As I understand it (from the Science of Diskworld, quite a great read, and about real science despite the title) the problem with the "it was gradual" argument is this.
Fossils are rare. Damn rare to create, even harder to find. Up until Jurassic Park came out, there were all of THREE T-Rex fossils found. They've since found more.
This means that you may find only four or five fossils of a given species. The last one you -happen- to find may be a million years before the K-T boundary, but that's only because you haven't found any newer ones yet.
What is significant, though, is that there is a time when 99.99% of the fossils stop appearing past. There's also evidence of massive dieoffs in the area of the crater of much more common things - I think ammonites were the significant ones, but I don't have the book handy.
Now, this is all thirdhand data (studies, paraphrased by the book, [mis]remembered by me). But it does help explain why you may seem to see species slowly drifting off, when they really all stuck around until that fateful year.
I looked through the article, but didn't notice if this was covered....
Anyone know if it's feasible to use something like fluorinert (a totally non-conductive liquid) instead of water, to mitigate leakage damage? Or is fluorinert sufficiently different in physical terms (thicker, probably) than water to make it unlikely to work with the pumps and radiator in this?
How would you feel if your country had constant surveillance flights right along the international boundaries (which you don't agree with, btw - you feel they're further out).
I think you'd be just a tad testy if the Taliban was flying recon off Seattle, or the Soviets had planes growling around off Miami, these barely visible specks in the sky reminding you day in and day out - they're watching you.
Both sides provoked that spyplane incident. Don't be fooled.
Sorry, didn't mean "is is possible to make a bootable miniCD", I meant "can this player burn a bootable miniCD itself, or is it crippled in some way". My bad, I wasn't precise.:)
I agree on the Apple comments, but a quick perusal of the article does answer the last question you posed:
The unit is not limited to digital music files, allowing it to simultaneously serve as a backup unit for your PC
That makes it a bit handier for the techie-on-the-go, as Firewire is nowhere near as ubiquitous as USB, and these CD's should play in anything. Wonder if you can burn a (small) ISO or other bootable CD on 'em?
For Cisco, at least, that's an awfully limited supported list.
7200, 7500, 12000. Yay. What about the 3662 I used to admin?:/
Best I was able to decide on was having it only accept connections from the internal LAN, having a switch between it and the management box, and SSHing into the management box.
Which is also a good idea - disinformation is also sent via coded messages on occasion, so you need to make sure that the message was accurate before you deploy forces.
Actually, MMORPG / FPS gamers don't really care about bandwidth. At least, those with the faintest clue.
MMORPGs are tuned so that there are a maximum number of updates needed per second that keeps it feasible for a 56k player to be there. This may be changing now, but it's the case for Asherons Call and Everquest (that's why you get moved out of a city if there's too many people there).
FPS gamers likewise don't send many bits. I had a Tribes 1 server, running full-out maxxed settings, and it was using about 45kbits/second with 24 people on the server.
What gamers really care about is -latency-. It just happens that the higher bandwidth solutions generally have faster routing on their hardware.
This is not to say there's not a lot of techno-clueless gamers out there that pursue maximum bandwitdth at all costs....
There's really nothing to setting up a (open/insecure) NAN, provided it's just linked to itself.
Sure, you could have problems with overlapping NANs, with frequency fights, but that's mostly handled silently by the hardware.
Inter-NAN is a little thornier, especially if the hardware becomes commodity items installed by Joe Average. I can easily forsee accidental broadcast loops due to misconfigurations.
The hardest one, however, is actually linking up the NAN to the 'net to get somewhere else, as has been mentioned in every other "setting up a wireless network" article. It's against just about every TOS. Sure, you could try buying a T1 lease, and charging for that... but now you have to track who has paid, keep people from hooking up others on the sly, provide support... in other words, become an ISP.
Now, if we all said "the hell with it, we'll ditch the Internet", and built our own from the ground up (possibly with NAPs at universities, those pesky academics are always giving stuff away for free) with long-run links between towns in a kind of wireless fidonet, then you're on to something. The infrastructure costs on that though... yeesh.
True, but presumably you could have multiple access pipes, so that you could have three or four fetches going on simultaneously. Still a problem if all the data you need is in sequential locations, if it's broken up per-chip, but it would be one way to do it.
While most folks are correct in that the biggest latency source is the drives right now, there is a fair bottleneck on the RAM to CPU bus. I think it's up around a 8:1 ratio right now (4:1 if you have a 266 MHz FSB), which means that your CPU can spend a large portion of its time waiting for data from memory.
True, that's what the L1 and L2 cache are supposed to prevent, but some apps (games, mostly) blow through that cache without even thinking about it. WWIIOnline, for instance, gets bitchy with only 256MB. It's only happy once you have 512MB. How long will even a 4 MB on-die cache last?
If we can increase the speed that we can toss bits between the CPU and RAM, we'll reduce one more sticking point (and RDRAM, expensive as it is, was meant to do that), and higher framerates for all!:)
Oh, I agree that it can be better to block outbound 25 (although, I personally run my own mailserver on @home, even for outbound, because theirs choke and die too often). It's blocking that -and- requiring @msn.com that's BS, IMO.
