Sorry, those numbers give an average packet size of about 85k if they're TCP/IP. I expect they're payload bytes, I don't know of any ISP that quotes payload bps.
Still you are right about one thing. IF the server ignores the MTU discovery and always sends 64k IP packets the required number of ACKs drops right down. The packets will get instantly fragmented into 40-50 pieces that have to be reassembled at the other end but it should work.
It kills performance if you start losing the odd packet though. And anyone who does RED (random early drop) will really hate you.
Very wrong.
Normal TCP over ethernet has around a 38 bytes Ethernet overhead, for 1500 bytes packets (with timestamps) that's less than 18:1 downstream vs upstream. DOCSIS is a little better with a 30 bytes overhead but it still doesn't get you to 20:1 unless you dump the TCP/IP timestamps.
With pure TCP/IP and all options stripped from the ACK packets you get about 38:1 (31:1 with timestamps). MPLS looks like the lightest physical layer protocol, bare TCP/IP over MPLS gets you about 35:1.
You can get higher ratios, in very special cases. If you have only a couple of TCP/IP sessions, and you're using PPP you may be able to use VJ-compression. It compresses a stripped IP header to maybe 4-5 bytes. If you're using PPP over MPLS you could get 100:1 in the perfect case, if you're lucky, maybe.
Back in the real world, with 1500 bytes packets, 10:1, maybe 15:1 is normally the highest ratio you should consider. A ratio of 20:1 is really pushing it and you'll probably have to reconfigure your IP stack to get rid of things like timestamps if you want the top speed.
As for a ratio of 60m:1m, with TCP/IP, yea, right.
E: Invalid operation pussy
# apt-get install pussy
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Suggested packages:
tits
The following packages will be REMOVED
penis
The following NEW packages will be installed
pussy
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 1 to remove and 2 not upgraded.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? ^C^C^C
#
Okay, question one is why are they underclocking (or using really cheap versions of) the ARMs I know they are pretty close to a GHz for expensive ones and mass produced g
ear (very price sensitive) doesn't go below about 200MHz.
The second is why aren't they using a fractal grid ie:
table +-0123456789ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST UVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz begin 664 Ascii_art.txt h6+cU60+U60+UL0+U60+U60-TLpxTLpxT60+U60+U60w860+U60+U60-Q60+U h60+j60+U60+U63kU60+U60w860+U60+U60+U8moh9GgU60+U60+U60+f9Goh h8kcU60+U60+U60-w63+UT0+U60+U60+U65kUI0-w0W+U60+U60+U60gh9Gof h60+U60+U60+U8moh9Gg860+U60+U60+j60+U60-QLpxT63xTLmwU60+U63k8 h60+U60+U65kU60+U60+ULpxTK3xTLm+U60+U60-w0W+U60+U60+UL0+U60+U h9m+U60+U60-Q60+U60+j0W+U60+U60+U60gh9Gof60+U60+U60+U8moh9Gg8 h60+U60+U60+UT0-E65kU60+U60+U60-w63+UT+cU60+U60+U60+f9Goh8m+U h60+U60+U60gh9Gof0W+U60+U60+U9m+U60+UL3xTLpxTLpwj60+U60-Q0W+U R60+U60+j60+U60+U60+U60+U60+U60+U60+UL+c+ + end
So a processor has four links from it's corners and they are linked together into a group of four that has links from the four corners. Repeat to infinity.
OOps: The shitty Slashcode requires that my pretty picture be encoded.
There was no 'break in' I suppose the nearest criminal act we're looking at is shop lifting.
As to what's been 'shoplifted', well it would appear to be exactly the same as a small bag of those Amazon MP3s.
So we're looking at probably a small fine, possibly community service, and maybe a bit of probation if they tried to run for it. Jail time is allowed, but only reasonable if it's not your first time up before the bench.
If this was the result nobody would have noticed.
But, the civil and criminal copyright laws were designed with a whole big fat lump of criminal intent built in, because it's so expensive to setup to copy a work anyone who does it must be intending to make thousands of copies.
At least that's how it used to be, nowadays the cost is so low that the only intent needed is "I wonder if that sounds as crap as the last one".
So no, the law is not working as it's supposed to.
