Hehe, sorry, just my raging hormones talking here -- just how I get about smart young women;) but anyway, if anyone's interested in a picture here ya go.
"Single Instance Store (SIS) is a file system filter driver that conserves disk space by removing multiple copies of a file and replacing them with links to a single shared copy in a common folder. These links differ from hard links in that if one copy of the file is changed, it then 'splits off' from the others and becomes a separate file."
So there you go, it is *not* a hardlink. It does a copy-on-write, so if you modify your file, you do *not* modify all the other instances of that file on the server, as has been fudded in this forum so far.
I think this is a pretty good point -- how would it fare against win2k? Is anyone planning such a study?
But all you people can reply with is the 63,000 bugs thing! It's like all microsoft haters in the world unite over one ZDnet article!
The whole *POINT* of doing such a test would be to see if FUD like that was at all substantiated. Saying "nah, there's no point. It wouldn't be any different -- look at how buggy it is!!!" is besides the point!
What's the most recent linux bug count, out of curiosity?
If there's a problem with slashdot's time, or slashdot's moderation system, or if you have any other such gripe about slashdot, either email someone, or wait for an appropriate article to come around (they've been here in the past). *Don't* clutter the message boards with your complaints.
<i>Oh, and I said moderators suck in the title, and gave a valid reason for it. That's gotta be worth -1, troll as well.[/sarcasm]</i>
Your post has nothing to do with the topic of the article, therefore it is Offtopic, therefore -1. It makes perfect sense.
Sorry, I replied to the wrong post. I meant to reply to the one titled "Latest, fastest chip is *always* an OC'ed model" which is a reply to your post./me slaps himself around a bit with a large trout
Overclocking, by definition, is setting the clock rate higher than the manufacturer's rating.
The manufacturer, therefore, can never actually "overclock" their own chips -- they always run them at their own rating.
Heat has *NOTHING* to do with this. Or is there some magical heat threshold in your world which separates overclocked chips from non-overclocked chips? What exactly is it, how much is required to burn your finger when you touch the heat sink?:P
Well first of all you're confusing bus speed with lack of memory, but I'll only concentrate on bus speed.
If you think the limitation of slower RAM than processor clock is so horrible that "processor speeds above 400MHz don't make that drastic difference" you obviously don't know much about memory caching technology, or haven't looked at any high speed benchmarks lately.
Charts such as this one: http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/99q3/990823/image s/q2.gif seem to demonstrate that today's modern processors are doing just fine for themselves scaling to high clock rates even though the memory bus is still slow.
1 Gflop is not the measure of a "supercomptuer" no matter what steve jobs says.
Computers that have a CTP (composite theoretical performance) of over 2000 MTOP/s (millions of theoretical operations per second) qualify for export ban to certain sensitive countries. Jobs decided that this export ban meant they were a "supercomputer." Unfortunately I can't find specific info on the G3/G4's mtops ratings, nor for AMD. Intel has theirs here: http://support.intel.com/support/processors/CTP.HT M
... is execution time. How long it takes to perform the function(s) you're interested it. Everything else (MHZ, Flops, Instructions per clock) considered only by themselves is misleading.
In fact, there's a "performance equation" which gives you execution time:
Execution time for a certain function = Instructions/Function * average Cycles/Instruction * Time/clock cycle + hardware or IO delays
Specific Application performance, or performance suites like SPEC, while far from perfect, are still much better indicators of performance than theoretical garbage such as flops or mtops or analysis of instruction architecture or whatnot.
A preliminary version of the product also was put on the Internet to enable users to look for security breaches, Valentine said. Within two weeks, four denials of service bugs were found, but no breaches were discovered, he said.
As Dr Evil would say: "Riiiiiiight"... Within two weeks, the NT2K server crashed so many times they decided to put it off-line. I'll let you, gentle reader, decide for yourself what that means...
Argh, typical slashdot short-attention span. Slashdot posts about the online test, everyone labels it a marketing ploy. The Slashdot posts that it has been crashed and taken off line, everyone goes "Ha ha microsoft sucks" and moves on, figuring that's the end of it.
Then slashdotters like the one I'm replying to use this anecdotal evidence: "Yeah right, that test? They took it offline a few days after they put it up, what a test!"
If people had just bothered to go BACK to that site later, they would have found that the windows2000test.com was up for over a month! After the horrible crashing scene, they reconfigured the server, reported some bugs in the tcp/ip stack, and put it BACK ON LINE. They also had a detailed log of all the crashes, dos attacks, and problems found and fixed. By the end, the server was running strong with constant DoS banging against it with no CPU slowdown, while running HTTP, FTP, SAMBA and some other services. They identified 4 distinct DoS vunerabilities in the TCP/IP stack through the test, so they did get something of value out of it. Oh and they got the page to display correctly in netscape too:P
Take the unproven assertion that Microsoft made a deal with the NSA, add a mix of anti-NT bias (gee, it could *never* have made C2 on it's own merits!), and poof, we have conspiracy theory!
