Ah, thanks for the clarification. I got puzzled by the ridicuosly low suggested SRAM/DRAM density relation. In reality, it's nowhere near 6/2... The SRAM needs tons of interconnects and stuff that really make them horribly ineffecient in space usage.
The new memory should be six times denser than SRAM and twice as dense as DRAM.
You probably meant that it is six times denser than SRAM, but only half as dense as DRAM (that's still very good!). Typically, DRAM is approximately 12-50 times denser than SRAM
, because each SRAM cell needs a lot of transistors and capacitors, and a DRAM cell only needs a capacitor and bitline connections.
Oops, sorry, forgot that. Yes, it worked. But it felt slower than a floppy disk (!). And the storage capacity was already then just a tenth of a CR-RW, cheaply available...
I still have it anyway. Hopefully I might be able to sell it as an antique or something when I get old...:)
I'm not sure about new drives, but the first computer my parents bought, a 386SX, contained a 50 MB drive. That was pretty small even then, so it got upgraded within a year. After that it didn't get used for like 6-7 years ago until I decided to experiment with approximately two or three years ago...
As a Swede I'm curious - why do you call it "Swedish rounding"? We do only have 50 öre coins as smallest (half a krona), but exactly the same situation is found in many other countries...
Photoshop hasn't been ported, yet at least. It runs crap slow because it is being emulated through Rosetta. Considering that, the Intel iMac really didn't do THAT bad. And next time, RTFA. Don't just look at the pictures and assume stuff!
Yes, there still is a chance that you get specifically targeted by a hacker. For the home user, that situation rarely is possible to defend against. Not even for/.ers. I'm not denying that.
The huge majority of hacked Windows boxen, are hacked by automated tools though, like viruses or worms (trojans there have been for Mac OS X - like the 0.6 MB MS Office install - not suspicious at all, right?). As I said, already in my first comment, there aren't that many home systems really targeted for other purposes than botnets/similar purposes. And I think it would be rather silly to hack them all "manually" without using some kind of tool. And as stated on several places in this thread - there just aren't any viruses or worms for OS X...
Basically, if you "just get a rootkit" on your Mac OS X computer you either
1) did something really stupid, like installed it themselves 2) activated some kind of services, possibly using crap (wordbook) passwords, possibly having bad luck getting hit by one of the first hackers to try out a possible exploit.
You can't really get better protection than that on any OS...
Opener isn't a virus. It doesn't selfmultiply...
What Opener is, it's a rootkit. A program you use as a hacker to cover up that you've hacked into the machine. To use it, you have to gain access to the computer somehow BEFOREHAND. A rootkit basically is useless unless you already have root (or at least user) access to the machine in question.
The other source mentions only mentions an exploit. No one has said that there aren't exploits for Mac OS X. Only that none has been used to develop viruses.
If seccurity indeed is very important (read: secret information, research, webservers etc), an exploit is a very probable vector of infection, and shouldn't be ignored. Unpatched exploits are what hackers use to gain access.
In a home setting, the risk of getting targeted attacks is lesser. Basically, the only interesting use of the average home system is as some kind of a botnet. That means hackers are less probable to hack a home system "manually" and instead use viruses, trojans, spyware etcetra.
Also, the automated versions often work better in settings where the user has a firewall (think WMF exploit!). If no ports are opened for services, it doesn't really matter if there is a barn-size hole in the service, as you can't access it remotely anyway.
No, it's not a Pentium D [insert joke about molten computer here].
It's a Core Duo, also code-named Yonah, the successor of the current Pentium M. Basically, a chip developed specifically for laptops. It still works well in desktops as well...
There are no viruses targetting a clean OS X installation, at least not yet. There however are some macro viruses targetting Microsoft Word running under Mac OS X. The most of them won't work under Mac OS X (as many assume the existence of C:\), but surely some of them do work.
It hasn't even been released yet, and won't for at least half a year...