Criminal copyright infringement is normally only applied if
The copies are sold
There are works from many different copyright holders
The idea is that it makes more sense for the state to pursue the case because it's cheaper that all those individual civil cases and the fact that the items are sold gives a direct indication of the value of lost sales.
I doubt it. It probably means it's just different.
An applicator is either designed to be used the way that the first user wants it (may be the programmer) or, often later on, it is able to adapt to user tastes. Users obviously prefer the computer to be able to adjust to their way of working, even if it's weird.
There are two main ways that an application can adapt. You either have loads of configuration options or you can change the code. Configuration options are the only way for old binary compiled code but firefox's plugin (addon) ability lets people change the code; potentially a far better fit to what the user wants.
Of course there are disadvantages to both routes but IME (outside firefox) core code + patches is much faster and more stable than first core code + 2nd user options + 3rd user options + 4th... + nth user options.
This is not to say that firefox couldn't get better; running the plugin code in a separate process/thread to the website could give a better response to problem plugins. Disabling and enabling plugins without a restart, so a plugin could add an "Enable and use me" menu option or button would be perfect for rarely used plugins.
I suppose this is a quibble, I really don't agree that it's fourth gen
I agree with the Gen 1 to 2 jump as switching from point to point cables to true networks and at the same time mostly text based to mostly graphical.
The Gen 2 to 3 jump is the switch from a single protocol at a time to all protocols included in one box. Ie the so called thin client boxes.
But I don't see that putting the client on a general purpose PC is a fourth generation. Terminal emulators have been around since before there were terminals. The first 'terminals' were actually a remote emulation of the local console of the machine, initially just good enough for data entry (a page at a time) but reasonably quickly becoming the console for many machines.
By the time you get to X-servers, the console of the main machine has a very good chance of being a memory mapped display with a local X-server running it. Any X-Server is automatically a remote terminal.
If you still think it's a new idea; go look at the VT103. It's a VT100 terminal with an LSI-11 mini-computer in the box for local processing... plug in a disk or tape drive and it's complete.
Even with MS windows remote processing has been around for a long time; hosted Exchange is easy. Terminal services/remote desktop or Citrix can be used to remote anything, even with just a browser.
Sigh, okay, everyone off my lawn...I have to get back to my TPS reports; I accidentally saved them in docx format and have to re-save them all as.doc so people with Word 2007 can read them.
Damn, my sarcasm detector must be wonky, I can't work out if that's a typo or not.
The two of you have pretty much put what's wrong with copyright in a nutshell here.
If Mr J Random can make a passable copy of your product (with special secret sauce) without a business loan (or similar) your business has a serious problem. The product of "music business" has never been music, it used to be promotion, distribution and mass copying services.
There was recently a piece in the paper about the police being proud of convicting some family for estimated £7,000,000 of copying of movies, music and porn (lots of porn) DVDs. There was this picture of the PCs each with 12 DVD recorders in them. I would estimate that's maybe £600 per machine, £1k if you want a good one. That's personal loan or savings range, not a business loan. That's copying services.
Distribution; well you know that, that's the internet: tenner a month.
Even the last product "music business" can now sell, promotion, is very devalued. It's the same thing that newspaper and TV adverts used to be good for.
So we're back to the law.
Copyright is supposed to protect you from some other company throwing money at the problem and getting to the buyers first. If a your official product (DVDs) can be copied and manufactured in a garage in Chingford before your multimillion company can get it on the shelves you're as good as dead.
And do remember, these guys are the ones that couldn't stop, they fell into the trap of 'just a little bit more', if they had decided that £6,000,000 was enough they wouldn't have been caught... and even now; a big chunk of that £7M is supposed to be out of reach, is say £4M enough compensation for 4y work and 4y in a cushy jail...
So not legal, but cost effective, well... not for me I'm addicted to Slashdot.
The website looks just like a startup's website to me. The copy has been written by the MD (or the MD's marketing friend) and the layout is exactly what you get from someone technical who can do html but does their best to minimise their contact with it. The fonts in particular are using the "verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif" list straight out of "the manual" and the layout is a dead simple table layout copied from before everyone got conned into trying to do all the layout using CSS.
