Half the population could be in a soup line at the homeless shelter, but all you'll see on the news is low unemployment, low interest, and high growth.
The press lives off of bad news, so if you really think that they look to play down poor economic news, you are dreaming.
You should look-up what an analogy is. It isn't as simple as "if they use like it's a simile".
An analogy is comparable to metaphor and simile in that it shows how two different things are similar, but itâ(TM)s a bit more complex. Rather than a figure of speech, an analogy is more of a logical argument. The presenter of an analogy will often demonstrate how two things are alike by pointing out shared characteristics, with the goal of showing that if two things are similar in some ways, they are similar in other ways as well.
Oh and that's just in todays headlines. I just don't get where the "bury my head in the sand and everything will be ok" mentality comes from? I'm not saying that the world is coming to an end, but to think that there is nothing wrong. huh??????
Your post just got too boring to follow past here.
Who's burying their head in the sand? Just because I'm not running around railing about cyclical industries doesn't mean that I don't see some economic turmoil...but it just isn't as bad as some seem to desperately hope it is.
I was in the business during the.COM crash, and that was a bad economy (especially for tech). I was a teen in the early 90s, and saw the incredible turmoil. Right now is ridiculously good times comparatively, despite chickenlittles like yourself.
Remember, when you (the top 5%) can't afford your second SUV for your family it usually means the rest of the world is hurting badly. I think even rural America sees things differently than you.
Aside from tremors, China is doing fantastic. India is much the same. Europe is doing pretty much the same. Russia is recovering nicely from their economic doldrums.
I would guess that there are far fewer people worldwide living in poverty today than there were 10, or even 5, years ago, despite some speculative food price run-ups.
However, disparity of wealth distribution isn't even the point in contention (no one disputes that it is a real problem). This submission is quite clearly playing upon the current "the economy is in the gutter" meme, but it just isn't supported by the numbers. Things aren't great, and there's some bouncing atop a potential recession, but it's actually remarkably robust given some of the inputs over the past couple of years, which many expected to yield much worse conditions.
There's a lot of foreboding potential out there, and a lot of big numbers have been lost on the market...but the numbers just don't seem to support that poor of an economy.
Yet, at least.
Nonetheless, everyone keeps talking like the world is in the depths of a worldwide recession.
I think it's obvious to anyone with common sense that this Wii Fit can hardly be considered a workout.
Why do you feel the need to mention it, out of curiosity?
Wii Fit is a completely reasonable "workout" of balance and flexibility, and even for very moderate workouts for people who are otherwise sedentary (and there are a lot of those people, though they're probably sitting at their computer writing about how Wii Fit isn't a real workout because they see everything as a binary full-on-workout, or nothing).
Steps and other basic activities aren't going to replace the gym for someone who is actually into fitness, but it's better than nothing for people who have limited activity.
And one of the best elements of the Wii is the simplest element of all -- weigh-ins with time plotted tracking. It's simplistic, relying upon the lame BMI scale, not taking into account muscularity and other variables, however again for a normal everyday person seeing an accurate graph of their weight when they occasionally weigh into their Wii can be a very powerful input.
It's kind of like McDonald's
Analogies are like a dog with a tail growing out of its nose. Kind of like the planet Mars with annuity insurance.
Nintendo's whole angle with the Wii has been whole-body gameplay that is their "gimmick" instead of the traditional thumbs only. This is an obvious continuation of that. Like Wii Sports, the included game (Wii Fit) isn't the most incredible demonstration of the board, but it gets the units out there.
Besides, after the buzz wears down, anyone doing these "exercises" will quickly discover there are no results to be had, and the balancing board will end up in the closet with the rest of the rubber bands, abdominizors, and exercises dvds.
There are over a dozen balance-board-using games in development, and of course it launched with Wii Ski. It's another input controller (one with amazing potential...and it's bluetooth, and could be used with a compatible PC bluetooth stack), and Wii Fit is one use of it. I certainly don't think very many people are going to stick with their Wii Fit regiment,just as they don't stick with any regiment, but if they at least weigh in on occasion before hopping into a game of Mario Balance, then that's better than nothing.
