Older versions seem to work fine. In newest ones I get hangs, especially in Firefox. But if I turn off "View in browser" it's ok. And you're theory that its 'lame tricks to speed things up' sounds plausible - I found that if I turn off "Allow fast webview" it's ok too.
Switching between processes will always be more efficient than switching between threads because processes have their own address space.
On most CPUs, switching address spaces is painfully slow because you need to flush the TLB. The cache gets clobbered too. So the classic Windows server paradigm is to have a pool of threads waiting for requests from the outside world, all running in the address space of one server process. This means that you can share state in memory, protected by some kind of lock - perhaps something lightweight like a spinlock.
It's hard to get right though - most PC programmers tend to screw up the implementation - either by having one big lock which kills performance, or a whole shitload of locks with ill defined semantics which kills stability/maintainability. People with some experience of embedded code tend to be better though, since histortically embedded systems worked on CPUs without MMUs where true processes weren't possible - everything was a thread.
Which reminds me
Q) Why did the multithreaded chicken cross the road. A) the other side. To get to
I'm English. I'm an atheist and I don't worship any 'verses'.
The US gave aid to the mujaheddin, it's true. Aiding the mujaheddin was a reasonable thing to do, because it brought down the Soviet Union. But the fatal mistake they made was to channel it through the ISI, who gave it to people like Osama who were as anti Western as they were anti communist, because they had a hostile, Islamist agenda. Once the Taliban took over, the Pakistan was virtually the only country in the world that recognised them. Apart from the Saudis of course, who had much the same goals. And the UAE for some reason.
Fighting for freedom is of course no vice, but it depends how you do it. Those Kasmiri guys don't seem to have qualms about targetting civillians do they? e.g. here or here.
And I don't believe they are fighting for their freedom - lots of these guys are fighting for an Islamic state. And up until recently, they were supported by the ISI.
Maybe you should question what your media/government/ISI tells you a bit. After all an Islamic state in Pakistan won't be much fun for you.
Not, I hasten to add, that Pakistan is among the worst offenders in this area, what with having had a woman prime minister for example
I dunno, I get the impression that Pakistan is a mixture. There's a westernised elite which produced Benazir Bhutto and all the democratic politicians, but I think that the only really control the cities. Arfa is the poster child for these people.
Then there's the 'tribal areas' where the government has no say whatsoever, where Taliban like strongmen still run things, and where girls don't even go to school.
And up until recently, the SIS - the intelligence service and the army was basically run by the fundies - they created the Taliban for example, and sent arms to terrorists in Kashmir. The US tried to get Musharref to rein these people in, but it's hard to know whether he really wants to do this, and if he has the power to do it if he does.
The whole point of the article is that if Pakistan turns out kids like her, her parents must come from a group of middle class people in Pakistani who are westernised and probably extremely hostile to the fundamentalists.
If you look at the picture, she's not wearing a veil, and must been pretty well educated, both of which are things that the fundies strongly disapprove of.
I thought that was kind of sad really. I've read about people with Aspergers Syndrome who get into trouble like this. Their lives must really suck.
Whereas the rest of us understand the unwritten rule that when a security screener at an airport recommends you remove your shoes, it's a very different use of the word recommend than "I recommend you see this movie."
Is windows easy to use? Really? Is that why so many people get trojans, viruses, backdoors, malware, etc?
The people that designed Windows didn't really have the right ideas about security, it's true. The NT based OS's are better, but they still listen on too many damn IP ports for my taste. IE has too many insecure features to be securable.
On the other hand, if you turn on the built in Windows firewall and auto updates, get a free antivirus package and switch to Firefox (you can lock down IE, but it's not exactly easy), you're pretty much locked down.
The effort to do that is much less than switching to a new OS. And sooner or later, Microsoft will make Windows work like this out of the box, so there won't be any effort needed at all.
I think if you want Linux to succeed, you need to start making positive arguments, not harping on about security.
