrelevant to performance."
And there you have the difference between theory and reality
"A small block size reduces the wasted space at the ends of files. For me, going from 4K to 1K gave me 4 GB more free space on my 160 GB drive for my current files - 2.5%."
No it didn't. If you assume a maximum waste of 3K per file that would mean you have more then 1 million (1,048,576) files! I somehow doubt that. Esecially in light of the next paragraph:
The actual savings came from using -N 2000000. You significantly reduced the number of inodes you have on the hd. inodes take up space and that's where your 4GB came from. And here's the best part - if you really do have millions of files on the system you are in trouble because you only have 2 million inodes!
"It may be that Linux will provide 1K filesystem blocks on top of the 4K phsyical blocks. Performance will be worse. However, the original ext filesystem provided half K blocks, and that option is now moribund."
I quite double that it would do so. Why would anyone want that? Performance would be embarassing. And half K blocks are no problem when the sector size is half a K. You can't have a block size smaller then the sector size.
"For new systems, this standard is fine. However, I run my machines into the ground, and the better ones have lasted fifteen years. Given that my current machine could last another ten years, it would be a shame to have to toss it into the landfill in five years because the disk drives can't be replaced. Progress is good. Forced upgrades are not."
Did you even read the RTF? First of all the large sector sizes are only for large hd's. Buy a small one and you'll be fine. Second, they have backward compatibility modes - not for the hardware, but for the OS (i.e. windows) which can't deal with unexpected sector sizes. Linux can handle the sector sizes no problem, so no land fill for you.