Gmail allows you to use POP access. Yahoo! mail does not have this feature.
I had free POP access to my Yahoo! mail account in the 1990s, when they bought out Geocities, and migrated my email address.
You can still get POP access if you pay for Yahoo! mail. I think a major reason they don't offer free POP now is simply because they can't pull in the same advertising revenue. If you use their web-based mail, they can show you all the flash ads they want.
I don't know how google plans to make money on GMail POP...
What with yahoo just down the street in sunnyvale, HP up north a touch in Palo Alto, and Apple a bit South West, in cupertino, A microsoft campus, and S3 in santa clara, the greater mountain view area hits slashdot quite often, I think.
If you have access to the trusted source's servers (blizzards, in this example), you don't need an MD5 vulnerability to do damage.
This whole MD5 flaw is massively overhyped. If it had any *real* practical application, we'd be seeing reports of actual exploits, not more of these contrived proofs of concept.
I find it amusing that you're preaching about people not knowing what terms mean, and then saying
1,000,000 KB = 1,000 MB = 1 GB
1GB = 1024 MB = 1048576 KB! Apparently one more unit of measurement isn't that easy.
In raw orders of magnitude, 1 million : 1 thousand : 1 is sufficiently close to correct.
Also: I'm a hard drive manufacturer. Bob Maxtor's the name.
When my doctor refers to medical jargon I may not know what it means and may be confused... so do you really expect them to understand what the jargon in your field is?
I'm not a mechanic -- hell, I don't even change my own oil -- but I understand "spark plug", "alternator", "transmission", "brake pad", "muffler"...
I'm not a doctor, but I understand "catheter", "seratonin reuptake inhibitor", "priapism", "cyst", "tumor", "intestinal tract"...
So why the fuck can't these people understand that 1,000,000 KB = 1,000 MB = 1 GB, and that it takes about a minute to download 20 MB? I don't mind that they can't write a shell script, set up keys for SSH, configure a firewall, or understand that MSIE is not "the internet". But for fucks sake, you know how much a galon of gas is, you know how much a quart of oil is, how much 10mg of prozac is... How hard is it to understand one more unit of measurement?
So, this power "used for computing". Where does it go?
Ah, I finally understand your misunderstanding. When they say half the power goes to active computing and half to waste currently, they mean half of the power consumption occurs while your CPU is crunching numbers, and half while it's just idling.
In both cases, power is dissipated as heat. All they've done is something along the lines of turning the processor off when it's not actually crunching numbers.
They haven't magically done away with resistance, or anything like that.
It's not that confusing.
A current intel chip spends half it's power consumption on computing, and wastes the other half. This new process reduces that waste to 1/1000th of what it was -- if a chip used to consume 2 watts, 1 on computing, 1 on waste, now it will consume only 1.001 watts, 1 on computing,.001 on waste.
The "designed to consume a tenth of the power" is about a completely unrelated processor: the next generation of Pentium M is supposed to consume 1/10th the power it currently conusmes.
Score one for reading comprehension.
That's not Object Oriented programming, that's Procedural Programming. Still a step above the sort of stuff BASIC programmers tend to churn out though.
I pulled a magnet out of an old 40 megabyte harddrive when I was in highschool, and carried it arround in my pocket along with my ATM card for a couple of days. ATM card still worked.
It's gotta take a hell of an electromagnet to wipe those things.
People say that they can separate fantasy from reality. But this misses the point. A brain is a neural network that is exposed to stimuli and makes associations. It sees "opponent" and "me killing him" and the neurons between these two things are strengthened.
If you can separate fantasy from reality, it meens that the neurons linking "opponent" and "me killing him" and "fantasy" are strengthened. Which inevitably spills over onto just the first two.Maybe you can separate fantasy from reality perfectly well. But can your neurons? -- No.
I hope you're a lawyer, 'cause I've got this first degree murder charge I need representation for, and since I played GTA once, I'm pretty sure this new persuasive, scientific defense you've just offered is just what I need to beat this.
The only people who are prevented from playing violent video games by this law are children whose parents do not want them to play violent video games.