As for 3, I imagine it's got something to do with the US having a sue happy population with stupid laws about anything with the word nuclear in it. You know like Nuclear magnetic resonance scanner...
TCM has roots in a paper called "Programming Satan's computer" the first paragraph of the conclusion is this...
We have tried to give an accessible introduction to the complex and fascinating
world of cryptographic protocols. Trying to program a computer which is under
the control of an intelligent and malicious opponent is one of the most challenging
tasks in computer science, and even programs of a few lines have turned out to
contain errors which were not discovered for over a decade.
The second sentence tells you what TPM is for; hint: it's not for you.
The problem with that theory is that it would result in attendance dropping, in half empty concerts because there aren't enough people willing to pay the price hike. That isn't what's happening, the venues have been able to raise prices and still get the full house needed for people to come back to the next concert.
The only way that can happen, in a recession yet, is if even more people want to go but can't justify the cost.
So where do all these people find out about the concerts? I don't see any increase in big business advertising... in fact I see a great deal of negative PR...
Sorry you feel abused, that's how we feel too, however, our feeling has a name because it's happened so many times before. Many people have been "Microshafted" before now and while the exit of Billg appears to have made changes it's not yet clear if they are for better or worse.
As for Microsoft's "Free" software, you should go to a few MS events. They will tell you that they aren't important, the important thing is "The Stack" the bottom of "The Stack" must be Windows, the top is Office. The bits in between are either required for Office (eg Exchange) or just 'check box' items to make sure nobody has a good reason for leaving. That is after all the core of lockin.
Erm, that isn't Mode 2 records, that's audio data padded to 2352 byte blocks.
Mode 2 sectors have a sync header plus a (minutes/seconds/sector No/Mode No) for each block and have 2336 bytes for each block. White book (video CD) sectors have an additional XA header and a 4 byte checksum with a final data rate of 2324 bytes per sector (Mode 2/Form 2 sectors).
If you have just two disks, then yes complete failure of one disk requires the other to be good. But for block failures you could lose upto 50% of each disk and still recover everything. The upto is a marketing "UPTO" so 25% is normally more like it due to the statistical probability of "bad luck".
But things get a lot better.
If you have four disks then you can recover all the data from any two disks, you don't have to have a disk from set A and a disk from set B survive. Plus the file recovery still works, if you have a disk with lots of bad sectors but can recover some files they will contribute to the survivability. So it's very likely that any three disks in a 'sort of readable' state will allow for complete recovery.
A backup set with 10 CD-R disks is seriously impressive.
This provides about 3GB of storage and you can recover the data if you can read any five of the disks or can recover 3GB of whole archive files or failing that 3GB of matched pieces of archive files (eg it is possible to use two broken archive files to replace one pristine one if the errors don't overlap.)
Put simply, pararchive (v2, v1 wasn't quite as good.) was designed to give the best possible chance of recovery no matter how bad the underlying medium is. What's more is it can be tuned to the error rate of that medium; you work out how much data (5%, 10%, 50%) you expect to lose and create enough error correction to overwhelm it.
BTW: A 50% error rate is generally considered to be rather poor... aka complete crap!
Okey, you're probably right, I suspect a lot more of Microsoft's website is accessible to firefox than used to be.
But it still feels like I hit and IE only section every time I use firefox. I guess they still don't write it to standards; just fix it if enough people complain.
No you don't. You said you wanted to compare installing a 2002 XP and a 2002 Linux and bring them both upto date as the OP did to his original XP.
When you do that with XP you get a mess. With Linux you get a clean, fast and stable system.
You get a clean, fast and stable Linux system even if you started in '92 like I did.
That's not what you get if you start with windows '95, I know, I tried. Mostly you get blue screens and reboot loops. (Even starting with original XP and adding service packs is quite likely to get you get BSODS).
Or perhaps you didn't mean what you implied, however, there are lots of answers to that round here.
There are a lot of Microsoft bugfixes that do not come through windows update and even some of the updates that come through WU are best downloaded (eg: service packs). But normally if you want to download anything that isn't a mass market download (eg: a windows beta) you're stuck with using their activex download manager. This especially applies to anything in the subscriber msdn.
