Swap is needed for those rare occasions, like, when testing various compilers, clang takes more than 13GB (failed with 8GB RAM + 5.5GB swap) for building something that with gcc takes 154 minutes on raspi. Or, if you run several ordinary builds in parallel (proper use of -j is quite rare, so it's safer to build several tasks with -j1 each), and you get a rare pairing that takes enormous amounts of memory. Swap makes the difference between working slower and a failure.
Kind of like/proc/sys/vm/swappiness, which decides that if you copy over 10GB junk to a backup drive, all your running processes get swapped off to make space for file cache because "it improves throughput".
The reason their analysis excludes pharma is purely political: the big pharma lobby has such an immense power that anything they perceive as risk will be torpedoed. Having powerful enemies doesn't stop you from being right, though, merely might make holding your cards prudent.
Except that "protection", while it rewards the person in question, greatly harms dissemination of the idea. Thus, the first question to answer is whether that curve isn't strictly monotonic, which I think it is.
Half the web developers out there can't even prevent simple cross site scripting let alone the dozens of other common threats that exist in web development.
Just half? Your glasses are of such a bright shade of pink that it must make it hard to see. This sounds so optimistic that you perhaps still have shreds of faith in humanity.
1. The reason reactors are not being built has to do with the cost -- they're not cost-effective for utilities unless they get huge subsidies.
Like, say, burning coal and oil? Let's see what the price of those would be if you had to store the waste.
2. Where are you going to put the nuclear waste?
Burning coal produces a lot more of radioactive dust which is simply put into the air. Almost any solution for (relatively) easy to secure barrels is better to that. Oh, and besides radioactive stuff, you get carbon dioxide, sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides and a laundry list of other pollutants.
So any comparison that is not biased towards combusting carbon-based deposits by many orders of magnitude shows that if we had any shred of rationality we should replace those with nuclear power. Geothermal is better where it's available, wind not really.
An easy fix: apt-get install xfce4. For more thorough fix: echo "deb http://repo.mate-desktop.org/debian wheezy main" >>/etc/apt/sources.list apt-get install mate-desktop-environment
And for the love of Yog-Sothoth, remember to clean up the crap Gnome3 pulled in if you inadvertently installed it. Some stuff just wastes disk, some wastes memory, some (like avahi) is a security hole, some (network-manager) is just a wholesale sabotage machine.
Gnome3 Classic Mode is a bad joke: it superficially matches the appearance of Gnome2, while retaining but a small fraction of its functionality.
Uhm, Windows having any resemblance of security against the local user? That's news to me.
Against remote threats (at least other that netbios), it has improved tremendously, I admit. But local root exploits? Microsoft's usual answer is that it doesn't consider it a threat.
Have you noticed this observation counts money passing through the layer upon layer of shell companies as the volume of transactions? It takes quite a few layers of indirection to skirt the law safely, all without any actual commerce.
No actual productive work comes from most government spending: it's either broken window fallacy, or outright pocketing. The money that changed hands can be just as well spent by its rightful owner as by the crony whom it ended up with. All the extra "economy" was generated only on paper.
So how would you classify phones like N900 that make shitty smartphones but wonderful mini-netbooks?
After beating some brain-dead decisions of Nokia, like a pull-down on-screen keyboard for a lot of important keys instead of using shift, you get a full-blown Unix system that's more convenient to use that quite a lot of laptops.
If you don't use Microsoft's clients, there is not a lot of difference between XP and newer Windowses. If you can possibly exploit a bug in directX/etc, you have already pwned the user, and the game is over already.
My point is not that local network exploits are that much safer, but that the only client you can't easily get rid of, SMB, is ran over the local network and thus it can be contained within your control. Like, allowing SMB connections only to the server[s] rather than between an arbitrary pair of workstations.
You mean, covering shortages by printing money can possibly have a positive effect? That's news to me.
The EU works hard to help Greece here, and to stop the politicos' attempts to give handouts right during a collapse (like your average CEO, all they think about is short-term gains). If you're facing an incoming bankruptcy, the solution is not to go on another spending spree.
Please enlighten me, how exactly does Microsoft's security support matter? No on even remotely sane uses a version of Internet Explorer that works on XP, and all other browsers will keep security support for foreseable future. The only element that's not trivial to seamlessly replace is SMB, and that's relevant for the local network only.
Other vital protocols: * DNS: when the shit hits the fan, clueful admins for some and "Security Suites" for the rest will install a reasonable resolver and tell Windows to query 127.0.0.1 * sNTP: kill Windows Time Service; if you want replacement (I'm afraid most won't), you know what to install instead * ARP: this is harder, but a low-level firewall can detect and block packets that would kill Windows
So folks will just continue the current state, slowly replacing Microsoft software. And in enterprise, block all SMB traffic other than to/from the domain controller and file servers, none of which need to run XP, or Windows for that matter.
Depending on the level of compression a full HD (1080p) stream requires between 400KBytes/sec and ~2 MBytes/sec of bandwidth.
You got that wrong: a single frame takes 6MB, or around 50Mbit. Then use shitty TV 30 frames/sec or what serious FPS gamers take as a decent minimum, 60 frames/sec, and you get 1.5Gbit/s or 3Gbit/s, respectively.