That's not completely crazy. When you buy a cheap inkjet, it comes with a starter cartridge with a low capacity. Once that expires (or dries out), a full replacement cartridge may actually cost more than the original printer.
The printer might actually be sold at a loss, and they make money from the high margins on the replacement cartridges.
Hmm, so if I decide to reuse your favourite radio/TV channel to send my data, cloberring the original content, that would be ok, it's free speech after all.
I think you're missing the important point that with spread spectrum, you can have multiple users of the same frequency, so there doesn't need to be a single owner. With old style modulation, that is not the case, so there does.
But the channel still has a capacity limit - if too many people use it the noise floor will rise.
It reminds you of the Shannon information theorem - the bit rate of a channel is a function of both bandwidth and signal to noise ratio. With FSK modulation, only one sender could use the channele, so the FCC auctioned off the bandwidth.
With Spread Spectrum, the FCC would need to do something more complex - limit the bitrate per sender perhaps, assuming the channel was going to be regulated. Note that a deregulated channel is likely to gum up eventually because the noise floor will rise. Presumably the bit rate per sender would eventually drop to the point where new senders would find it unusable. If it was cell based of course, you could just add new cells and reduce the power of the existing ones the way phone networks do.
You's still need to have some regulation though - someone would need to certify that transceivers on the network wouldn't interfere with each other - e.g. crash and leave their transmitters active. This is true now of mobile phones - all models need to be tested by some trusted body to make sure that they don't kill the cell. The FCC or whoever forces all the users of the mobile phone frequency range to use the same modulation system, and also use the same higher level protocols that decide when they can transmit.
So really the level of regulation for a high tech spread spectrum cell based network is actually more than for a simpler broadcast system with one broadcaster.
It's not as simple as that - I worked on embedded code that targets several OS's not to mention a pile of variants, and killing off support for the one OS sped up development enormously.
E.g. consider each time you make a change, you need to test on all the supported platforms. If you need to fix someonething quickly, the extra build and test cycles really slow you down.
Most of the bugs were in the lowlevel OS dependent code, so n platforms means n times as many of them. Some code works in a very different way on the different OS's and it takes developers a long time to really learn this.
Anyone saying that multiplatform development is no harder than single platform clearly hasn't done it.
As other people have pointed out synthesizing a gram of antimatter would require an enormous amount of energy and an industrial strength particle accelerator, far more sophisticated than the state of the art ones in the West.
And the sort of people that try to blow up planes don't seem to be particularly technically savvy, to say the least. E.g. Richard Reid - the shoe bomber - managed to get hold of plastic explosive, but failed to Google for how to detonate it. He tried to light it with a match.
The return to service on London Underground was delayed last night after Tube drivers refused to carry out security inspections on trains. The drivers argued that police or army officers should give the all-clear before services could resume. The Rail Maritime and Transport union said that drivers had been asked to carry out security inspections on Tube trains, which was "completely unacceptable".
Bob Crow, the RMT union's general secretary, said: "We don't believe drivers should be checking trains until police or army officers have given the all clear.
"We obviously apologise for any delays this will cause, but the threat is too serious for such crucial inspections to be done by untrained staff."
The union said that it had been kept in the dark over security plans and called for a review of the arrangements that would involve the trade unions.
Dude, it might be THE freakin' NSA, that's why you can't find the North Shore Agency on the net. Hell, they probably posted the GP post just to trick people into thinking it was safe to fuck with them. It's all some sick game to destroy some hapless geek. I read about this sort of thing on that timecube website.
Pay the money, unplug the phone, burn any magnetic media you have and put on a tinfoil hat when you sleep. Then you might just get away with it.
on the page labelled 105 (which is helpfully at page 119 in the PDF file) there's a picture of Margret Thatcher. I grew up in the Thatcher era and it gives me the heebee jeebies.
