Ben, those numbers are NOT per tab. The bfcache is global; there are never more than 8 pages total in bfcache (and you need to have 1GB of RAM for this to happen). Most users have 3 or 5 pages in bfcache at any given time.
So what's the explanation for Firefox to use so much RAM sometimes? Don't tell me that 8 pages explain the 124 MB of memory firefox is currently using on my computer (which btw only has 768 MB of memory)!
Yeah, because everyone likes having 1-pixel-wide window miniatures on their task bar. And don't talk me about the "group similar windows" feature (which btw only appeared on Windows XP), that sucks for a lot of programs (such as MSN Messenger for example). Unless you have a way to enable that option just for Firefox - and even then, it would only work on Windows XP, not 2000 (which a lot of people use).
Yep. The middle/scroll wheel button works everywhere in firefox and always opens a new tab with the page. Try for example the "View Image" option in the right-button menu on top of an image - it loads the image in a new tab.
Well, you can't train that anyway... But I concess that it's possible that playing a lot of combat games could make you feel "immortal" (at least subconsciously, which could affect your behavior).
The real question isn't can they hire x86 professionals, but can they hire enough x86 pros of a skill level sufficient to defeat every single x86 hacker out there?
Yep, I agree with that - I was just saying that the fact that Apple has just entered the x86 world doesn't mean much.
Hell, even Microsoft can't do it and they've been an x86 shop for decades.
A NAND logic gate, for example, accepts two inputs to arrive at one output. If both inputs are one, the NAND gate spits out a zero. If one or the other or both inputs are a zero, the NAND gate provides a one as an output.
Porod and his colleagues equipped their new chip with a universal logic gate -- a combination of the NAND and NOR gates. Together, these two logic gates can perform any of the basic arithmetic functions intrinsic to all computer processing.
Either NAND or NOR gates are enough to perform any logical operation, one doesn't need a combination of both to make an "universal logic gate". If this misleading sentence was on CNN I'd accept it, but Wired should know better...
If I were the phisher, I'd ask for my money back - no-one cares about SSL certificates, so it probably won't make the phishing attempt any more successful!
Even if I was using Intel, I'd be thinking "Hmm, Skype, that's the one that doesn't always work depending on which computer you are using. Screw that nonsense!"
Yep, that's exactly my case, as I've said in this post! Knowing this, I'm not going to even try Skype for the first time.
But, I'm a geek - I doubt a significant number of people will think the same way (or, even worse, they won't even hear about this...).
Well, they could put a message box in Skype saying something like "Your CPU doesn't support adding one more contact to this conversation". That would be an outright lie, but could they get away with it once people found out? "Oh sorry, that was a bug. Fixed on the next version!"
Well cool... Since I'm about to go working abroad, I was currently deciding whether to buy 10 euros of conversation money from Skype or not - now they have decided for me:)
This is the way I see it - if the cold virus has survived until now it's because factors such as the one you talked about are true (us sneezing and spreading the virus). There may have been lots of virus species in the past, but the ones who survived are the ones which can be spread by the reactions they cause on our body. If this can be called "influencing" or not, I'll leave to each one of you to decide, but for me it's just simple selection of survivable species.
Or better yet, it would be neither one thing nor the other, since it's a very bad analogy from the start. The problems caused in any of the three situations don't have anything to do with the other.
So you're saying that FSF would sue someone for doing what they have stated as a perfectly fine thing to do? That would pretty much be the end of FSF as a well regarded institution...
By definition, if you see the future, you are seeing what will happen. Maybe you'll point the gun to your head and decide that you'll find another way not to die, such as not entering cars. Then, two years from now you would have an heart attack and the ambulance would be involved in a deadly car accident.
If you can see the future, it means the future is written - and if it's written, you can't change it;) Read this, it's not the same thing but it's the same style of thinking.
Either a white hat discovers a vulnerability when it's already known by some black hats or the vulnerabity isn't known by any blackhats yet.
In the first case, full disclosure means that everyone will know it, which will allow all the black hats to exploit the public with it before the company has a chance to fix it and deploy (or at least try) the fix. Those are the disadvantages - the only advantage I see is that no black hats will be able to make money selling the vulnerability information. Conclusion - the world loses, the black hats win.
In the second case, it's really the same as the first one, with the exception that no black hats were exploiting the vulnerability before.
What really are the advantages of full disclosure in your mind? I can only see it being useful on those cases where the vendor has known and ignored the vulnerability for months - it forces them to fix it and therefore improves the situation if the first case I presented is the true one for the vulnerability in question.
People should also remember that Bill Gates left the CEO title in order to focus more on technical issues, and people who work at MS usually say that he knows very technical details about most MS products...