So unless you want to compress it up the wazoo, taking oodles of processing power just to have it look like shit, gigabit ethernet is not enough.
Of course, with present bandwidth speeds watching a stream over a wide area network forces lossy compression. But don't tell me I should have to lossily compress X forwarding between the box in my cellar and my display
How exactly patents protect property? They're an anathema to it! What's the use in owning something if some bozo tells you what you can and what you can't do with the item in question?
The word "property" makes any sense only if the thing owned is scarce (as in, can't be replicated without a significant cost).
An example: someone invented a magic replicator that can copy a loaf of bread. Before the invention: person A has one loaf, person B has none but wants to have it. The concept of property is needed to stop B from taking the bread and depriving A of it. Yet once the replicator is invented, enforcing a rule that only A is allowed to have bread is an outright robbery. B could have been fed with no loss to A! The society is deprived of some value.
Ideas, being infinitely replicatable with no cost other than copying the information (ie, utterly negligible today), are a non-scarce good. Patents and copyrights inflict artificial scarcity on something every member of society could have benefitted from.
Wait, so government-granted monopolies such as patents are now libertarian fault?
The govt testing drugs and refusing those with harmful side effects, that's regulation I'm willing to accept. Denying people the right to do something just because someone else does the very same thing is flat-out oppression.
You're underestimating the power of default. The new user has first to know any alternatives exist -- no distro lists better desktop environments with any prominence strong enough to draw the user's attention -- if at all. Then, after the new user has played with what was installed by default for a while, there are two possibilities: * he sees this "Linux" thing sucks and goes away (because all he saw was Gnome3) * after several hours of learning how to do basic things, he'll be too tired to try alternatives he did not know about
The worst thing that happened is most distros falling into the Gnome3 trap just as Microsoft left a huge opportunity by making the same mistake with Metro.
The problem is that people refuse to accept that obesity is a mental health issue (as that carries a stigma) and either glorify it or try to fix its consequences rather than source.
Slashdot Mirror
Swap is needed for those rare occasions, like, when testing various compilers, clang takes more than 13GB (failed with 8GB RAM + 5.5GB swap) for building something that with gcc takes 154 minutes on raspi. Or, if you run several ordinary builds in parallel (proper use of -j is quite rare, so it's safer to build several tasks with -j1 each), and you get a rare pairing that takes enormous amounts of memory. Swap makes the difference between working slower and a failure.
Kind of like /proc/sys/vm/swappiness, which decides that if you copy over 10GB junk to a backup drive, all your running processes get swapped off to make space for file cache because "it improves throughput".
Do you prefer a slow emulated real system, or a fast but minimal toy?.
their power came from letters of marque or letters patent from rulers that gave them a monopoly on the practice of a trade
Emphasis mine. And new enterprises were routinely stopped by guilds, as any innovation threatened their profits.
The reason their analysis excludes pharma is purely political: the big pharma lobby has such an immense power that anything they perceive as risk will be torpedoed. Having powerful enemies doesn't stop you from being right, though, merely might make holding your cards prudent.
Except that "protection", while it rewards the person in question, greatly harms dissemination of the idea. Thus, the first question to answer is whether that curve isn't strictly monotonic, which I think it is.
Half the web developers out there can't even prevent simple cross site scripting let alone the dozens of other common threats that exist in web development.
Just half? Your glasses are of such a bright shade of pink that it must make it hard to see. This sounds so optimistic that you perhaps still have shreds of faith in humanity.
1. The reason reactors are not being built has to do with the cost -- they're not cost-effective for utilities unless they get huge subsidies.
Like, say, burning coal and oil? Let's see what the price of those would be if you had to store the waste.
2. Where are you going to put the nuclear waste?
Burning coal produces a lot more of radioactive dust which is simply put into the air. Almost any solution for (relatively) easy to secure barrels is better to that. Oh, and besides radioactive stuff, you get carbon dioxide, sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides and a laundry list of other pollutants.
So any comparison that is not biased towards combusting carbon-based deposits by many orders of magnitude shows that if we had any shred of rationality we should replace those with nuclear power. Geothermal is better where it's available, wind not really.
An easy fix: apt-get install xfce4. For more thorough fix:
echo "deb http://repo.mate-desktop.org/debian wheezy main" >>/etc/apt/sources.list
apt-get install mate-desktop-environment
And for the love of Yog-Sothoth, remember to clean up the crap Gnome3 pulled in if you inadvertently installed it. Some stuff just wastes disk, some wastes memory, some (like avahi) is a security hole, some (network-manager) is just a wholesale sabotage machine.
Gnome3 Classic Mode is a bad joke: it superficially matches the appearance of Gnome2, while retaining but a small fraction of its functionality.
Uhm, Windows having any resemblance of security against the local user? That's news to me.
Against remote threats (at least other that netbios), it has improved tremendously, I admit. But local root exploits? Microsoft's usual answer is that it doesn't consider it a threat.