In Word, I can disable images and thus be protected, by in Acrobat 5.1 I can't. Frankly, I'll take the VBScript worms - you can reformat your PC, but you can't reformat your brain.
There is a picture of Margret Thatcher on page 105.
If you grew up in the UK in the Thatcher era, between 1979 and 1990, your brain may have a vulnerability that causes it to crash when exposed to these kinds of images.
At time of writing, no patch is a available.
The following workarounds are available.
1) Do not download the pdf file. If you have already downloaded it, delete it without opening it. 2) Print the PDF file, and ask someone born after 1990 or before 1940 to sort through the printout, find page 105 and destroy it. If they have read about the Thatcer era or lived through it, they should destroy the page *without looking at it*, by placing the printout face down and counting through to page 105. 3) Disable image display in your pdf file reader, or use a pdf reader which does not support images. 4) View the pdf in a hex editor.
Actually, one of the best lines in Stargate SG1 was something like
(on finding an artifact with a bunch of writing)
Earth Archaelogist: (lists the scripts)... and that's Linear A.
Alien: That's Goa'uld (alien language)
Well, I thought it was a nice touch. In SG1, ancient human civilisations worshipped aliens and built cargo cult style non working imitations of their technology after they left. The idea that Linear B is the linguistic equivalent of this, i.e. and imitation of the alien Linear A is cool.
Bah, you youngsters have it easy.
In my day, we toggled the opcodes into memory by hand by shorting tracks on a board. All the documentation was in Linear A
No. Bullshit. They tried to knock over the World Trade Center in 1993 when Bill Clinton was president. Why? They bombed the USS Cole during Clinton's term. Why? They slaughtered hundreds at our embassies in Africa. Why? President Clinton mostly ignored them, why did they still want to get us? All because of Gulf 1? If there's no connection between al Qaeda and Iraq, why in the world would these terrorists be so upset about Iraq?
Actually it's worse than that. Muslims didn't really have much to complain about US foreign policy up to that point.
They'd helped the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan, and stopped the Serbian genocide against Muslims in Kosovo. Plus they'd worked to get a peace treaty between Israel and the Palestinians, subtly moving to a more neutral role in the Arab/Israeli dispute post cold war.
Al Quaeda attacked anyway at the Khobar Towers, where the US responded by indicting people in an American court. And then bombed they the embassies and the US Cole. Only then did the US retaliate
Whoa there. The concentration camps in the Boer War and WWII were Not the same thing
Boer War style large scale internment is neither morally acceptable nor a particularly effective counter insurgency technique, but it's not on the same level as the Nazis.
Slashdot Mirror
It depends on version of Acrobat Reader.
Older versions seem to work fine. In newest ones I get hangs, especially in Firefox. But if I turn off "View in browser" it's ok. And you're theory that its 'lame tricks to speed things up' sounds plausible - I found that if I turn off "Allow fast webview" it's ok too.
Don't bother hackers. I checked and it's all underage midget Nazi furry Canadian stuff. Ewww.
That reminds of a classic blog comment
"You're such a crazy, sociopathic bitch that I'm amazed we haven't dated"
Switching between processes will always be more efficient than switching between threads because processes have their own address space.
On most CPUs, switching address spaces is painfully slow because you need to flush the TLB. The cache gets clobbered too. So the classic Windows server paradigm is to have a pool of threads waiting for requests from the outside world, all running in the address space of one server process. This means that you can share state in memory, protected by some kind of lock - perhaps something lightweight like a spinlock.
It's hard to get right though - most PC programmers tend to screw up the implementation - either by having one big lock which kills performance, or a whole shitload of locks with ill defined semantics which kills stability/maintainability. People with some experience of embedded code tend to be better though, since histortically embedded systems worked on CPUs without MMUs where true processes weren't possible - everything was a thread.
Which reminds me
Q) Why did the multithreaded chicken cross the road.
A) the other side. To get to
That depends whose notes you want to take.
I'm English. I'm an atheist and I don't worship any 'verses'.