Not quite. Under this law, if I want to buy my kid a copy of GTA, I actually have to go to the store and buy it myself.
Whereas *without* this law, I can just tell little Johnny, "Yes, I think that at age 17, you are old enough and mature enough to play GTA. Feel free to go pick a copy up on your way home from school." Similarly, I can tell him "No, Johnny, I don't want you playing GTA, and if I find a copy in this house, you will be grounded"
Of course, GTA is an extreme example -- but who knows where the line will be drawn? Will I have to be physically present to purchase a copy of "Final Fantasy XXI: Tidus and the Sword of Electric Boogaloo" for my 16 year old?
The only benefit I see of this law is an attempt at keeping violent games out of the hands of kids with lazy parents -- but it even fails at that: how does it prevent Johnny from trading games with kids at school?
I was working in a shop full of pentium 1 class machines -- mostly 200 mhz with 64 meg of ram. Someone brought in a copy of the Windows 2000 beta.
We noticed it ran like shit on our 200 mhz, 64 meg system. We called up microsoft, and they told us 2000 would require at least 128 meg of ram. "128 meg of RAM just for an OS? That's rediculous!", we cried.
Now, here, in 2005, I wouldn't dream of using a PC with less than 512 meg of ram (although I'm stuck with a pathetic 256 here at work!), not only because my OS uses 128 meg, but firefox routinely uses several hundred meg itself! And let's not even get started on games...
Yes, these specs look rediculous now, but by 2010, they'll be baseline.
One of the trends you listed has already hit its limit and stopped
CD-audio isn't necessarily the pinnacle of digital audio quality. Higher sampling/bit rates are always possible.
If DVDA ever takes, the size of lossless audio files will go up again.
Current lossless audio files are just lossless 44khz stereo (aka 2 channel) wavs, reversably compressed. Why not go up from there? 5.1 surround sound? Higher sampling rates?
I thought I'd never fill my new 200 GB drive. When I installed it, my use patterns changed -- I started saving images of all the CDs I frequently used, and hanging on to p2p-acquired files I wouldn't normally. I kept MP3s and (cough) videos around I normally wouldn't have, and started downloading GB after GB every night.
I had the drive filled in less than a couple of months.
Also, back when we had 250 MB drives, almost all audio was distibuted as 8khz.wavs, averaging a few hundred KB each.
When we moved to 2 GB drives, audio was distributed in 128kbps MP3s, averaging around a few MB each -- ten times the drive space, ten times file size.
With drives in the hundreds of GB, it becomes feasible to store lossless audio -- somewhere on the order of 30 MB/song.
All in all: as drive space goes up, filesizes, and image/audio/video quality go up. And user behaviors change. As my father used to say: The steady state of disks is full" --- which, as I just learned, he ripped off from Dennis Ritchie, co-author of the definitive book on "C".
I usually have to replace a hard drive every five to six months, and often these are still under warranty.
I had a Maxtor I had to RMA 3 times over the course of two years. Each time they sent back a bigger drive, the most recent of which has run fine for over 5 years. The original was installed along side a WD that has run without problems the whole time.
Some drives just don't last as long as others. It's probably on a per-drive basis, rather than a per model/mfg. basis.
I have relatives who are teachers at various levels. They are reporting that many young kids have gotten these small music devices as gifts, and often listen to them in school during lectures. Because they're so small they are often quite easy to hide if the teacher does come along
Radios have been available in similar and smaller sizes for well over two decades. And kids have been doing the same thing for well over two decades.
Hell, my 1999 Rio PMP300 was only 1/2 an inch thicker than the nano.
Slashdot Mirror
Gmail allows you to use POP access. Yahoo! mail does not have this feature.
I had free POP access to my Yahoo! mail account in the 1990s, when they bought out Geocities, and migrated my email address.
You can still get POP access if you pay for Yahoo! mail. I think a major reason they don't offer free POP now is simply because they can't pull in the same advertising revenue. If you use their web-based mail, they can show you all the flash ads they want.
I don't know how google plans to make money on GMail POP...
The new yahoo mail has drag and drop.