I have, occasionally, tried to download stuff using Linux firefox. It doesn't work even if many of the pages render mostly the same as in IE.
BTW: The 2010 promises, sorry but I've heard that before.
Slashdot Mirror
support that hacked together mess called PAE
Snigger.
PAE is the 64bit page table mode. When a 32bit OS enables PAE it's enabling 64bit pages tables.
When an OS is in the 64bit modes it MUST use PAE.
Sorry, those numbers give an average packet size of about 85k if they're TCP/IP. I expect they're payload bytes, I don't know of any ISP that quotes payload bps.
Still you are right about one thing. IF the server ignores the MTU discovery and always sends 64k IP packets the required number of ACKs drops right down. The packets will get instantly fragmented into 40-50 pieces that have to be reassembled at the other end but it should work.
It kills performance if you start losing the odd packet though. And anyone who does RED (random early drop) will really hate you.
Very wrong.
Normal TCP over ethernet has around a 38 bytes Ethernet overhead, for 1500 bytes packets (with timestamps) that's less than 18:1 downstream vs upstream. DOCSIS is a little better with a 30 bytes overhead but it still doesn't get you to 20:1 unless you dump the TCP/IP timestamps.
With pure TCP/IP and all options stripped from the ACK packets you get about 38:1 (31:1 with timestamps). MPLS looks like the lightest physical layer protocol, bare TCP/IP over MPLS gets you about 35:1.
You can get higher ratios, in very special cases. If you have only a couple of TCP/IP sessions, and you're using PPP you may be able to use VJ-compression. It compresses a stripped IP header to maybe 4-5 bytes. If you're using PPP over MPLS you could get 100:1 in the perfect case, if you're lucky, maybe.
Back in the real world, with 1500 bytes packets, 10:1, maybe 15:1 is normally the highest ratio you should consider. A ratio of 20:1 is really pushing it and you'll probably have to reconfigure your IP stack to get rid of things like timestamps if you want the top speed.
As for a ratio of 60m:1m, with TCP/IP, yea, right.
# apt-get pussy
E: Invalid operation pussy
# apt-get install pussy
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Suggested packages:
tits
The following packages will be REMOVED
penis
The following NEW packages will be installed
pussy
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 1 to remove and 2 not upgraded.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? ^C^C^C
#
Phew!
Okay, question one is why are they underclocking (or using really cheap versions of) the ARMs I know they are pretty close to a GHz for expensive ones and mass produced g ear (very price sensitive) doesn't go below about 200MHz.
The second is why aren't they using a fractal grid ie:
So a processor has four links from it's corners and they are linked together into a group of four that has links from the four corners. Repeat to infinity.
OOps: The shitty Slashcode requires that my pretty picture be encoded.
and they don't beat up grandmas.
You don't even have to do that, half the machines over here are set to American and their users don't notice.
Okay, random response.
There was no 'break in' I suppose the nearest criminal act we're looking at is shop lifting.
As to what's been 'shoplifted', well it would appear to be exactly the same as a small bag of those Amazon MP3s.
So we're looking at probably a small fine, possibly community service, and maybe a bit of probation if they tried to run for it. Jail time is allowed, but only reasonable if it's not your first time up before the bench.
If this was the result nobody would have noticed.
But, the civil and criminal copyright laws were designed with a whole big fat lump of criminal intent built in, because it's so expensive to setup to copy a work anyone who does it must be intending to make thousands of copies.
At least that's how it used to be, nowadays the cost is so low that the only intent needed is "I wonder if that sounds as crap as the last one".
So no, the law is not working as it's supposed to.
Criminal copyright infringement is normally only applied if
The idea is that it makes more sense for the state to pursue the case because it's cheaper that all those individual civil cases and the fact that the items are sold gives a direct indication of the value of lost sales.
So, you actually agree; one is NOT a prime, it's a "unit". Like -1, i and -i.
maybe it means the built-in one sucks?
I doubt it. It probably means it's just different.
An applicator is either designed to be used the way that the first user wants it (may be the programmer) or, often later on, it is able to adapt to user tastes. Users obviously prefer the computer to be able to adjust to their way of working, even if it's weird.