The US gave aid to the mujaheddin, it's true. Aiding the mujaheddin was a reasonable thing to do, because it brought down the Soviet Union. But the fatal mistake they made was to channel it through the ISI, who gave it to people like Osama who were as anti Western as they were anti communist, because they had a hostile, Islamist agenda. Once the Taliban took over, the Pakistan was virtually the only country in the world that recognised them. Apart from the Saudis of course, who had much the same goals. And the UAE for some reason.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban
Fighting for freedom is of course no vice, but it depends how you do it. Those Kasmiri guys don't seem to have qualms about targetting civillians do they? e.g. here or here.
And I don't believe they are fighting for their freedom - lots of these guys are fighting for an Islamic state. And up until recently, they were supported by the ISI.
Maybe you should question what your media/government/ISI tells you a bit. After all an Islamic state in Pakistan won't be much fun for you.
I dunno, I get the impression that Pakistan is a mixture. There's a westernised elite which produced Benazir Bhutto and all the democratic politicians, but I think that the only really control the cities. Arfa is the poster child for these people.
Then there's the 'tribal areas' where the government has no say whatsoever, where Taliban like strongmen still run things, and where girls don't even go to school.
And up until recently, the SIS - the intelligence service and the army was basically run by the fundies - they created the Taliban for example, and sent arms to terrorists in Kashmir. The US tried to get Musharref to rein these people in, but it's hard to know whether he really wants to do this, and if he has the power to do it if he does.
If the comment came from a 30 year old man or woman in the West, I'd definitely criticise it.
But somehow, I think I can live with a bit of radical feminism from a ten year old Pakistani girl.
The whole point of the article is that if Pakistan turns out kids like her, her parents must come from a group of middle class people in Pakistani who are westernised and probably extremely hostile to the fundamentalists.
If you look at the picture, she's not wearing a veil, and must been pretty well educated, both of which are things that the fundies strongly disapprove of.
I thought that was kind of sad really. I've read about people with Aspergers Syndrome who get into trouble like this. Their lives must really suck.
Whereas the rest of us understand the unwritten rule that when a security screener at an airport recommends you remove your shoes, it's a very different use of the word recommend than "I recommend you see this movie."
Actually, the keyboard driver already lets you remap keys. If you remap them to scan code 0x0000 they are disabled. http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/input/w2kscan -map.mspx
The people that designed Windows didn't really have the right ideas about security, it's true. The NT based OS's are better, but they still listen on too many damn IP ports for my taste. IE has too many insecure features to be securable.
On the other hand, if you turn on the built in Windows firewall and auto updates, get a free antivirus package and switch to Firefox (you can lock down IE, but it's not exactly easy), you're pretty much locked down.
The effort to do that is much less than switching to a new OS. And sooner or later, Microsoft will make Windows work like this out of the box, so there won't be any effort needed at all.
I think if you want Linux to succeed, you need to start making positive arguments, not harping on about security.
That's not completely crazy. When you buy a cheap inkjet, it comes with a starter cartridge with a low capacity. Once that expires (or dries out), a full replacement cartridge may actually cost more than the original printer. The printer might actually be sold at a loss, and they make money from the high margins on the replacement cartridges.
Hmm, so if I decide to reuse your favourite radio/TV channel to send my data, cloberring the original content, that would be ok, it's free speech after all.
I think you're missing the important point that with spread spectrum, you can have multiple users of the same frequency, so there doesn't need to be a single owner. With old style modulation, that is not the case, so there does.
But the channel still has a capacity limit - if too many people use it the noise floor will rise.
It reminds you of the Shannon information theorem - the bit rate of a channel is a function of both bandwidth and signal to noise ratio. With FSK modulation, only one sender could use the channele, so the FCC auctioned off the bandwidth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon's_theorem
With Spread Spectrum, the FCC would need to do something more complex - limit the bitrate per sender perhaps, assuming the channel was going to be regulated. Note that a deregulated channel is likely to gum up eventually because the noise floor will rise. Presumably the bit rate per sender would eventually drop to the point where new senders would find it unusable. If it was cell based of course, you could just add new cells and reduce the power of the existing ones the way phone networks do.
