The only problem: you'll need a lot of these devices to generate usable amount of energy.
Exactly, that's what I meant with "space-effective" and "cost-effective". If these devices can be cheap and compact, efficiency isn't really a concern.
Yet, you're forgetting that heat is exactly what we have too much of. It's for all practical purposes free, so efficiency energy-wise doesn't matter.
What matters, is the efficiency time-wise, space-wise or monetary cost-wise. Having twice as much power from the same heat would be nice, but it isn't the point.
Try to install Ubuntu without random crashes all the way, including some Python entrails thrown into your face.
Perhaps it's a problem with faulty RAM. Memtest86+ is your friend. I would also look into dodgy power.
This is good advice; in fact, most experienced people do this on a twitch reflex.
However, the problems were not totally random but happening once in X tries in the same places. Somehow, this is the way Windows tends to fail -- the same places on the same machine, just unreliably[1].
You can't ever be certain, but I believe the hardware was sound. It did work for a long time without any issues, there was quite a bit of time since the box was opened, too.
[1]. Yeah, Windows even crashes unreliably. Go figure.
I do not claim that I know Ubuntu. What I claim is that two different attempts to install 6.06 on two completely different machines kept failing badly, and this is 2 of 2 installs I witnessed.
One of these installs was done by an educated but non-technical user (one of the biologist types who churn huge number-crunching programs). On every try one of the following problems appeared: * partman crashed without a word (the most usual one) * a dialog popped up during the debootstrap phase, filled with random Python entrails (happened twice) * a dialog with nothing but "The installer crashed [Ok]" without any extra information (happened thrice) * network config locking up (with iwconfig being stuck in interruptible sleep; too bad, the user vehemently denied all my offers to help, so I couldn't investigate this more closely) The machine was known to be good -- it used to dual boot an earlier Ubuntu and Win2k, then just Win2k for a while after a disk upgrade.
Such tries went on for many hours. I would personally skip the installer and debootstrap it by hand, but I kept getting told that if the installer can't be forced to work, the rest will be incapable of being forced to work as well -- so I let the user continue, just watching (while doing some idle other tasks myself). The next day, I she told me she switched to Gentoo which installed cleanly the first time. Oh well.
or else one of those disgruntled Debian Purist types that shows up in every Ubuntu discussion.
Yeah, I'm a Debian user/maintainer. No, this is not an Ubuntu discussion -- it's one about vanilla Debian with just a few digressions about Ubuntu.
Apache 2.0 has been in Debian for ages. I'm afraid that you, sir, are a troll. Also, the plans for 2.2 migration speak about having 2.2 as a replacement instead of putting it side-to-side, so no, Etch probably won't have that Apache 2.0 you want.
MySQL 5.0 was released in October 2005, Sarge in June 2005. So...?
Even Woody installer had the benefit of being stable. Try to install Ubuntu without random crashes all the way, including some Python entrails thrown into your face.
I had the unpleasant experience of watching someone install Ubuntu Dapper recently; it's on the level of Windows! Eye-candy thrown in, everything hidden from the user, random faults without any reasonable way to debug.
I would put an installer that works over one which looks pretty.
Don't laugh so loud, grasshopper. This question is adequate.
And the answer is: yes. K*BSD arches are in good shape, but none of them are release candidates for Etch. Nexenta (OpenSolaris kernel) gathered so much bad karma because of Sun's CDDL's intentional incompatibilities with GPL causing problems that Nexenta isn't going to be an official arch anywhere soon. Debian/Hurd isn't that bad, but too bad, Hurd remains just a toy for now. And Debian/Minix stays at the level of talks for now. It's only Debian/win32 which died completely.
So yeah, Etch does run Linux, but most likely Alien/Lenny/??? (Etch+1) will have K*BSD variants.
What I mentioned, was the most extreme case, intentionally ridiculous.
My point isn't that unheard of, though. For real-life examples, what about Ubuntu vs Debian? Ubuntu folks put a good deal of work into desktop integration, and have a tremendous following among desktop users. In fact, a load of uninformed people here on/. call Debian "irrelevant" and "obsolete", even though Ubuntu intentionally remains nothing but Debian with some eye-candy added. The squablings between the two projects are very minor and most of Ubuntu improvements go to Debian, which provides the vast majority of packages.
From my nearly server-only point of view, Ubuntu is worse than Debian/experimental, because the eyecandy causes breaks. From desktop users' point of view, Ubuntu is Teh Uber, because they do get all the newest doodads presented in a nice form. There is more desktop users than server folks, so, Debian+(a bit) would get a lot more votes than 'the official Debian'.
Just because the largest portion of MySpace users seem to have hideous pages doesn't mean that those running MySpace are complete morons and can't manage their system.
Even if there's no implication A => B, both A and B can be true.
I'm not a developer on the project or anything...but can I go ahead and submit Drupal:)
It really is a great open source CMS...just not mine;)
You can change a single character and submit it:p
This raises a question: when a fork stops being "a fork" and starts being something totally separate? In a majority of Free Software projects, never. And, to cloud things up, usually you have thousands on thousands of small pieces of code from elsewhere. And this is good; good for anything but this particular flawed contest.
