I digress. If an ISP didn't patch yet, it means they are incompetent. When the Debian SSL vulnerability was discovered, I sent two emails out, one to my server hosting company and one to my phone company. The server hosting company replaced their ssl cert within a day, the phone company took 4 months, meanwhile their online user gateway was open to sniffing.
I ditched the phone company when my email didn't get a reply in a week.
There might be valid reasons to pick Fedora instead of Debian based systems, but package management is not one of them. Debian's package management is absolutely superior compared to everything else that I know about out there.
Microwaves contain insufficient energy to directly chemically change substances by ionization, and so are an example of nonionizing radiation. The word "radiation" refers to the fact that energy can radiate, and not to the different nature and effects of different kinds of energy. Specifically, the term in this context is not to be confused with radioactivity. Due to this fact, it has not yet conclusively been shown that microwaves (or other nonionizing electromagnetic radiation) have any biological effects. This is separate from the risks associated with very high intensity exposure, which can cause thermal burns, in the same way that infrared emissions from a hot heating element can do so, and not due to any unique property of microwaves specifically.
The mercury depends on efficiency aswell. Modern CFLs have <=2mg mercury content, (at least the CFLs I own). Over a 5 year period, the electricity needed for CFLs, generated by coal based power plants in some portion, releases 2.4mg of mercury into the air. For incandescents the number is 10mg over a 5 year period. LED lighting is currently less efficient than CFL, so more mercury gets into the air.
The question is really, whether you prefer 2.4mg of mercury in air plus 2mg in the landfills, or more than 2.4mg of mercury in the air. Until LEDs become more efficient than CFLs, I'll opt for CFLs.
Note, there is a confusion over LED vs CFL efficiency. LEDs generate light more efficiently than CFLs, but they do so in a narrow arc. To make it useful for everday applications conversion to a wider arc takes place and that causes efficiency loss.
Indeed. GP's post seems to imply that he's so used to the problem that he doesn't even want to hear about it anymore. That's the equivalent of just giving up and letting politicians and government people do whatever they want. That's precisely what they want and precisely what we shouldn't let them do.
The funny part is that I'm actual pro-EU and actually feel European. The concept is good, it's just that some EU institutions are degraded and corrupt and need to be eliminated or thoroughly remade.
We need elected legislators instead of these puppets.
Indeed. The Lisbon treaty was also a legalese mess, so I didn't want it for that reason either. When some politicians speak of the "irish slap in the face" and somehow challenging the will of the people and make Ireland vote again or some such shit, my blood boils.
First of all, not only Ireland rejects the treaty, there are a lot of other countries undecided yet and only the irish people were asked in a referendum, the rest of the countries pushed it through only the respective national parliaments. This was after the previous treaty that was officially labelled the EU constitution was rejected by some countries holding a public referendum before.
So it's not just Ireland, but these idiots somehow feel like pretending only Ireland is the problem and the rest of the 27 countries are all for the new constitution. Bollocks. They even think that the will of the irish people can be ignored if the politicians don't like the outcome, by this standard the will of the people can be ignored in the other countries as well, so they should be made to vote again aswell.
It's not just the commission though, that's making these stupid statements, but elected statesmen aswell. These people should be ashamed of themselves for putting together such a shoddy constitution and instead they try to bully around the few countries that have had the sense to say no. To hell with this.
I can think of a lot of reasons why this would be very useful. If SSDs come out with a large enough tolerance for writes, then applications open up for server usage.
A database for example would profit a lot from the huge random I/O speed boosts. The problem is of course that under any serious write load coupled with fsync, unless you're using BBWC, you're writing frequently to disk.
Also, with SSD going mainstream, the MTBF should increase for harddrives - I hope to see 5+ years of guarantees after the third or fourth generation of SSDs come out. If all goes well, we'll have a problem of destroying data, instead of the problem of preserving data.
Slashdot Mirror
It was an ssl cert, not a patch they had to exchange. Their ssl cert was compromised for months. Unacceptable.
Yeah, I should have previewed. My english is still more cromulant than some people's though ;-)
Click here.