All the things you describe could just be psychological and explained by the fact that you're used to use the information from your left eye... What I mean is that your example is not sure to tell us something about the physiology of the brain, but maybe I'm misunderstanding something you said;)
Slashdot Mirror
So what's the explanation for Firefox to use so much RAM sometimes? Don't tell me that 8 pages explain the 124 MB of memory firefox is currently using on my computer (which btw only has 768 MB of memory)!
Yeah, because everyone likes having 1-pixel-wide window miniatures on their task bar. And don't talk me about the "group similar windows" feature (which btw only appeared on Windows XP), that sucks for a lot of programs (such as MSN Messenger for example). Unless you have a way to enable that option just for Firefox - and even then, it would only work on Windows XP, not 2000 (which a lot of people use).
Yep. The middle/scroll wheel button works everywhere in firefox and always opens a new tab with the page. Try for example the "View Image" option in the right-button menu on top of an image - it loads the image in a new tab.
Well, you can't train that anyway... But I concess that it's possible that playing a lot of combat games could make you feel "immortal" (at least subconsciously, which could affect your behavior).
The real question isn't can they hire x86 professionals, but can they hire enough x86 pros of a skill level sufficient to defeat every single x86 hacker out there?
Yep, I agree with that - I was just saying that the fact that Apple has just entered the x86 world doesn't mean much.
Hell, even Microsoft can't do it and they've been an x86 shop for decades.
Mmmmm, have they tried?
Either NAND or NOR gates are enough to perform any logical operation, one doesn't need a combination of both to make an "universal logic gate". If this misleading sentence was on CNN I'd accept it, but Wired should know better...
Yeah, because Apple can't hire x86 experts.
If I were the phisher, I'd ask for my money back - no-one cares about SSL certificates, so it probably won't make the phishing attempt any more successful!
But then, it would be a small step away from obvious that it's just an artificial limitation, and people would be pissed off!
Even if I was using Intel, I'd be thinking "Hmm, Skype, that's the one that doesn't always work depending on which computer you are using. Screw that nonsense!"
Yep, that's exactly my case, as I've said in this post! Knowing this, I'm not going to even try Skype for the first time.
But, I'm a geek - I doubt a significant number of people will think the same way (or, even worse, they won't even hear about this...).
Well, they could put a message box in Skype saying something like "Your CPU doesn't support adding one more contact to this conversation". That would be an outright lie, but could they get away with it once people found out? "Oh sorry, that was a bug. Fixed on the next version!"
Well cool... Since I'm about to go working abroad, I was currently deciding whether to buy 10 euros of conversation money from Skype or not - now they have decided for me :)
This is the way I see it - if the cold virus has survived until now it's because factors such as the one you talked about are true (us sneezing and spreading the virus). There may have been lots of virus species in the past, but the ones who survived are the ones which can be spread by the reactions they cause on our body. If this can be called "influencing" or not, I'll leave to each one of you to decide, but for me it's just simple selection of survivable species.
Or better yet, it would be neither one thing nor the other, since it's a very bad analogy from the start. The problems caused in any of the three situations don't have anything to do with the other.
So you're saying that FSF would sue someone for doing what they have stated as a perfectly fine thing to do? That would pretty much be the end of FSF as a well regarded institution...
LOL. :P
It could probably done rather easily with a mod, but that wouldn't have the same impact :/
Read this post.
You're obviously just thinking about servers, not personal computers...
No.
By definition, if you see the future, you are seeing what will happen. Maybe you'll point the gun to your head and decide that you'll find another way not to die, such as not entering cars. Then, two years from now you would have an heart attack and the ambulance would be involved in a deadly car accident.
;) Read this, it's not the same thing but it's the same style of thinking.
If you can see the future, it means the future is written - and if it's written, you can't change it
So you're suggesting that everyone stops using windows/linux everytime a vulnerability is found?
Well, there are two possibilities:
Either a white hat discovers a vulnerability when it's already known by some black hats or the vulnerabity isn't known by any blackhats yet.
In the first case, full disclosure means that everyone will know it, which will allow all the black hats to exploit the public with it before the company has a chance to fix it and deploy (or at least try) the fix. Those are the disadvantages - the only advantage I see is that no black hats will be able to make money selling the vulnerability information. Conclusion - the world loses, the black hats win.
In the second case, it's really the same as the first one, with the exception that no black hats were exploiting the vulnerability before.
What really are the advantages of full disclosure in your mind? I can only see it being useful on those cases where the vendor has known and ignored the vulnerability for months - it forces them to fix it and therefore improves the situation if the first case I presented is the true one for the vulnerability in question.
People should also remember that Bill Gates left the CEO title in order to focus more on technical issues, and people who work at MS usually say that he knows very technical details about most MS products...
All the things you describe could just be psychological and explained by the fact that you're used to use the information from your left eye... What I mean is that your example is not sure to tell us something about the physiology of the brain, but maybe I'm misunderstanding something you said ;)