You's still need to have some regulation though - someone would need to certify that transceivers on the network wouldn't interfere with each other - e.g. crash and leave their transmitters active. This is true now of mobile phones - all models need to be tested by some trusted body to make sure that they don't kill the cell. The FCC or whoever forces all the users of the mobile phone frequency range to use the same modulation system, and also use the same higher level protocols that decide when they can transmit.
So really the level of regulation for a high tech spread spectrum cell based network is actually more than for a simpler broadcast system with one broadcaster.
It's not as simple as that - I worked on embedded code that targets several OS's not to mention a pile of variants, and killing off support for the one OS sped up development enormously. E.g. consider each time you make a change, you need to test on all the supported platforms. If you need to fix someonething quickly, the extra build and test cycles really slow you down. Most of the bugs were in the lowlevel OS dependent code, so n platforms means n times as many of them. Some code works in a very different way on the different OS's and it takes developers a long time to really learn this. Anyone saying that multiplatform development is no harder than single platform clearly hasn't done it.
I wouldn't worry about it too much.
As other people have pointed out synthesizing a gram of antimatter would require an enormous amount of energy and an industrial strength particle accelerator, far more sophisticated than the state of the art ones in the West.
And the sort of people that try to blow up planes don't seem to be particularly technically savvy, to say the least. E.g. Richard Reid - the shoe bomber - managed to get hold of plastic explosive, but failed to Google for how to detonate it. He tried to light it with a match.
Well the RMT certainly don't
Err, no thanks. This is London we're talking about. When I used to get the tube to work, it was like travelling in a Hieronymous Bosch painting.
Dude, it might be THE freakin' NSA, that's why you can't find the North Shore Agency on the net. Hell, they probably posted the GP post just to trick people into thinking it was safe to fuck with them. It's all some sick game to destroy some hapless geek. I read about this sort of thing on that timecube website.
Pay the money, unplug the phone, burn any magnetic media you have and put on a tinfoil hat when you sleep. Then you might just get away with it.
PDF's can contain 'sploits for your brain.
E.g this one
on the page labelled 105 (which is helpfully at page 119 in the PDF file) there's a picture of Margret Thatcher. I grew up in the Thatcher era and it gives me the heebee jeebies.
In Word, I can disable images and thus be protected, by in Acrobat 5.1 I can't. Frankly, I'll take the VBScript worms - you can reformat your PC, but you can't reformat your brain.
There is a picture of Margret Thatcher on page 105.
If you grew up in the UK in the Thatcher era, between 1979 and 1990, your brain may have a vulnerability that causes it to crash when exposed to these kinds of images.
At time of writing, no patch is a available.
The following workarounds are available.
1) Do not download the pdf file. If you have already downloaded it, delete it without opening it.
2) Print the PDF file, and ask someone born after 1990 or before 1940 to sort through the printout, find page 105 and destroy it. If they have read about the Thatcer era or lived through it, they should destroy the page *without looking at it*, by placing the printout face down and counting through to page 105.
3) Disable image display in your pdf file reader, or use a pdf reader which does not support images.
4) View the pdf in a hex editor.
Bah, you youngsters have it easy. In my day, we toggled the opcodes into memory by hand by shorting tracks on a board. All the documentation was in Linear A
Al Quaeda attacked anyway at the Khobar Towers, where the US responded by indicting people in an American court. And then bombed they the embassies and the US Cole. Only then did the US retaliate
Whoa there. The concentration camps in the Boer War and WWII were Not the same thing
Boer War style large scale internment is neither morally acceptable nor a particularly effective counter insurgency technique, but it's not on the same level as the Nazis.