I digress. If an ISP didn't patch yet, it means they are incompetent. When the Debian SSL vulnerability was discovered, I sent two emails out, one to my server hosting company and one to my phone company. The server hosting company replaced their ssl cert within a day, the phone company took 4 months, meanwhile their online user gateway was open to sniffing.
I ditched the phone company when my email didn't get a reply in a week.
...Windows hardware back. Seriously, who is stupid enough today not to support linux?
I was referring to LowNMU. Not quite unrelated I would think.
Besides, the user's experience is what matters on a system, not the developer's.
I'm not a maintainer of any package in debian, however I did help package a few times.
I didn't run into any issue with debian-local changes so far. Why, is there a problem with the way dpkg is doing it?
There might be valid reasons to pick Fedora instead of Debian based systems, but package management is not one of them. Debian's package management is absolutely superior compared to everything else that I know about out there.
The bible is 4th century BCE scifi.
It has won a popularity contest though 600 years later.
It seems really apt to include a link to this. I waited for a long time to be able to link this on /.
The mercury depends on efficiency aswell. Modern CFLs have <=2mg mercury content, (at least the CFLs I own). Over a 5 year period, the electricity needed for CFLs, generated by coal based power plants in some portion, releases 2.4mg of mercury into the air. For incandescents the number is 10mg over a 5 year period. LED lighting is currently less efficient than CFL, so more mercury gets into the air.
The question is really, whether you prefer 2.4mg of mercury in air plus 2mg in the landfills, or more than 2.4mg of mercury in the air. Until LEDs become more efficient than CFLs, I'll opt for CFLs.
Note, there is a confusion over LED vs CFL efficiency. LEDs generate light more efficiently than CFLs, but they do so in a narrow arc. To make it useful for everday applications conversion to a wider arc takes place and that causes efficiency loss.
Because then noone would be allowed to drive.
Indeed. GP's post seems to imply that he's so used to the problem that he doesn't even want to hear about it anymore. That's the equivalent of just giving up and letting politicians and government people do whatever they want. That's precisely what they want and precisely what we shouldn't let them do.
Oh, you mean luck!
Indeed. The Lisbon treaty was also a legalese mess, so I didn't want it for that reason either. When some politicians speak of the "irish slap in the face" and somehow challenging the will of the people and make Ireland vote again or some such shit, my blood boils.
First of all, not only Ireland rejects the treaty, there are a lot of other countries undecided yet and only the irish people were asked in a referendum, the rest of the countries pushed it through only the respective national parliaments. This was after the previous treaty that was officially labelled the EU constitution was rejected by some countries holding a public referendum before.
So it's not just Ireland, but these idiots somehow feel like pretending only Ireland is the problem and the rest of the 27 countries are all for the new constitution. Bollocks. They even think that the will of the irish people can be ignored if the politicians don't like the outcome, by this standard the will of the people can be ignored in the other countries as well, so they should be made to vote again aswell.
It's not just the commission though, that's making these stupid statements, but elected statesmen aswell. These people should be ashamed of themselves for putting together such a shoddy constitution and instead they try to bully around the few countries that have had the sense to say no. To hell with this.
It's more of a social problem - to educate people that if they throw their old SSD away, someone can still easily grab data off of it.
I can think of a lot of reasons why this would be very useful. If SSDs come out with a large enough tolerance for writes, then applications open up for server usage.
A database for example would profit a lot from the huge random I/O speed boosts. The problem is of course that under any serious write load coupled with fsync, unless you're using BBWC, you're writing frequently to disk.
Also, with SSD going mainstream, the MTBF should increase for harddrives - I hope to see 5+ years of guarantees after the third or fourth generation of SSDs come out. If all goes well, we'll have a problem of destroying data, instead of the problem of preserving data.
Oh, snap!
TFA says for a 60G disk, with 50G written daily, the drive will last for 33 years in respect to wear.
Hi, I'm GlaDoS, how may I help with your photo proooooocess-ss-ing needs?
Disregard that, I suck cocks - err the article was talking about throughput not speed of transfer.
Speed of light, anyone?
It's called "Perl".
Oh, hello Big Bang, nice to meet you!