De-duplication doesn't work that way. The system tracks duplicates at block level and if a configured cluster size of blocks is identical, the file block stream is chained through a single copy of the blocks. If a new version of the file appears, it will fail the block check and will have space allocated to it. If more copies of the new version then appear, they will be chained through the single copy of the new version.
If you delete a single instance of a de-duped file, it is handled the same way as multiple hard links to a file on a unix file system. The FAT entry (if you don't mind the archaic reference) is removed and the reference count to the data is decreased by one. No blocks are freed for overwrite if other FAT entries reference the blocks. So NO, an installer deleting one instance of a de-duped DLL will not remove the contents of the file from disk as the blocks are referenced by other files.
They didn't spell Al-Qaeda correctly at all. That looks like the spelling of someone who's only ever heard the name and spelled it the way they were taught English.
The problem that the Onion Pi is not granny-friendly. The problem that the Onion Pi needs to be assembled and requires RP Linux knowledge to set up in the first place.
Some people want the challenge of making the device, others just want to plug it in and go. That's where this comes into play.
They had similar levels of data collection on the tech previews and betas of 7 and 8, and switched it off on the RTMs. I don't think even MS has the desire and capacity to collect that much data from a billion computers.
At least you can diagnose and fix issues with shell scripts with vi and a bit of knowledge. Try that with a binary blob that stores its data in a binary store.
Either yours or his is the correct analogy. If the images come from the Snapchat server, then they are not deleting their images as they claim they are. That is your analogy.
If the prevailing theory that the popular 3rd party app for Snapchat is breaking the delete-after-x-hours promise by uploading the image to a non-Snapchat server so it can be accessed later, or uploading the image without knowledge of the users of the app because they are sick buggers who want to see what the pics are (NSA I'm watching you), then his analogy is the better fit.
Either way, people stop assuming your arse and tits photos are secured when you trust the cloud.
I think the difference here is the same as the difference between buying your own delivery trucks from Mack and contracting FedEx to deliver your products from factory to retail store.
The earlier days of space flight were like buying the various bulk components of a truck, engine from GM, chassis from one metal shop, driver's cabin from another, electronics from Lucas and then building the full truck up. Come the era of the shuttle, the delivery truck came fully assembled from Mack, but you still have to pump the diesel, change the tires, load the cargo into the back yourself.
Now it looks like calling FedEx and telling them you've got fifty packages in London and you need them in Bogota by Sunday. They pick it up, containerize it and ship it.
I think the companies knew that multiple contracts were an option, but judging from the press coverage in the week or two leading up to it, the business pundits thought it would be the traditional multiple proposals, one winner option.
I don't know what will happen if both deliver a fully functional vehicle by 2017 within the budget. We still could be in the Y stage of the process, e.g. the YF-22 and YF-23 fighter technology demonstrators which were functional aircraft leading to the choice of the YF-22 to go into production as the F-22.
NASA could also go head post-2017 with both companies supplying vehicles and launches. We'll have to see.
Not Boeing alone, and not SpaceX alone. This is the best possible outcome for NASA, not reliant on a single supplier like before.
The fact that to deliver the same development and certification process costs $1.6 billion less for SpaceX over Boeing is also interesting. Some are already saying that it is a bigger win for Boeing and that SpaceX is a backup plan, but since the amounts are what the two companies bid on the project, it shows how economical SpaceX believes they can be.
And that there are two companies still competing should reduce the risk of deliberate cost-overruns and delays. If one can get to full certification a year or more ahead of the other, it will be a huge blow to the second-place finisher's chances to win the final operational contract.
And according to Kathy Lueders at the press conference, both companies bid on the same process, so SpaceX believes they can do it for nearly half the price of Boeing.
It takes that long because trying to keep every tiny porthole and edge in the exact same place, and the paint work the specific colour so that that geeks and nerds don't write up 1000 pages on their blog about the horrific damage and destruction.