Have you noticed this observation counts money passing through the layer upon layer of shell companies as the volume of transactions? It takes quite a few layers of indirection to skirt the law safely, all without any actual commerce.
No actual productive work comes from most government spending: it's either broken window fallacy, or outright pocketing. The money that changed hands can be just as well spent by its rightful owner as by the crony whom it ended up with. All the extra "economy" was generated only on paper.
So how would you classify phones like N900 that make shitty smartphones but wonderful mini-netbooks?
After beating some brain-dead decisions of Nokia, like a pull-down on-screen keyboard for a lot of important keys instead of using shift, you get a full-blown Unix system that's more convenient to use that quite a lot of laptops.
It turns out that cutting 1 euro of government spending shrinks the economy by 1.7 euros, not the 0,5 euros they thought
So by your logic, setting the tax rate at 100% and giving all that money to whoever pays a cut to the politicians in power, will make us all rich?
If you don't use Microsoft's clients, there is not a lot of difference between XP and newer Windowses. If you can possibly exploit a bug in directX/etc, you have already pwned the user, and the game is over already.
My point is not that local network exploits are that much safer, but that the only client you can't easily get rid of, SMB, is ran over the local network and thus it can be contained within your control. Like, allowing SMB connections only to the server[s] rather than between an arbitrary pair of workstations.
You mean, covering shortages by printing money can possibly have a positive effect? That's news to me.
The EU works hard to help Greece here, and to stop the politicos' attempts to give handouts right during a collapse (like your average CEO, all they think about is short-term gains). If you're facing an incoming bankruptcy, the solution is not to go on another spending spree.
Please enlighten me, how exactly does Microsoft's security support matter? No on even remotely sane uses a version of Internet Explorer that works on XP, and all other browsers will keep security support for foreseable future. The only element that's not trivial to seamlessly replace is SMB, and that's relevant for the local network only.
Other vital protocols:
* DNS: when the shit hits the fan, clueful admins for some and "Security Suites" for the rest will install a reasonable resolver and tell Windows to query 127.0.0.1
* sNTP: kill Windows Time Service; if you want replacement (I'm afraid most won't), you know what to install instead
* ARP: this is harder, but a low-level firewall can detect and block packets that would kill Windows
So folks will just continue the current state, slowly replacing Microsoft software. And in enterprise, block all SMB traffic other than to/from the domain controller and file servers, none of which need to run XP, or Windows for that matter.
Depending on the level of compression a full HD (1080p) stream requires between 400KBytes/sec and ~2 MBytes/sec of bandwidth.
You got that wrong: a single frame takes 6MB, or around 50Mbit. Then use shitty TV 30 frames/sec or what serious FPS gamers take as a decent minimum, 60 frames/sec, and you get 1.5Gbit/s or 3Gbit/s, respectively.
So unless you want to compress it up the wazoo, taking oodles of processing power just to have it look like shit, gigabit ethernet is not enough.
Of course, with present bandwidth speeds watching a stream over a wide area network forces lossy compression. But don't tell me I should have to lossily compress X forwarding between the box in my cellar and my display
It gets to the point there's no reason to not have ntpd running on any network connected computer, period.
Routers do it, raspbian does too; with the risk of obscure damage due to the time being off, not having ntpd on a server becomes gross incompetence.
How exactly patents protect property? They're an anathema to it! What's the use in owning something if some bozo tells you what you can and what you can't do with the item in question?
The word "property" makes any sense only if the thing owned is scarce (as in, can't be replicated without a significant cost).
An example: someone invented a magic replicator that can copy a loaf of bread. Before the invention: person A has one loaf, person B has none but wants to have it. The concept of property is needed to stop B from taking the bread and depriving A of it. Yet once the replicator is invented, enforcing a rule that only A is allowed to have bread is an outright robbery. B could have been fed with no loss to A! The society is deprived of some value.
Ideas, being infinitely replicatable with no cost other than copying the information (ie, utterly negligible today), are a non-scarce good. Patents and copyrights inflict artificial scarcity on something every member of society could have benefitted from.
Wait, so government-granted monopolies such as patents are now libertarian fault?
The govt testing drugs and refusing those with harmful side effects, that's regulation I'm willing to accept. Denying people the right to do something just because someone else does the very same thing is flat-out oppression.
You're underestimating the power of default. The new user has first to know any alternatives exist -- no distro lists better desktop environments with any prominence strong enough to draw the user's attention -- if at all. Then, after the new user has played with what was installed by default for a while, there are two possibilities:
* he sees this "Linux" thing sucks and goes away (because all he saw was Gnome3)
* after several hours of learning how to do basic things, he'll be too tired to try alternatives he did not know about
The worst thing that happened is most distros falling into the Gnome3 trap just as Microsoft left a huge opportunity by making the same mistake with Metro.
Odroid-U2 $89, four cores at twice the clock, twice the memory.
Most of us don't need GPIO/etc so it's not in the standard, you can get that on an $15 expansion board.
Metro shows its ugly head in far more places than just the start menu. Update notifications and interface, jinxes bar, etc, etc.
The problem is that people refuse to accept that obesity is a mental health issue (as that carries a stigma) and either glorify it or try to fix its consequences rather than source.