I do not see any virtual machines in the clip, nor do I see any booting screens or similar.
One part of the video is the Vista bootup, so either it's a virtual machine, with Camtasia running in the host system, or he is using something entirely different to record (e.g. DRAC remote video feed witha cap of that).
In addition, the manipulation of the Vista files using the Linux system does not seem to include the mounting of a virtual disk image
Setup Vista in a Virtual Machine
Map the optical drive in the VM to a bootable Linux distro
Reboot virtual machine -- machine will boot into Linux, where that Linux session will see the virtual Vista hard drive
Frankly, CIRA should contract out the whole thing to Godaddy. They would run it far better and cheaper.
Do you really think that these restrictions are there because they can't figure out how to do an online form? Do you think GoDaddy made it so easy because they just want to do what's right for you?
Seems like an poor choice of disk configuration for a database server. Or do these database servers not see a lot of writes ?
RAID 5 is perfectly fine for database servers, presuming you don't want to piss-away 1/2 of your storage in a RAID 10 arrangement. Checksum calculations are largely a non-issue with hardware RAID.
Sure, it looks like it's booted to the desktop...but have you tried doing anything?
Windows has been progressively delay-loading more and more, so while the upfront cost is cheaper, and it seems to be quicker, the time until you can actually do something of use hasn't really improved.
I once worked with a moron who insisted upon nulling every object in a language where it was not only unnecessary, it was actually detrimental. Yet he stomped his feet and proclaimed that he was doing something that was somehow righteous because he could satisfy his illogical, poorly derived "always null objects" rule.
They screwed up by writing dodgy code
There was nothing, whatsoever, dodgy about their code. At all. Not the slightest bit. Initializing the memory used for this sort of XOR buffer is absolutely the perfect example of a cargo-cult type mentality -- somethings it's good to initialize memory, therefore it always must be good.
It's pretty clear that OpenSSH code isn't for tourists, and they have no obligation to coddle a tourist along through every line (I would say it would be counterproductive because it would provide enough information to be even more dangerous. Here someone made such a massive screw up to satisfy a cargo cult dictum in one of the most security sensitive pieces of code...imagine if he had guideposts along the way...
Uninitialised data doesn't seem to be a good source of randomness to depend on
They didn't depend on it: They needed a buffer to do some XORing to, and there was no need to initialize it. So they didn't initialize. That choice offered a potentially minor increase in entropy, and saved the admittedly minor computational cost of initializing the memory.
There was no reason to initialize the memory, so they didn't.
The problem is that in satisfying an automated code check to correct a complete non-bug, the enterprising developer removed additional, critical code seemingly haphazardly, not understanding what it did. In doing so he not only eliminated the minor randomness of the starting buffer, but a majority of all other, enormously much more significant randomness.
You can get a dedicated 10Mbit line in a large datacenter for under 300$ / month.
Running lines between data centers is cheap, relatively. Your home isn't a data center, however, and does not have the economy of scale. The "last mile" is the expensive part.
All of this is exactly why I pay through the ass to comcast in the first place for the 7Mb connection
You are not paying remotely the cost for a unlimited 7Mbps connection. You are paying to basically share a connection. Don't act all surprised -- we've had this same boring debate on Slashdot about two dozen times over the past 10 years (the 98 in my username is because I signed up in 1998). "I WANT MY UNLIMITED INTERNET!" the petulant cries ring out.
Guessing its tied to shared lines on their network.
Or maybe the sender can't saturate your pipe. On the real dedicated side of things, 7Mbps is quite expensive, much less enough to saturate lots of simultaneous 7Mbps users.
The The difference is that the alternative is that they can just progressively throttle back the speed (allowed by the "up to" part) as you use more. You still have "the internet", and thus "unlimited internet" (I've never seen an ad that says "Unlimited data throughput"), until it's a mathematical impossibility for you to exceed the quota.