There are two main ways that an application can adapt. You either have loads of configuration options or you can change the code. Configuration options are the only way for old binary compiled code but firefox's plugin (addon) ability lets people change the code; potentially a far better fit to what the user wants.
Of course there are disadvantages to both routes but IME (outside firefox) core code + patches is much faster and more stable than first core code + 2nd user options + 3rd user options + 4th ... + nth user options.
This is not to say that firefox couldn't get better; running the plugin code in a separate process/thread to the website could give a better response to problem plugins. Disabling and enabling plugins without a restart, so a plugin could add an "Enable and use me" menu option or button would be perfect for rarely used plugins.
Google have been thinking about doing this; their data centres are built out of lots of standard containers after all ...
I suppose this is a quibble, I really don't agree that it's fourth gen
I agree with the Gen 1 to 2 jump as switching from point to point cables to true networks and at the same time mostly text based to mostly graphical.
The Gen 2 to 3 jump is the switch from a single protocol at a time to all protocols included in one box. Ie the so called thin client boxes.
But I don't see that putting the client on a general purpose PC is a fourth generation. Terminal emulators have been around since before there were terminals. The first 'terminals' were actually a remote emulation of the local console of the machine, initially just good enough for data entry (a page at a time) but reasonably quickly becoming the console for many machines.
By the time you get to X-servers, the console of the main machine has a very good chance of being a memory mapped display with a local X-server running it. Any X-Server is automatically a remote terminal.
If you still think it's a new idea; go look at the VT103. It's a VT100 terminal with an LSI-11 mini-computer in the box for local processing ... plug in a disk or tape drive and it's complete.
Even with MS windows remote processing has been around for a long time; hosted Exchange is easy. Terminal services/remote desktop or Citrix can be used to remote anything, even with just a browser.
Sigh, okay, everyone off my lawn...I have to get back to my TPS reports; I accidentally saved them in docx format and have to re-save them all as .doc so people with Word 2007 can read them.
Damn, my sarcasm detector must be wonky, I can't work out if that's a typo or not.
The two of you have pretty much put what's wrong with copyright in a nutshell here.
If Mr J Random can make a passable copy of your product (with special secret sauce) without a business loan (or similar) your business has a serious problem. The product of "music business" has never been music, it used to be promotion, distribution and mass copying services.
There was recently a piece in the paper about the police being proud of convicting some family for estimated £7,000,000 of copying of movies, music and porn (lots of porn) DVDs. There was this picture of the PCs each with 12 DVD recorders in them. I would estimate that's maybe £600 per machine, £1k if you want a good one. That's personal loan or savings range, not a business loan. That's copying services.
Distribution; well you know that, that's the internet: tenner a month.
Even the last product "music business" can now sell, promotion, is very devalued. It's the same thing that newspaper and TV adverts used to be good for.
So we're back to the law.
Copyright is supposed to protect you from some other company throwing money at the problem and getting to the buyers first. If a your official product (DVDs) can be copied and manufactured in a garage in Chingford before your multimillion company can get it on the shelves you're as good as dead.
And do remember, these guys are the ones that couldn't stop, they fell into the trap of 'just a little bit more', if they had decided that £6,000,000 was enough they wouldn't have been caught ... and even now; a big chunk of that £7M is supposed to be out of reach, is say £4M enough compensation for 4y work and 4y in a cushy jail ...
So not legal, but cost effective, well ... not for me I'm addicted to Slashdot.
The website looks just like a startup's website to me. The copy has been written by the MD (or the MD's marketing friend) and the layout is exactly what you get from someone technical who can do html but does their best to minimise their contact with it. The fonts in particular are using the "verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif" list straight out of "the manual" and the layout is a dead simple table layout copied from before everyone got conned into trying to do all the layout using CSS.
As for 3, I imagine it's got something to do with the US having a sue happy population with stupid laws about anything with the word nuclear in it. You know like Nuclear magnetic resonance scanner ...
TCM has roots in a paper called "Programming Satan's computer" the first paragraph of the conclusion is this ...
We have tried to give an accessible introduction to the complex and fascinating
world of cryptographic protocols. Trying to program a computer which is under
the control of an intelligent and malicious opponent is one of the most challenging
tasks in computer science, and even programs of a few lines have turned out to
contain errors which were not discovered for over a decade.