Perhaps you wish to imply that *all* C2 rated OS makers made deals with the NSA? Maybe they all have "backdoors" too, and you just don't know it?
Anyway I don't see jumping to conclusions as necessarily "insightful."
The other thing I noted in the story was that it's patchable if you go to the microsoft site. This places the onus on users to make sure they're not infected; Microsoft can say 'look, it's available; it's not our fault if you don't download it.'
with win98 you have a nice feature called "windows update" which brings you to a page listing all the critical patches, and other dowloads (such as new themes and new versions of media player and whatnot). All you have to do is check a box and click a button. This patch was on windows update as a "critical update" a month ago. It wasn't that hard to download.
If you download the patch it still leaves the settings up - even on the Restricted Zones.
That's because you have to *run* the patch:)
Ok, joking aside, what do you mean "leaves the settings up"? What the patch does is mark two built-in functions, which the exploit uses, "unsafe for scripting" (they were mistakenly marked "safe for scripting" before). When they're marked unsafe, the script that runs this virus will no longer work.
Since the virus in question hasn't yet been found "in the wild" I don't see how you can verify whether the patch works or not.
The virus actually takes advantage of a security flaw in Microsoft's ActiveX technology that was discovered in August.
August?!? AUGUST! Why the hell wasn't a patch to repair the error relased in August then? When a monopoly has no competition, they have no motivation to repair errors until they become huge issues for their software....
Sloooow Down. A Patch was released, and has been available on windows update as a "critical update" for some time now. I've installed it, as has anyone who checks windows update with any regularity.
All I know is one of my roommates's girlfriend is DAMN HOT, is a geek, and they met online. He lives in NY and she lives in CA, but she came to our school (we're sophmores, she's a freshman). I'm pretty sure his situation is rare though.
Now I think that mindless microsoft bashing is lame and annoying and done to death.
And I think that mindless BWP bashing is lame and annoying and done to death.
But I think the way this article combined them both was pretty clever, and it got a few lols out of me. It wasn't meant to be a review of BWP or a critique of MS. It was meant to be funny.
The image is cool too, I like BG's eyes:)
But this should have been under "Humor" not "Microsoft." It's funny. Lighten up and Laugh.
The problem where renaming the q3demo directory got you out of restricted demo mode was only applicable to the first test release (1.05?). It's been fixed in later releases.
"Myst, the most successful computer game of all time, has no community. "
Actually we do. It's not quite as big as quake's (/understatement), but it's there. It basically revolves around a web site called RivenGuild (www.rivenguild.com), and especially the RivenLyst -- a mailing list devoted to "hardcore" M/R/D fans.
We actually have plenty to discuss -- Myst, Riven, the three Myst books, two soundtracks, lots of online fanfiction and art, the culture and language of the civilization invented as a backstory to myst and riven, stuff Cyan releases on 'secret' parts of their web page to humor us (information on upcoming products), and other random stuff.
... what IE does. Windows maintains your "favorites" folder, which is made up of.URL files (analogous to your "url objects"?). It can be manipulated like any other folder.
Unfortunately it's operation is tied to IE, and Netscape doesn't use it.
Limited mindset? That quote isn't even sequential! Having a human body and being conscious are completely unrelated things, and I'm sure Mr. Bringsjord knows that.
I go to RPI and am taking one of his classes right now, he seems like an intelligent, straightforward guy, who knows his stuff. I'll have to ask him about this:)
Grr I just am having trouble with my sig and need to test it. I hope no moderators notice this post and if they do, realize that I'm posting it under a really old story so that it won't bother anyone so they won't mark it down for being offtopic and hurt my karma:)
Does continuous voice recognition software use some sort of neural net technique to interpret the sounds? It seems that they do due to the way you "train" them to your voice. Though I could be wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Hehe, sorry, just my raging hormones talking here -- just how I get about smart young women ;)
but anyway, if anyone's interested in a picture here ya go.
-------------
The following sentence is true.
"Single Instance Store (SIS) is a file system filter driver that conserves disk space by removing multiple copies of a file and replacing them with links to a single shared copy in a common folder. These links differ from hard links in that if one copy of the file is changed, it then 'splits off' from the others and becomes a separate file."
So there you go, it is *not* a hardlink. It does a copy-on-write, so if you modify your file, you do *not* modify all the other instances of that file on the server, as has been fudded in this forum so far.