MSN is already breaking things by insisting on a @msn.com From line. Everyone else is just trying to work around it.
Yes, you should always just use your "local" SMTP gateway, but when the people running it are being draconian morons, you don't have many choices... and no, having official correspondence go out under @msn.com isn't an option.
If MSN was serious about this, they'd just use several of the possible authentication methods that exist for SMTP service (IP range, SMTP-after-POP, SASL, ). It sounds like they've picked one, and only one, instead of implementing several and allowing mail to go if any of the above are met.
Some SMTP auth links:
http://www.thecabal.org/~devin/postfix/smtp-auth .t xt
http://www.qmail.org/top.html (look for "authenticate")
http://www.sendmail.org/~ca/email/auth.html
I don't mind what rms calls the system. I don't think his arguments for the naming are very valid, but hey, at the same time I really couldn't care less.
(emphasis added)
Now that has GOT to hurt. The guy that tons of geeks look up to (rightly or wrongly), has just said that he doesn't really give a rats ass about what one of the Big Names keeps going on about.... Definately not what anyone in a philosophical debate wants to hear - people loving your idea is great, people loathing your idea is still something you can work with, but disregard? Ouch.
I believe what they call "double opt-in", is this:
You punch in an email address at the webform.
Their system sends a confirmation email, with a token of some sort, to that address.
You reply, with said token, and the address is confirmed and added to the list.
It's not that hard, and it also allows you to get your ass off a list even if you don't send from that address any more - if you get the emails forwarded, it's all good.
Now, if MAPS was demanding something more (and I half expect they may have, it seems to me they've been constantly increasing their requirements), that's unreasonable. But simply verifying that the stated account really wants on the list isn't a huge deal, nor is it hard for the user - AND it pays off for the sending servers, as they spend less time spinning their wheels on bogus/broken addresses.
Science exists to find out what is, simply for the sake of it being.
Corporate research exists to find out things to make money on (or minimize costs, same deal).
I'm sure they didn't know for certain what they were going to get when they started playing around with most discoveries that led to the technologies that make our modern world what it is....
Slashdot Mirror
As I understand it (from the Science of Diskworld, quite a great read, and about real science despite the title) the problem with the "it was gradual" argument is this.
Fossils are rare. Damn rare to create, even harder to find. Up until Jurassic Park came out, there were all of THREE T-Rex fossils found. They've since found more.
This means that you may find only four or five fossils of a given species. The last one you -happen- to find may be a million years before the K-T boundary, but that's only because you haven't found any newer ones yet.
What is significant, though, is that there is a time when 99.99% of the fossils stop appearing past. There's also evidence of massive dieoffs in the area of the crater of much more common things - I think ammonites were the significant ones, but I don't have the book handy.
Now, this is all thirdhand data (studies, paraphrased by the book, [mis]remembered by me). But it does help explain why you may seem to see species slowly drifting off, when they really all stuck around until that fateful year.
Well, fluorinert is designed as a cooling fluid for electronic devices. There's a lot of varieties, all hellishly expensive.
:)
My concern was more if it would have a bad reaction to the valves in the pumps, causing them to degrade and fall apart, that sort of thing.
What are they going to do, pull them to the curb and give them a ticket? ;)
I looked through the article, but didn't notice if this was covered....
Anyone know if it's feasible to use something like fluorinert (a totally non-conductive liquid) instead of water, to mitigate leakage damage? Or is fluorinert sufficiently different in physical terms (thicker, probably) than water to make it unlikely to work with the pumps and radiator in this?
How would you feel if your country had constant surveillance flights right along the international boundaries (which you don't agree with, btw - you feel they're further out).
I think you'd be just a tad testy if the Taliban was flying recon off Seattle, or the Soviets had planes growling around off Miami, these barely visible specks in the sky reminding you day in and day out - they're watching you.
Both sides provoked that spyplane incident. Don't be fooled.
I prefer the next level, Mosh Mosh Revolution, as popularized in MegaTokyo. Full body workout, bandages not included!
We actually need two more bugs.
:)
2.2.22 is even better.
Sorry, didn't mean "is is possible to make a bootable miniCD", I meant "can this player burn a bootable miniCD itself, or is it crippled in some way". My bad, I wasn't precise. :)
I agree on the Apple comments, but a quick perusal of the article does answer the last question you posed:
The unit is not limited to digital music files, allowing it to simultaneously serve as a backup unit for your PC
That makes it a bit handier for the techie-on-the-go, as Firewire is nowhere near as ubiquitous as USB, and these CD's should play in anything. Wonder if you can burn a (small) ISO or other bootable CD on 'em?
Perhaps a fax would be better, given the general mail paranoia in DC these days.
Depends if you're a unix wonk (case sensitive) or winhead (case insensitive). ;)
For Cisco, at least, that's an awfully limited supported list.
:/
7200, 7500, 12000. Yay. What about the 3662 I used to admin?
Best I was able to decide on was having it only accept connections from the internal LAN, having a switch between it and the management box, and SSHing into the management box.