It took a couple of weeks to build because the model maker had a rough guide of x decks and y windows and slapped it together from bits and pieces and painted it to work on the screen. The poor restorer has to keep that work accurate.
As long as the rotation pattern isn't discernible from past numbers and the number is only valid for a single transaction, then collisions shouldn't be a security issue. In fact not letting the full 1000 numbers cycle before re-randomizing the list would probably be a good thing.
As long as the randomization isn't predictable, and attempting to process a transaction with an invalid CVV forces a regeneration of a new one, it could be an incredibly hard system to crack. Then again, they could just be using a statically salted rand() call:)
It will start by downloading the wrong size image first, then repeatedly redownload the image each time the screen refreshes or resizes until you run out of mobile data.
It's because society has spent centuries observing how immoral individuals use lack of regulation to rape, pillage and torment those less capable of defending themselves, whether it be via trade, relationships or employment, and has decided as a group to regulate those areas to protect those incapable of protecting themselves.
Yes, some regulations go too far, and others don't go far enough, and a lot are outdated because society evolves too fast. But it is needed, and changes are needed too.
If German society as a whole thinks Uber is getting a bum deal with this ruling, then they must tell the authorities in no uncertain terms that they think that. Not just a vocal minority as is happening now. If the majority don't do so when given the opportunity, then they do have concerns about clean and safe vehicles and properly trained drivers which Uber needs to address before society will trust them.
Slashdot Mirror
De-duplication doesn't work that way. The system tracks duplicates at block level and if a configured cluster size of blocks is identical, the file block stream is chained through a single copy of the blocks. If a new version of the file appears, it will fail the block check and will have space allocated to it. If more copies of the new version then appear, they will be chained through the single copy of the new version.
If you delete a single instance of a de-duped file, it is handled the same way as multiple hard links to a file on a unix file system. The FAT entry (if you don't mind the archaic reference) is removed and the reference count to the data is decreased by one. No blocks are freed for overwrite if other FAT entries reference the blocks. So NO, an installer deleting one instance of a de-duped DLL will not remove the contents of the file from disk as the blocks are referenced by other files.
The transcriptions I've seen have all maintained the phonetics of the Arabic word al-qÄÊidah as al-KY-dÉ(TM)
What we have here is
al-kwid-a
, as in quid pro quo or the slang for a British pound.
They didn't spell Al-Qaeda correctly at all. That looks like the spelling of someone who's only ever heard the name and spelled it the way they were taught English.
Or part of the development and testing process for a new generation space suit?
If you could point us to the source code of the Windows services manager engine, we'd appreciate it. :)
The problem that the Onion Pi is not granny-friendly. The problem that the Onion Pi needs to be assembled and requires RP Linux knowledge to set up in the first place.
Some people want the challenge of making the device, others just want to plug it in and go. That's where this comes into play.
They had similar levels of data collection on the tech previews and betas of 7 and 8, and switched it off on the RTMs. I don't think even MS has the desire and capacity to collect that much data from a billion computers.
At least you can diagnose and fix issues with shell scripts with vi and a bit of knowledge. Try that with a binary blob that stores its data in a binary store.
Either yours or his is the correct analogy. If the images come from the Snapchat server, then they are not deleting their images as they claim they are. That is your analogy.
If the prevailing theory that the popular 3rd party app for Snapchat is breaking the delete-after-x-hours promise by uploading the image to a non-Snapchat server so it can be accessed later, or uploading the image without knowledge of the users of the app because they are sick buggers who want to see what the pics are (NSA I'm watching you), then his analogy is the better fit.
Either way, people stop assuming your arse and tits photos are secured when you trust the cloud.
Link to a proper article about it. http://news.agu.org/press-release/satellite-data-shows-u-s-methane-hot-spot-bigger-than-expected/
Because it is a feedstock into their polio vaccine production line.
Might I ask what specs/OS you're running? Firefox on Windows 7 on an i5 didn't even hesitate with the page.