Personally that's the approach that I think they should be pursuing, not hard caps. I don't do a lot on my up-to-10Mbps connection, but when I do I want it to be fast. I'd rather not have the economics screwed up because a bunch of freedom fighters are saturating the shared pipe 24 hours a day (and no, the cable companies can't just suck it up. My business is currently paying just under $600 a month for a 5Mbps SLAd synchronous connection, with a monthly cap no less. To think that $40 a month gets you unlimited 10Mbps is just asinine).
Another Cogeco user here (I've had their high speed service for about 5 years now). Overall I've been extremely satisfied, and have experienced extraordinarily little downtime, 10Mbps virtually around the clock, and the torrents I have downloaded seemed to work perfectly.
Dunno, but I would still have a high opinion of Cogeco even if this were true (though I don't see why they would explicitly lie about it. That part doesn't mesh).
Up here, it's illegal to make it impossible for a person to access their own data.
I highly doubt this has any applicability to a subscription version of Office. When the subscription runs out, it doesn't suddenly encrypt all of your files. You are still free to bring those files to any of millions of capable machines, any print shop in the world, or use the long existing free "Viewer" versions.
Certainly the way that new OS X features have made it onto the iPhone first suggest to me that if there are two separate pipes, Apple has figured a way to span them much better than Microsoft ever did with Windows CE.
A lot of claims here, and no real proof.
So the failure is entirely the fault of dreaming beyond any possible technical solution, and has absolutely nothing to do with the tools, code base, and culture that they had to build on?
Yes, clearly I said it has nothing to do with it.
Regardless of the illusory strawman you've decided to attack, the CORE cause of Vista's failure was overreaching. Hell, the whole monolithic legacy nonsense is immediately discountable given that the failed parts of Vista -- the part that caused the reset -- was all new. It wasn't the modifications of existing code that caused the problems at all, and indeed after the great reset Microsoft very quickly created a parallel track with the legacy code to get to where they were, so if anything the actual history says something exactly opposite of Gartner's absurd evaluation.
such as having an OS that "could not operate" without an applications program (Explorer) installed
Are you really this naive in real life, or do you just play it when you think it serves your argument?
Not to mention that many of the many years spent in getting Vista were not spent on WinFS or any of the "big risks" that you attribute their failure to
A lot of claims here, but no real proof.
Without meaning to offend, you clearly are completely ignorant on the entire lifecycle that led to Vista, grossly evident in the quote above.
They shouldn't be, yet here this tripe is as a featured Slashdot story, as it will surely top the other meme sites.
And as you mentioned, it's just complete and utter bunk. The idea that OSX was just copied over to the iPhone is absurd. "OSX" on the iPhone is to OSX on the desktop as Windows CE is on PDAs and embedded devices (which Microsoft has been doing for at least 8 years or so) to the desktop -- yeah, there's some cross branding, shared libraries (from a source-code perspective -- C is cross-platform, even in the Windows world), API similarities, but underneath it all it isn't the same, and both are best-purposed for their respective targets, which is a much better decision than any run anywhere, lowest-common-denominator approach.
Of course I knew Gartner's opinion was nonsense when they went down the ridiculous-yet-truthy-through-repeated-assertion "monolithic" line of argument (which they likely picked up on Slashdot, it should be mentioned). Vista is a failure not because of any sort of code maintenance problem, but rather that Microsoft aimed far too high with Vista, taking far too many risks for a big, big change.
Like many such highly speculative (the whole WinFS initiative), large-scale projects, it failed spectacularly, and the result was a backtrack and then a polishing of XP to pretend it was something new. The failure of WinFS alone, which was to be a major foundation of a lot of the features of the new OS, was a massive failure for the project.
I'd switch to cash as there's absolutely no reason to use the banks if they're not going to offer me basic safeguards
Banks are responsible for their own systems, and that is the full-time focus of those professionals. It is irrational, in my opinion, to expect them to take full culpability for the entire universe of client systems as well. Unless you're willing to accept a dictum that you must you BankOS running on BankHardware over the BankNet if you ever plan on accessing your money.