Which is also a good idea - disinformation is also sent via coded messages on occasion, so you need to make sure that the message was accurate before you deploy forces.
Any ideas on how much de-advertising will cost?
Cool, thanks for that info. I've never played EQ personally, just followed the tech on the periphery. :)
Actually, MMORPG / FPS gamers don't really care about bandwidth. At least, those with the faintest clue.
MMORPGs are tuned so that there are a maximum number of updates needed per second that keeps it feasible for a 56k player to be there. This may be changing now, but it's the case for Asherons Call and Everquest (that's why you get moved out of a city if there's too many people there).
FPS gamers likewise don't send many bits. I had a Tribes 1 server, running full-out maxxed settings, and it was using about 45kbits/second with 24 people on the server.
What gamers really care about is -latency-. It just happens that the higher bandwidth solutions generally have faster routing on their hardware.
This is not to say there's not a lot of techno-clueless gamers out there that pursue maximum bandwitdth at all costs....
There's really nothing to setting up a (open/insecure) NAN, provided it's just linked to itself.
Sure, you could have problems with overlapping NANs, with frequency fights, but that's mostly handled silently by the hardware.
Inter-NAN is a little thornier, especially if the hardware becomes commodity items installed by Joe Average. I can easily forsee accidental broadcast loops due to misconfigurations.
The hardest one, however, is actually linking up the NAN to the 'net to get somewhere else, as has been mentioned in every other "setting up a wireless network" article. It's against just about every TOS. Sure, you could try buying a T1 lease, and charging for that... but now you have to track who has paid, keep people from hooking up others on the sly, provide support... in other words, become an ISP.
Now, if we all said "the hell with it, we'll ditch the Internet", and built our own from the ground up (possibly with NAPs at universities, those pesky academics are always giving stuff away for free) with long-run links between towns in a kind of wireless fidonet, then you're on to something. The infrastructure costs on that though... yeesh.
True, but presumably you could have multiple access pipes, so that you could have three or four fetches going on simultaneously. Still a problem if all the data you need is in sequential locations, if it's broken up per-chip, but it would be one way to do it.
While most folks are correct in that the biggest latency source is the drives right now, there is a fair bottleneck on the RAM to CPU bus. I think it's up around a 8:1 ratio right now (4:1 if you have a 266 MHz FSB), which means that your CPU can spend a large portion of its time waiting for data from memory.
:)
True, that's what the L1 and L2 cache are supposed to prevent, but some apps (games, mostly) blow through that cache without even thinking about it. WWIIOnline, for instance, gets bitchy with only 256MB. It's only happy once you have 512MB. How long will even a 4 MB on-die cache last?
If we can increase the speed that we can toss bits between the CPU and RAM, we'll reduce one more sticking point (and RDRAM, expensive as it is, was meant to do that), and higher framerates for all!
Oh, I agree that it can be better to block outbound 25 (although, I personally run my own mailserver on @home, even for outbound, because theirs choke and die too often). It's blocking that -and- requiring @msn.com that's BS, IMO.
MSN is already breaking things by insisting on a @msn.com From line. Everyone else is just trying to work around it.
h .t xt
Yes, you should always just use your "local" SMTP gateway, but when the people running it are being draconian morons, you don't have many choices... and no, having official correspondence go out under @msn.com isn't an option.
If MSN was serious about this, they'd just use several of the possible authentication methods that exist for SMTP service (IP range, SMTP-after-POP, SASL, ). It sounds like they've picked one, and only one, instead of implementing several and allowing mail to go if any of the above are met.
Some SMTP auth links:
http://www.thecabal.org/~devin/postfix/smtp-aut
http://www.qmail.org/top.html (look for "authenticate")
http://www.sendmail.org/~ca/email/auth.html
Depends on the information you want... if all you want is "where the hell am I?" then no data need be sent out. :)
(emphasis added)
Now that has GOT to hurt. The guy that tons of geeks look up to (rightly or wrongly), has just said that he doesn't really give a rats ass about what one of the Big Names keeps going on about.... Definately not what anyone in a philosophical debate wants to hear - people loving your idea is great, people loathing your idea is still something you can work with, but disregard? Ouch.
I believe what they call "double opt-in", is this:
You punch in an email address at the webform.
Their system sends a confirmation email, with a token of some sort, to that address.
You reply, with said token, and the address is confirmed and added to the list.
It's not that hard, and it also allows you to get your ass off a list even if you don't send from that address any more - if you get the emails forwarded, it's all good.
Now, if MAPS was demanding something more (and I half expect they may have, it seems to me they've been constantly increasing their requirements), that's unreasonable. But simply verifying that the stated account really wants on the list isn't a huge deal, nor is it hard for the user - AND it pays off for the sending servers, as they spend less time spinning their wheels on bogus/broken addresses.
You're confusing corporate research with science.
Science exists to find out what is, simply for the sake of it being.
Corporate research exists to find out things to make money on (or minimize costs, same deal).
I'm sure they didn't know for certain what they were going to get when they started playing around with most discoveries that led to the technologies that make our modern world what it is....