TAKE THAT GOOGLE
What with yahoo just down the street in sunnyvale, HP up north a touch in Palo Alto, and Apple a bit South West, in cupertino, A microsoft campus, and S3 in santa clara, the greater mountain view area hits slashdot quite often, I think.
That's why they call it sillicon valley.
If you have access to the trusted source's servers (blizzards, in this example), you don't need an MD5 vulnerability to do damage.
This whole MD5 flaw is massively overhyped. If it had any *real* practical application, we'd be seeing reports of actual exploits, not more of these contrived proofs of concept.
Are patents evil, or are they good?
It's hard to let Slashdot tell me what to think when they post stories on _both_ sides of an argument!
One-sided posts are all my feeble mind can handle!
I find it amusing that you're preaching about people not knowing what terms mean, and then saying 1,000,000 KB = 1,000 MB = 1 GB 1GB = 1024 MB = 1048576 KB! Apparently one more unit of measurement isn't that easy.
In raw orders of magnitude, 1 million : 1 thousand : 1 is sufficiently close to correct.
Also: I'm a hard drive manufacturer. Bob Maxtor's the name.
When my doctor refers to medical jargon I may not know what it means and may be confused... so do you really expect them to understand what the jargon in your field is?
I'm not a mechanic -- hell, I don't even change my own oil -- but I understand "spark plug", "alternator", "transmission", "brake pad", "muffler"...
I'm not a doctor, but I understand "catheter", "seratonin reuptake inhibitor", "priapism", "cyst", "tumor", "intestinal tract"...
So why the fuck can't these people understand that 1,000,000 KB = 1,000 MB = 1 GB, and that it takes about a minute to download 20 MB? I don't mind that they can't write a shell script, set up keys for SSH, configure a firewall, or understand that MSIE is not "the internet". But for fucks sake, you know how much a galon of gas is, you know how much a quart of oil is, how much 10mg of prozac is... How hard is it to understand one more unit of measurement?
if MD5(x) == MD5(y) then MD5(x + q) == MD5(y + q)
the rest still holds.
That attack doesn't work!!
This attack operates on one fact:
if MD5(x) == MD5(y) then MD5(x + q) == MD5(x + q)
Here's the rub: the MD5 hash of your infected patch is MD5(x + q). The MD5 hash of blizzard's patch is MD5(q)
MD5(q) != MD5(x + q)
A beowulf cluster of these!
So, this power "used for computing". Where does it go?
Ah, I finally understand your misunderstanding. When they say half the power goes to active computing and half to waste currently, they mean half of the power consumption occurs while your CPU is crunching numbers, and half while it's just idling.
In both cases, power is dissipated as heat. All they've done is something along the lines of turning the processor off when it's not actually crunching numbers.
They haven't magically done away with resistance, or anything like that.
It's not that confusing. A current intel chip spends half it's power consumption on computing, and wastes the other half. This new process reduces that waste to 1/1000th of what it was -- if a chip used to consume 2 watts, 1 on computing, 1 on waste, now it will consume only 1.001 watts, 1 on computing, .001 on waste.
The "designed to consume a tenth of the power" is about a completely unrelated processor: the next generation of Pentium M is supposed to consume 1/10th the power it currently conusmes.
Score one for reading comprehension.
gosub... was the foundation for how I learned OOP
That's not Object Oriented programming, that's Procedural Programming. Still a step above the sort of stuff BASIC programmers tend to churn out though.
I pulled a magnet out of an old 40 megabyte harddrive when I was in highschool, and carried it arround in my pocket along with my ATM card for a couple of days. ATM card still worked.
It's gotta take a hell of an electromagnet to wipe those things.
Hah, $60/gig pricy? I payed $100 for a 32 meg of flash in 1999.
Don't forget SGI
I did. Is that bad?
Seriously, I remember them being the biggest name in graphics back in '96. I thought they were dead and gone.
Wooooooooooooooossssssssssshhhhhhh
You are kidding, right?
...yes.
If my neurons can't tell fantasy from reality, how can I!?