They have the technology to keep it safe now. I think they're just too cheap to fund it themselves.
When you make demands on business, in the end the person who ends up paying is you, not "them". Personally I'd rather not subsidize people who can't take even rudimentary responsibility over their own risk factors, though I would like to see a great use of two-factor authentication and the like, as you rightly heralded.
So, you're one of the people who thought that Firefox's memory problems were overblown?
Yes, absolutely. Without fail it was grossly overblown. The most remarkable thing about the whole Firefox memory leak issue was how strong the anecdotes and subjective opinions were,and how stunningly rare any actual empirical metrics were.
Did Firefox use a shitload of memory? Absolutely. As did any competitor doing anything similar.
It seems that a bunch of Firefox fans (and even some developers) decided that all of the reports were just Microsoft FUD
You realize that we have amazing tools like debuggers, or at a higher level simply process performance metrics, right? The reason most complaints were shot down is because they usually had the credibility of someone yelling about how their Q-bracelet makes them feel so much better.
The lousy period of fanboys
When you're faced with countless morons just repeating verbatim the proclamations by someone else, never putting the slightest bit of effort into actually providing credible metrics, then it deserves to be shouted down. If you believe that anyone who is anti-ignorance is a fanboy, you just keep on believing that.
I hear those evolution fanboys keep at it. God created the universe in 7 days, and those assholes should just believe it and quit shooting it down. The anti-Creationism has gone on long enough.
Since when did memory usage become such a big deal?
***BOGGLE***
Memory usage has been the #1 complaint about Firefox since it was called Firebird. "Wahhhhh, I tried Firefox but holy does it use a lot of memory!". Go to any clutching desperately to their copy of IE board right now -- any Microsoft centric type dev board -- and that's what you'll find recanted ad nausea, despite the fact that most of the memory usage is useful caching, and IE 7 is far worse.
So they're moving forward with the features and reducing a number in the task manager. Everyone is happy, and with more education and evangelism, maybe the morons will have to move onto a different whine to explain their irrational attachment to all things Microsoft.
Often they have all of the features and resolution, but they grossly sacrifice framerate. I've played a couple of console games, on current generation consoles, where it was around the 5fps. While it's a "what you're used to" thing, that is ridiculously unplayable once you become accustomed to 30fps+.
People who declare consoles graphically superior virtually never know what they're talking about -- there has yet to be a console that, on release, features better graphics than the mid-level computer hardware at the same time. Then it just rots and rots further behind, until an almost entry level 8800GT absolutely clobbers it dozens of times over.
Slashdot Mirror
The press lives off of bad news, so if you really think that they look to play down poor economic news, you are dreaming.
Your post just got too boring to follow past here.
Who's burying their head in the sand? Just because I'm not running around railing about cyclical industries doesn't mean that I don't see some economic turmoil...but it just isn't as bad as some seem to desperately hope it is.
I was in the business during the
Aside from tremors, China is doing fantastic. India is much the same. Europe is doing pretty much the same. Russia is recovering nicely from their economic doldrums.
I would guess that there are far fewer people worldwide living in poverty today than there were 10, or even 5, years ago, despite some speculative food price run-ups.
However, disparity of wealth distribution isn't even the point in contention (no one disputes that it is a real problem). This submission is quite clearly playing upon the current "the economy is in the gutter" meme, but it just isn't supported by the numbers. Things aren't great, and there's some bouncing atop a potential recession, but it's actually remarkably robust given some of the inputs over the past couple of years, which many expected to yield much worse conditions.
There's a lot of foreboding potential out there, and a lot of big numbers have been lost on the market...but the numbers just don't seem to support that poor of an economy.
Yet, at least.
Nonetheless, everyone keeps talking like the world is in the depths of a worldwide recession.
Why do you feel the need to mention it, out of curiosity?
Wii Fit is a completely reasonable "workout" of balance and flexibility, and even for very moderate workouts for people who are otherwise sedentary (and there are a lot of those people, though they're probably sitting at their computer writing about how Wii Fit isn't a real workout because they see everything as a binary full-on-workout, or nothing).