At least, we can't complain that they are late with the patches anymore. Interesting tactic actually, to release the patches before the operating system...:)
Assuming it was he (and only he - on one else) who wrote the content of the WP article, he would be on the safe side, yes. But WP articles that are only edited by one person aren't very usual...
Lagadonis said tests have generated 0.8 volts to 1.2 volts by driving an aluminum roofing nail half an inch into a tree attached to a copper water pipe driven 7 inches into the ground. But the electricity is useless because it's unstable and fluctuates.
Sounds a lot like a voltaic pile to me. Something that was made for the first time 200 years ago, only using other materials. The only new thing I can see with this implementation, is that you're using a tree instead of the traditional "little chemist's" lemon. Possibly, the idea is to have the tree regenerate the chemicals. But as they can't say anything about the power of the tappable current, we don't really know (it would be elementary to just raise the voltage - but that would also mean lowering the current...
it's safe to say that Sweden is on the "consumer" side of the scale.
I'm not that sure on that. Even though we do import lots of films and novels, Sweden is the third most music-exporting country in the world (sorry, couldn't find a weblink to confirm it with right now). And Sweden is a tiny country - the population is only 9 millions...
Duh! That was exactly what I suggested (a wardrobe is a type of closet). And not all wardrobes are in the bedroom even though it's the most commom (of course, some other closet is even better, I give you that)...
maybe under the bed
Been there, done that. Won't work. If possible, worse, as the computer is a lot closer to you with its sound.
If put in a closet, it won't matter if it sounds much, and you shouldn't really be using it day-to-day anyway if it's a server. There are possibilities for remote admining on aswell Windows as *nix, so that shouldn't be a problem.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, thanks for the clarification. I got puzzled by the ridicuosly low suggested SRAM/DRAM density relation. In reality, it's nowhere near 6/2... The SRAM needs tons of interconnects and stuff that really make them horribly ineffecient in space usage.
The new memory should be six times denser than SRAM and twice as dense as DRAM.
You probably meant that it is six times denser than SRAM, but only half as dense as DRAM (that's still very good!). Typically, DRAM is approximately 12-50 times denser than SRAM
, because each SRAM cell needs a lot of transistors and capacitors, and a DRAM cell only needs a capacitor and bitline connections.Oops, sorry, forgot that. Yes, it worked. But it felt slower than a floppy disk (!). And the storage capacity was already then just a tenth of a CR-RW, cheaply available...
:)
I still have it anyway. Hopefully I might be able to sell it as an antique or something when I get old...
I'm not sure about new drives, but the first computer my parents bought, a 386SX, contained a 50 MB drive. That was pretty small even then, so it got upgraded within a year. After that it didn't get used for like 6-7 years ago until I decided to experiment with approximately two or three years ago...
You didn't, sorry. I thought "zinc" but wrote "silver". Please read my reply to my reply to your post as well. :)
As a Swede I'm curious - why do you call it "Swedish rounding"? We do only have 50 öre coins as smallest (half a krona), but exactly the same situation is found in many other countries...
If you had RTFA'd you would have noticed they did mention silver as well! :)
Photoshop hasn't been ported, yet at least. It runs crap slow because it is being emulated through Rosetta. Considering that, the Intel iMac really didn't do THAT bad. And next time, RTFA. Don't just look at the pictures and assume stuff!
Yes, there still is a chance that you get specifically targeted by a hacker. For the home user, that situation rarely is possible to defend against. Not even for /.ers. I'm not denying that.
The huge majority of hacked Windows boxen, are hacked by automated tools though, like viruses or worms (trojans there have been for Mac OS X - like the 0.6 MB MS Office install - not suspicious at all, right?). As I said, already in my first comment, there aren't that many home systems really targeted for other purposes than botnets/similar purposes. And I think it would be rather silly to hack them all "manually" without using some kind of tool. And as stated on several places in this thread - there just aren't any viruses or worms for OS X...