His solution to the hack that destroys a section of your profile is not that he will fix the site, but that you should install Flash 9.
So if you're not a Windows or Mac OS X (PowerPC) user, you're SOL.
To the contrary.
If your kids use Windows or you're intelligence-challenged yourself, you're screwed.
The rest of us are safe.
"To help transition to the new protocol and for peer-to-peer networking features, Microsoft has functionality called IPv6 tunneling in Vista. This functionality could expose PCs that otherwise would be invisible behind a firewall, Symantec said."
Once again, Microsoft creates vulnerabilities in its operating system by adding new functionality that the majority of the world is not asking for.
As someone experienced with netfilter-fu, let me tell you:
IPv4 is the root of all evil. Not the basic design of it, which is fine -- what is wrong is NAT and related problems.
Switching from IPv4 to IPv6 is like switching from all itty bitty charsets to utf-8. An investment in upgrading your software that pays off in a silver bullet to most interchange problems.
A simple setup can be easily made secure, a complex one will rarely ever be. Any non-trivial IPv4 setup is by definition complex. Change it to IPv6 and suddenly all you need to do is filtering unwanted traffic.
Holy crap. They list most of the worst offenders as "green" -- even crap like valueclick.com or lop.com. I see that they fit into McAfee's quality pretty well.
Faced with memory leaks on one side, and swiss cheese security on the other, the choice is pretty obvious. If it's slow -- I can survive. If it gets me pwned -- I'm dead (well, or vmwared...).
This said, these words are posted using eLinks. Now, if Taco changed the layout to move all the menus and links to the end of the file...
Don't forget that all non-long-term stock-market investments are a zero-sum game. Actually, less-than-zero as there are taxes and fees involved. Any profit produced comes either from someone who lost that much, or from the Ponzi effect.
Talking about openssh's security, here's a vital patch: -PermitRootLogin yes +PermitRootLogin no
Come on, how in the hell the first can be the default? Is it that hard to log in first to your normal user account?
And don't start on "but having no root and using sudo is better". This is a fallacy, true only if your normal user password and the root one happen to be the same, or you have a root login available from network. Two separate passwords are always better than just one, and forcing people to type "sudo" before every line makes little sense -- quite a lot of servers have nothing to do on them for non-root (firewall, dom0, etc).
Xen doesn't look like a very realistic solution for the primary uses of virtualization technology, developers testing their software on a different OS, or sysadmins running virtual servers (production, or testing of Windows platforms).
1. Anywhere but on Windows, you don't need a copy of another OS on your desktop to do tests. 2. If you want to run virtual servers, you do care about resource usage. Both the virtualization layer and the OS inside should be as light-weight as possible.
Not really. English, unlike French, doesn't have an "Academie Englaise" which can change a word's meaning out of the blue with a decree, so in a given community a word means whatever that community uses.
That is, among mathematicians, pi=3.1415926..., no matter if a given legislature tries to declare it to be 3.
And, comparing the google rating is just crushing. In fact, for kilobyte/megabyte, you need to resort to tricks to avoid the google cap.
Slashdot Mirror
Yet, you're forgetting that heat is exactly what we have too much of. It's for all practical purposes free, so efficiency energy-wise doesn't matter.
What matters, is the efficiency time-wise, space-wise or monetary cost-wise. Having twice as much power from the same heat would be nice, but it isn't the point.
However, the problems were not totally random but happening once in X tries in the same places. Somehow, this is the way Windows tends to fail -- the same places on the same machine, just unreliably[1].
You can't ever be certain, but I believe the hardware was sound. It did work for a long time without any issues, there was quite a bit of time since the box was opened, too.
[1]. Yeah, Windows even crashes unreliably. Go figure.
One of these installs was done by an educated but non-technical user (one of the biologist types who churn huge number-crunching programs). On every try one of the following problems appeared:
* partman crashed without a word (the most usual one)
* a dialog popped up during the debootstrap phase, filled with random Python entrails (happened twice)
* a dialog with nothing but "The installer crashed [Ok]" without any extra information (happened thrice)
* network config locking up (with iwconfig being stuck in interruptible sleep; too bad, the user vehemently denied all my offers to help, so I couldn't investigate this more closely)
The machine was known to be good -- it used to dual boot an earlier Ubuntu and Win2k, then just Win2k for a while after a disk upgrade.
Such tries went on for many hours. I would personally skip the installer and debootstrap it by hand, but I kept getting told that if the installer can't be forced to work, the rest will be incapable of being forced to work as well -- so I let the user continue, just watching (while doing some idle other tasks myself).
The next day, I she told me she switched to Gentoo which installed cleanly the first time. Oh well.
Yeah, I'm a Debian user/maintainer. No, this is not an Ubuntu discussion -- it's one about vanilla Debian with just a few digressions about Ubuntu.
That's not "amd64" support what you're talking about, that's "i386 on amd64".
Apache 2.0 has been in Debian for ages. I'm afraid that you, sir, are a troll.