The second sentence tells you what TPM is for; hint: it's not for you.
... recession being blamed for it ...
The problem with that theory is that it would result in attendance dropping, in half empty concerts because there aren't enough people willing to pay the price hike. That isn't what's happening, the venues have been able to raise prices and still get the full house needed for people to come back to the next concert.
The only way that can happen, in a recession yet, is if even more people want to go but can't justify the cost.
So where do all these people find out about the concerts? I don't see any increase in big business advertising ... in fact I see a great deal of negative PR ...
Sorry you feel abused, that's how we feel too, however, our feeling has a name because it's happened so many times before. Many people have been "Microshafted" before now and while the exit of Billg appears to have made changes it's not yet clear if they are for better or worse.
As for Microsoft's "Free" software, you should go to a few MS events. They will tell you that they aren't important, the important thing is "The Stack" the bottom of "The Stack" must be Windows, the top is Office. The bits in between are either required for Office (eg Exchange) or just 'check box' items to make sure nobody has a good reason for leaving. That is after all the core of lockin.
Erm, that isn't Mode 2 records, that's audio data padded to 2352 byte blocks.
Mode 2 sectors have a sync header plus a (minutes/seconds/sector No/Mode No) for each block and have 2336 bytes for each block. White book (video CD) sectors have an additional XA header and a 4 byte checksum with a final data rate of 2324 bytes per sector (Mode 2/Form 2 sectors).
Except, if you're rewriting it every month you can replace disks as they go bad. (You better have good error recovery)
Of course, this needs an autochanger ... a read/write autochanger ... how many tape drives can you buy for that price?
Because it's nowhere near as good.
If you have just two disks, then yes complete failure of one disk requires the other to be good. But for block failures you could lose upto 50% of each disk and still recover everything. The upto is a marketing "UPTO" so 25% is normally more like it due to the statistical probability of "bad luck".
But things get a lot better.
If you have four disks then you can recover all the data from any two disks, you don't have to have a disk from set A and a disk from set B survive. Plus the file recovery still works, if you have a disk with lots of bad sectors but can recover some files they will contribute to the survivability. So it's very likely that any three disks in a 'sort of readable' state will allow for complete recovery.
A backup set with 10 CD-R disks is seriously impressive.
This provides about 3GB of storage and you can recover the data if you can read any five of the disks or can recover 3GB of whole archive files or failing that 3GB of matched pieces of archive files (eg it is possible to use two broken archive files to replace one pristine one if the errors don't overlap.)
Put simply, pararchive (v2, v1 wasn't quite as good.) was designed to give the best possible chance of recovery no matter how bad the underlying medium is. What's more is it can be tuned to the error rate of that medium; you work out how much data (5%, 10%, 50%) you expect to lose and create enough error correction to overwhelm it.
BTW: A 50% error rate is generally considered to be rather poor ... aka complete crap!
Okey, you're probably right, I suspect a lot more of Microsoft's website is accessible to firefox than used to be.
But it still feels like I hit and IE only section every time I use firefox. I guess they still don't write it to standards; just fix it if enough people complain.
No you don't. You said you wanted to compare installing a 2002 XP and a 2002 Linux and bring them both upto date as the OP did to his original XP.
When you do that with XP you get a mess. With Linux you get a clean, fast and stable system.
You get a clean, fast and stable Linux system even if you started in '92 like I did.
That's not what you get if you start with windows '95, I know, I tried. Mostly you get blue screens and reboot loops. (Even starting with original XP and adding service packs is quite likely to get you get BSODS).
Or perhaps you didn't mean what you implied, however, there are lots of answers to that round here.
There are a lot of Microsoft bugfixes that do not come through windows update and even some of the updates that come through WU are best downloaded (eg: service packs). But normally if you want to download anything that isn't a mass market download (eg: a windows beta) you're stuck with using their activex download manager. This especially applies to anything in the subscriber msdn.
I have, occasionally, tried to download stuff using Linux firefox. It doesn't work even if many of the pages render mostly the same as in IE.
BTW: The 2010 promises, sorry but I've heard that before.