Basically, if you "just get a rootkit" on your Mac OS X computer you either
1) did something really stupid, like installed it themselves
2) activated some kind of services, possibly using crap (wordbook) passwords, possibly having bad luck getting hit by one of the first hackers to try out a possible exploit.
You can't really get better protection than that on any OS...
copy C:\*.* D: Done!
unless you store all files in the root directory, I think you should consider researching what the command xcopy does instead.
This just in:
Carrying two laptops is heavier than only carrying one.
Opener isn't a virus. It doesn't selfmultiply... What Opener is, it's a rootkit. A program you use as a hacker to cover up that you've hacked into the machine. To use it, you have to gain access to the computer somehow BEFOREHAND. A rootkit basically is useless unless you already have root (or at least user) access to the machine in question. The other source mentions only mentions an exploit. No one has said that there aren't exploits for Mac OS X. Only that none has been used to develop viruses. If seccurity indeed is very important (read: secret information, research, webservers etc), an exploit is a very probable vector of infection, and shouldn't be ignored. Unpatched exploits are what hackers use to gain access. In a home setting, the risk of getting targeted attacks is lesser. Basically, the only interesting use of the average home system is as some kind of a botnet. That means hackers are less probable to hack a home system "manually" and instead use viruses, trojans, spyware etcetra. Also, the automated versions often work better in settings where the user has a firewall (think WMF exploit!). If no ports are opened for services, it doesn't really matter if there is a barn-size hole in the service, as you can't access it remotely anyway.
No, it's not a Pentium D [insert joke about molten computer here].
It's a Core Duo, also code-named Yonah, the successor of the current Pentium M. Basically, a chip developed specifically for laptops. It still works well in desktops as well...
There are no viruses targetting a clean OS X installation, at least not yet. There however are some macro viruses targetting Microsoft Word running under Mac OS X. The most of them won't work under Mac OS X (as many assume the existence of C:\), but surely some of them do work.
>100k viruses would be more correct...
And even if they DO care about .NET 2, it is available for Windows XP already today...
It hasn't even been released yet, and won't for at least half a year...
:)
At least, we can't complain that they are late with the patches anymore. Interesting tactic actually, to release the patches before the operating system...
Assuming it was he (and only he - on one else) who wrote the content of the WP article, he would be on the safe side, yes. But WP articles that are only edited by one person aren't very usual...
That should be ragnarok, nothing else.
Lagadonis said tests have generated 0.8 volts to 1.2 volts by driving an aluminum roofing nail half an inch into a tree attached to a copper water pipe driven 7 inches into the ground. But the electricity is useless because it's unstable and fluctuates.
Sounds a lot like a voltaic pile to me. Something that was made for the first time 200 years ago, only using other materials. The only new thing I can see with this implementation, is that you're using a tree instead of the traditional "little chemist's" lemon. Possibly, the idea is to have the tree regenerate the chemicals. But as they can't say anything about the power of the tappable current, we don't really know (it would be elementary to just raise the voltage - but that would also mean lowering the current...
That's exactly what Martin Luther did...
it's safe to say that Sweden is on the "consumer" side of the scale.
I'm not that sure on that. Even though we do import lots of films and novels, Sweden is the third most music-exporting country in the world (sorry, couldn't find a weblink to confirm it with right now). And Sweden is a tiny country - the population is only 9 millions...
put it in a closet
Duh! That was exactly what I suggested (a wardrobe is a type of closet). And not all wardrobes are in the bedroom even though it's the most commom (of course, some other closet is even better, I give you that)...
maybe under the bed
Been there, done that. Won't work. If possible, worse, as the computer is a lot closer to you with its sound.
If put in a closet, it won't matter if it sounds much, and you shouldn't really be using it day-to-day anyway if it's a server. There are possibilities for remote admining on aswell Windows as *nix, so that shouldn't be a problem.
bleh. links:
2
2
3 (bonus, the disputation. Parts understandable even if you don't know Swedish, because it is partly translated...)