People say that they can separate fantasy from reality. But this misses the point. A brain is a neural network that is exposed to stimuli and makes associations. It sees "opponent" and "me killing him" and the neurons between these two things are strengthened. If you can separate fantasy from reality, it meens that the neurons linking "opponent" and "me killing him" and "fantasy" are strengthened. Which inevitably spills over onto just the first two.Maybe you can separate fantasy from reality perfectly well. But can your neurons? -- No.
I hope you're a lawyer, 'cause I've got this first degree murder charge I need representation for, and since I played GTA once, I'm pretty sure this new persuasive, scientific defense you've just offered is just what I need to beat this.
The only people who are prevented from playing violent video games by this law are children whose parents do not want them to play violent video games.
Not quite. Under this law, if I want to buy my kid a copy of GTA, I actually have to go to the store and buy it myself.
Whereas *without* this law, I can just tell little Johnny, "Yes, I think that at age 17, you are old enough and mature enough to play GTA. Feel free to go pick a copy up on your way home from school." Similarly, I can tell him "No, Johnny, I don't want you playing GTA, and if I find a copy in this house, you will be grounded"
Of course, GTA is an extreme example -- but who knows where the line will be drawn? Will I have to be physically present to purchase a copy of "Final Fantasy XXI: Tidus and the Sword of Electric Boogaloo" for my 16 year old?
The only benefit I see of this law is an attempt at keeping violent games out of the hands of kids with lazy parents -- but it even fails at that: how does it prevent Johnny from trading games with kids at school?
I was working in a shop full of pentium 1 class machines -- mostly 200 mhz with 64 meg of ram. Someone brought in a copy of the Windows 2000 beta.
We noticed it ran like shit on our 200 mhz, 64 meg system. We called up microsoft, and they told us 2000 would require at least 128 meg of ram. "128 meg of RAM just for an OS? That's rediculous!", we cried.
Now, here, in 2005, I wouldn't dream of using a PC with less than 512 meg of ram (although I'm stuck with a pathetic 256 here at work!), not only because my OS uses 128 meg, but firefox routinely uses several hundred meg itself! And let's not even get started on games...
Yes, these specs look rediculous now, but by 2010, they'll be baseline.
One of the trends you listed has already hit its limit and stopped
CD-audio isn't necessarily the pinnacle of digital audio quality. Higher sampling/bit rates are always possible.
If DVDA ever takes, the size of lossless audio files will go up again.
Current lossless audio files are just lossless 44khz stereo (aka 2 channel) wavs, reversably compressed. Why not go up from there? 5.1 surround sound? Higher sampling rates?
I thought I'd never fill my new 200 GB drive. When I installed it, my use patterns changed -- I started saving images of all the CDs I frequently used, and hanging on to p2p-acquired files I wouldn't normally. I kept MP3s and (cough) videos around I normally wouldn't have, and started downloading GB after GB every night.
.wavs, averaging a few hundred KB each.
I had the drive filled in less than a couple of months.
Also, back when we had 250 MB drives, almost all audio was distibuted as 8khz
When we moved to 2 GB drives, audio was distributed in 128kbps MP3s, averaging around a few MB each -- ten times the drive space, ten times file size.
With drives in the hundreds of GB, it becomes feasible to store lossless audio -- somewhere on the order of 30 MB/song.
All in all: as drive space goes up, filesizes, and image/audio/video quality go up. And user behaviors change. As my father used to say: The steady state of disks is full" --- which, as I just learned, he ripped off from Dennis Ritchie, co-author of the definitive book on "C".
I usually have to replace a hard drive every five to six months, and often these are still under warranty.
I had a Maxtor I had to RMA 3 times over the course of two years. Each time they sent back a bigger drive, the most recent of which has run fine for over 5 years. The original was installed along side a WD that has run without problems the whole time.
Some drives just don't last as long as others. It's probably on a per-drive basis, rather than a per model/mfg. basis.
I have relatives who are teachers at various levels. They are reporting that many young kids have gotten these small music devices as gifts, and often listen to them in school during lectures. Because they're so small they are often quite easy to hide if the teacher does come along
Radios have been available in similar and smaller sizes for well over two decades. And kids have been doing the same thing for well over two decades.
Hell, my 1999 Rio PMP300 was only 1/2 an inch thicker than the nano.