Also, the plans for 2.2 migration speak about having 2.2 as a replacement instead of putting it side-to-side, so no, Etch probably won't have that Apache 2.0 you want.
MySQL 5.0 was released in October 2005, Sarge in June 2005. So...?
Even Woody installer had the benefit of being stable. Try to install Ubuntu without random crashes all the way, including some Python entrails thrown into your face.
I had the unpleasant experience of watching someone install Ubuntu Dapper recently; it's on the level of Windows! Eye-candy thrown in, everything hidden from the user, random faults without any reasonable way to debug.
I would put an installer that works over one which looks pretty.
And the answer is: yes. K*BSD arches are in good shape, but none of them are release candidates for Etch. Nexenta (OpenSolaris kernel) gathered so much bad karma because of Sun's CDDL's intentional incompatibilities with GPL causing problems that Nexenta isn't going to be an official arch anywhere soon. Debian/Hurd isn't that bad, but too bad, Hurd remains just a toy for now. And Debian/Minix stays at the level of talks for now. It's only Debian/win32 which died completely.
So yeah, Etch does run Linux, but most likely Alien/Lenny/??? (Etch+1) will have K*BSD variants.
What I mentioned, was the most extreme case, intentionally ridiculous.
/. call Debian "irrelevant" and "obsolete", even though Ubuntu intentionally remains nothing but Debian with some eye-candy added. The squablings between the two projects are very minor and most of Ubuntu improvements go to Debian, which provides the vast majority of packages.
My point isn't that unheard of, though. For real-life examples, what about Ubuntu vs Debian? Ubuntu folks put a good deal of work into desktop integration, and have a tremendous following among desktop users. In fact, a load of uninformed people here on
From my nearly server-only point of view, Ubuntu is worse than Debian/experimental, because the eyecandy causes breaks. From desktop users' point of view, Ubuntu is Teh Uber, because they do get all the newest doodads presented in a nice form. There is more desktop users than server folks, so, Debian+(a bit) would get a lot more votes than 'the official Debian'.
Even if there's no implication A => B, both A and B can be true.
You can change a single character and submit it
This raises a question: when a fork stops being "a fork" and starts being something totally separate?
In a majority of Free Software projects, never. And, to cloud things up, usually you have thousands on thousands of small pieces of code from elsewhere. And this is good; good for anything but this particular flawed contest.
In the rare case when you have found some useable flash site, you can install FlashBlock.
I'm personally too annoyed by the large flash marks it leaves to use it, but if you need flash, FlashBlock at least will let you survive.
If your kids use Windows or you're intelligence-challenged yourself, you're screwed. The rest of us are safe.
- a mail server the size of a can of SPAM
IPv4 is the root of all evil. Not the basic design of it, which is fine -- what is wrong is NAT and related problems.
Switching from IPv4 to IPv6 is like switching from all itty bitty charsets to utf-8. An investment in upgrading your software that pays off in a silver bullet to most interchange problems.
A simple setup can be easily made secure, a complex one will rarely ever be. Any non-trivial IPv4 setup is by definition complex. Change it to IPv6 and suddenly all you need to do is filtering unwanted traffic.
And, even worse, they can make Linux run in a TC sandbox -- a key step to making TC required by law.
I see that they fit into McAfee's quality pretty well.
Faced with memory leaks on one side, and swiss cheese security on the other, the choice is pretty obvious. If it's slow -- I can survive. If it gets me pwned -- I'm dead (well, or vmwared...).
This said, these words are posted using eLinks. Now, if Taco changed the layout to move all the menus and links to the end of the file...
Don't forget that all non-long-term stock-market investments are a zero-sum game. Actually, less-than-zero as there are taxes and fees involved. Any profit produced comes either from someone who lost that much, or from the Ponzi effect.
But gambling is against the scripture, while depriving citizens of their freedoms isn't.
Oh yeah? Someone has been playing on their network for months, and we know of it only because one of their employees blabbed about it.
Talking about openssh's security, here's a vital patch:
-PermitRootLogin yes
+PermitRootLogin no
Come on, how in the hell the first can be the default?
Is it that hard to log in first to your normal user account?
And don't start on "but having no root and using sudo is better". This is a fallacy, true only if your normal user password and the root one happen to be the same, or you have a root login available from network. Two separate passwords are always better than just one, and forcing people to type "sudo" before every line makes little sense -- quite a lot of servers have nothing to do on them for non-root (firewall, dom0, etc).
1. Anywhere but on Windows, you don't need a copy of another OS on your desktop to do tests.
2. If you want to run virtual servers, you do care about resource usage. Both the virtualization layer and the OS inside should be as light-weight as possible.
Not really. English, unlike French, doesn't have an "Academie Englaise" which can change a word's meaning out of the blue with a decree, so in a given community a word means whatever that community uses.
That is, among mathematicians, pi=3.1415926..., no matter if a given legislature tries to declare it to be 3.
And, comparing the google rating is just crushing. In fact, for kilobyte/megabyte, you need to resort to tricks to avoid the google cap.