-------------
The following sentence is true.
I think this is a pretty good point -- how would it fare against win2k? Is anyone planning such a study?
But all you people can reply with is the 63,000 bugs thing! It's like all microsoft haters in the world unite over one ZDnet article!
The whole *POINT* of doing such a test would be to see if FUD like that was at all substantiated. Saying "nah, there's no point. It wouldn't be any different -- look at how buggy it is!!!" is besides the point!
What's the most recent linux bug count, out of curiosity?
-------------
The following sentence is true.
If there's a problem with slashdot's time, or slashdot's moderation system, or if you have any other such gripe about slashdot, either email someone, or wait for an appropriate article to come around (they've been here in the past). *Don't* clutter the message boards with your complaints.
<i>Oh, and I said moderators suck in the title, and gave a valid reason for it. That's gotta be worth -1, troll as well.[/sarcasm]</i>
Your post has nothing to do with the topic of the article, therefore it is Offtopic, therefore -1. It makes perfect sense.
-------------
The following sentence is true.
Sorry, I replied to the wrong post. I meant to reply to the one titled "Latest, fastest chip is *always* an OC'ed model" which is a reply to your post. /me slaps himself around a bit with a large trout
-------------
The following sentence is true.
Overclocking, by definition, is setting the clock rate higher than the manufacturer's rating.
:P
The manufacturer, therefore, can never actually "overclock" their own chips -- they always run them at their own rating.
Heat has *NOTHING* to do with this. Or is there some magical heat threshold in your world which separates overclocked chips from non-overclocked chips? What exactly is it, how much is required to burn your finger when you touch the heat sink?
-------------
The following sentence is true.
Well first of all you're confusing bus speed with lack of memory, but I'll only concentrate on bus speed.
e s/q2.gif seem to demonstrate that today's modern processors are doing just fine for themselves scaling to high clock rates even though the memory bus is still slow.
If you think the limitation of slower RAM than processor clock is so horrible that "processor speeds above 400MHz don't make that drastic difference" you obviously don't know much about memory caching technology, or haven't looked at any high speed benchmarks lately.
Charts such as this one: http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/99q3/990823/imag
-------------
The following sentence is true.
1 Gflop is not the measure of a "supercomptuer" no matter what steve jobs says.
T M
Computers that have a CTP (composite theoretical performance) of over 2000 MTOP/s (millions of theoretical operations per second) qualify for export ban to certain sensitive countries. Jobs decided that this export ban meant they were a "supercomputer." Unfortunately I can't find specific info on the G3/G4's mtops ratings, nor for AMD. Intel has theirs here: http://support.intel.com/support/processors/CTP.H
-------------
The following sentence is true.
... is execution time. How long it takes to perform the function(s) you're interested it. Everything else (MHZ, Flops, Instructions per clock) considered only by themselves is misleading.
In fact, there's a "performance equation" which gives you execution time:
Execution time for a certain function = Instructions/Function * average Cycles/Instruction * Time/clock cycle + hardware or IO delays
Specific Application performance, or performance suites like SPEC, while far from perfect, are still much better indicators of performance than theoretical garbage such as flops or mtops or analysis of instruction architecture or whatnot.
-------------
The following sentence is true.
A preliminary version of the product also was put on the Internet to enable users to look for security breaches, Valentine said. Within two weeks, four denials of service bugs were found, but no breaches were discovered, he said.
:P
As Dr Evil would say: "Riiiiiiight"... Within two weeks, the NT2K server crashed so many times they decided to put it off-line. I'll let you, gentle reader, decide for yourself what that means...
Argh, typical slashdot short-attention span. Slashdot posts about the online test, everyone labels it a marketing ploy. The Slashdot posts that it has been crashed and taken off line, everyone goes "Ha ha microsoft sucks" and moves on, figuring that's the end of it.
Then slashdotters like the one I'm replying to use this anecdotal evidence: "Yeah right, that test? They took it offline a few days after they put it up, what a test!"
If people had just bothered to go BACK to that site later, they would have found that the windows2000test.com was up for over a month! After the horrible crashing scene, they reconfigured the server, reported some bugs in the tcp/ip stack, and put it BACK ON LINE. They also had a detailed log of all the crashes, dos attacks, and problems found and fixed. By the end, the server was running strong with constant DoS banging against it with no CPU slowdown, while running HTTP, FTP, SAMBA and some other services. They identified 4 distinct DoS vunerabilities in the TCP/IP stack through the test, so they did get something of value out of it.
Oh and they got the page to display correctly in netscape too
-------------
The following sentence is true.
etc. ;)
-------------
The following sentence is true.