I think the difference here is the same as the difference between buying your own delivery trucks from Mack and contracting FedEx to deliver your products from factory to retail store.
The earlier days of space flight were like buying the various bulk components of a truck, engine from GM, chassis from one metal shop, driver's cabin from another, electronics from Lucas and then building the full truck up. Come the era of the shuttle, the delivery truck came fully assembled from Mack, but you still have to pump the diesel, change the tires, load the cargo into the back yourself.
Now it looks like calling FedEx and telling them you've got fifty packages in London and you need them in Bogota by Sunday. They pick it up, containerize it and ship it.
Hope that helps?
I think the companies knew that multiple contracts were an option, but judging from the press coverage in the week or two leading up to it, the business pundits thought it would be the traditional multiple proposals, one winner option.
I don't know what will happen if both deliver a fully functional vehicle by 2017 within the budget. We still could be in the Y stage of the process, e.g. the YF-22 and YF-23 fighter technology demonstrators which were functional aircraft leading to the choice of the YF-22 to go into production as the F-22.
NASA could also go head post-2017 with both companies supplying vehicles and launches. We'll have to see.
Not Boeing alone, and not SpaceX alone. This is the best possible outcome for NASA, not reliant on a single supplier like before.
The fact that to deliver the same development and certification process costs $1.6 billion less for SpaceX over Boeing is also interesting. Some are already saying that it is a bigger win for Boeing and that SpaceX is a backup plan, but since the amounts are what the two companies bid on the project, it shows how economical SpaceX believes they can be.
And that there are two companies still competing should reduce the risk of deliberate cost-overruns and delays. If one can get to full certification a year or more ahead of the other, it will be a huge blow to the second-place finisher's chances to win the final operational contract.
And according to Kathy Lueders at the press conference, both companies bid on the same process, so SpaceX believes they can do it for nearly half the price of Boeing.
It takes that long because trying to keep every tiny porthole and edge in the exact same place, and the paint work the specific colour so that that geeks and nerds don't write up 1000 pages on their blog about the horrific damage and destruction.
It took a couple of weeks to build because the model maker had a rough guide of x decks and y windows and slapped it together from bits and pieces and painted it to work on the screen. The poor restorer has to keep that work accurate.
As long as the rotation pattern isn't discernible from past numbers and the number is only valid for a single transaction, then collisions shouldn't be a security issue. In fact not letting the full 1000 numbers cycle before re-randomizing the list would probably be a good thing.
As long as the randomization isn't predictable, and attempting to process a transaction with an invalid CVV forces a regeneration of a new one, it could be an incredibly hard system to crack. Then again, they could just be using a statically salted rand() call :)
Several weeks of delay != 11 days. At best you can call it a couple of weeks, but that's still pushing the definition.of couple.
Go SpaceX, beat the bastards.
One day Facebook is going to tell you the answer to your mother's maiden name question appears to be incorrect.
It will start by downloading the wrong size image first, then repeatedly redownload the image each time the screen refreshes or resizes until you run out of mobile data.
It's because society has spent centuries observing how immoral individuals use lack of regulation to rape, pillage and torment those less capable of defending themselves, whether it be via trade, relationships or employment, and has decided as a group to regulate those areas to protect those incapable of protecting themselves.
Yes, some regulations go too far, and others don't go far enough, and a lot are outdated because society evolves too fast. But it is needed, and changes are needed too.
If German society as a whole thinks Uber is getting a bum deal with this ruling, then they must tell the authorities in no uncertain terms that they think that. Not just a vocal minority as is happening now. If the majority don't do so when given the opportunity, then they do have concerns about clean and safe vehicles and properly trained drivers which Uber needs to address before society will trust them.
Definitely agree with you there. Sex while driving for one, anything to do with non-hands-free devices while driving for another. :)
Says the chap who has fallen for the desperate propaganda by the coal, oil and burning-the-forests industry to not have to lose their businesses.
See, propaganda can come from any direction.
Penguins are actually 1%ers, look at how they wear tuxedos all the time.