Take the unproven assertion that Microsoft made a deal with the NSA, add a mix of anti-NT bias (gee, it could *never* have made C2 on it's own merits!), and poof, we have conspiracy theory!
Perhaps you wish to imply that *all* C2 rated OS makers made deals with the NSA? Maybe they all have "backdoors" too, and you just don't know it?
Anyway I don't see jumping to conclusions as necessarily "insightful."
-------------
The following sentence is true.
The other thing I noted in the story was that it's patchable if you go to the microsoft site. This places the onus on users to make sure they're not infected; Microsoft can say 'look, it's available; it's not our fault if you don't download it.'
with win98 you have a nice feature called "windows update" which brings you to a page listing all the critical patches, and other dowloads (such as new themes and new versions of media player and whatnot). All you have to do is check a box and click a button. This patch was on windows update as a "critical update" a month ago. It wasn't that hard to download.
-------------
The following sentence is true.
It works fine, as you said, on Netscape on a Mac. What now about Microsoft?
-------------
The following sentence is true.
If you download the patch it still leaves the settings up - even on the Restricted Zones.
:)
That's because you have to *run* the patch
Ok, joking aside, what do you mean "leaves the settings up"? What the patch does is mark two built-in functions, which the exploit uses, "unsafe for scripting" (they were mistakenly marked "safe for scripting" before). When they're marked unsafe, the script that runs this virus will no longer work.
Since the virus in question hasn't yet been found "in the wild" I don't see how you can verify whether the patch works or not.
-------------
The following sentence is true.
The virus actually takes advantage of a security flaw in Microsoft's ActiveX technology that was discovered in August.
August?!? AUGUST! Why the hell wasn't a patch to repair the error relased in August then? When a monopoly has no competition, they have no motivation to repair errors until they become huge issues for their software....
Sloooow Down. A Patch was released, and has been available on windows update as a "critical update" for some time now. I've installed it, as has anyone who checks windows update with any regularity.
-------------
The following sentence is true.
All I know is one of my roommates's girlfriend is DAMN HOT, is a geek, and they met online. He lives in NY and she lives in CA, but she came to our school (we're sophmores, she's a freshman). I'm pretty sure his situation is rare though.
:)
(Asshole
-------------
The following sentence is true.
Now I think that mindless microsoft bashing is lame and annoying and done to death.
:)
And I think that mindless BWP bashing is lame and annoying and done to death.
But I think the way this article combined them both was pretty clever, and it got a few lols out of me. It wasn't meant to be a review of BWP or a critique of MS. It was meant to be funny.
The image is cool too, I like BG's eyes
But this should have been under "Humor" not "Microsoft." It's funny. Lighten up and Laugh.
-------------
The following sentence is true.
The problem where renaming the q3demo directory got you out of restricted demo mode was only applicable to the first test release (1.05?). It's been fixed in later releases.
-------------
The following sentence is true.
"Myst, the most successful computer game of all time, has no community. "
Actually we do. It's not quite as big as quake's (/understatement), but it's there. It basically revolves around a web site called RivenGuild (www.rivenguild.com), and especially the RivenLyst -- a mailing list devoted to "hardcore" M/R/D fans.
We actually have plenty to discuss -- Myst, Riven, the three Myst books, two soundtracks, lots of online fanfiction and art, the culture and language of the civilization invented as a backstory to myst and riven, stuff Cyan releases on 'secret' parts of their web page to humor us (information on upcoming products), and other random stuff.
-------------
The following sentence is true.
... what IE does. Windows maintains your "favorites" folder, which is made up of .URL files (analogous to your "url objects"?). It can be manipulated like any other folder.
Unfortunately it's operation is tied to IE, and Netscape doesn't use it.
-------------
The following sentence is true.
NT 5 (w2k) can do USB. I don't know if there's an add-on way of doing it in NT4 (like there was for win95)
And Microsoft has an "unsupported" ipv6 stack for NT for download here: http://research.microsoft.com/msripv6/
-------------
The following sentence is true.
Limited mindset? That quote isn't even sequential! Having a human body and being conscious are completely unrelated things, and I'm sure Mr. Bringsjord knows that.
:)
I go to RPI and am taking one of his classes right now, he seems like an intelligent, straightforward guy, who knows his stuff. I'll have to ask him about this
-------------
The following sentence is true.
Grr I just am having trouble with my sig and need to test it. I hope no moderators notice this post and if they do, realize that I'm posting it under a really old story so that it won't bother anyone so they won't mark it down for being offtopic and hurt my karma :)
-------------
The following sentence is true.
Does continuous voice recognition software use some sort of neural net technique to interpret the sounds? It seems that they do due to the way you "train" them to your voice. Though I could be wrong.
-------------
The following sentence is true.