Steps and other basic activities aren't going to replace the gym for someone who is actually into fitness, but it's better than nothing for people who have limited activity.
And one of the best elements of the Wii is the simplest element of all -- weigh-ins with time plotted tracking. It's simplistic, relying upon the lame BMI scale, not taking into account muscularity and other variables, however again for a normal everyday person seeing an accurate graph of their weight when they occasionally weigh into their Wii can be a very powerful input.
Analogies are like a dog with a tail growing out of its nose. Kind of like the planet Mars with annuity insurance.
Nintendo's whole angle with the Wii has been whole-body gameplay that is their "gimmick" instead of the traditional thumbs only. This is an obvious continuation of that. Like Wii Sports, the included game (Wii Fit) isn't the most incredible demonstration of the board, but it gets the units out there.
There are over a dozen balance-board-using games in development, and of course it launched with Wii Ski. It's another input controller (one with amazing potential...and it's bluetooth, and could be used with a compatible PC bluetooth stack), and Wii Fit is one use of it. I certainly don't think very many people are going to stick with their Wii Fit regiment
One part of the video is the Vista bootup, so either it's a virtual machine, with Camtasia running in the host system, or he is using something entirely different to record (e.g. DRAC remote video feed witha cap of that).
Do you really think that these restrictions are there because they can't figure out how to do an online form? Do you think GoDaddy made it so easy because they just want to do what's right for you?
The SAN market is currently a sucker's market, where vendors and huge-commission salespeople sell products at absurd price points.
Not to mention that it's also a single point of failure.
RAID 5 is perfectly fine for database servers, presuming you don't want to piss-away 1/2 of your storage in a RAID 10 arrangement. Checksum calculations are largely a non-issue with hardware RAID.
Sure, it looks like it's booted to the desktop...but have you tried doing anything?
Windows has been progressively delay-loading more and more, so while the upfront cost is cheaper, and it seems to be quicker, the time until you can actually do something of use hasn't really improved.
I once worked with a moron who insisted upon nulling every object in a language where it was not only unnecessary, it was actually detrimental. Yet he stomped his feet and proclaimed that he was doing something that was somehow righteous because he could satisfy his illogical, poorly derived "always null objects" rule.
There was nothing, whatsoever, dodgy about their code. At all. Not the slightest bit. Initializing the memory used for this sort of XOR buffer is absolutely the perfect example of a cargo-cult type mentality -- somethings it's good to initialize memory, therefore it always must be good.
It's pretty clear that OpenSSH code isn't for tourists, and they have no obligation to coddle a tourist along through every line (I would say it would be counterproductive because it would provide enough information to be even more dangerous. Here someone made such a massive screw up to satisfy a cargo cult dictum in one of the most security sensitive pieces of code...imagine if he had guideposts along the way...
They didn't depend on it: They needed a buffer to do some XORing to, and there was no need to initialize it. So they didn't initialize. That choice offered a potentially minor increase in entropy, and saved the admittedly minor computational cost of initializing the memory.
There was no reason to initialize the memory, so they didn't.
The problem is that in satisfying an automated code check to correct a complete non-bug, the enterprising developer removed additional, critical code seemingly haphazardly, not understanding what it did. In doing so he not only eliminated the minor randomness of the starting buffer, but a majority of all other, enormously much more significant randomness.
Running lines between data centers is cheap, relatively. Your home isn't a data center, however, and does not have the economy of scale. The "last mile" is the expensive part.
You are not paying remotely the cost for a unlimited 7Mbps connection. You are paying to basically share a connection. Don't act all surprised -- we've had this same boring debate on Slashdot about two dozen times over the past 10 years (the 98 in my username is because I signed up in 1998). "I WANT MY UNLIMITED INTERNET!" the petulant cries ring out.
Or maybe the sender can't saturate your pipe. On the real dedicated side of things, 7Mbps is quite expensive, much less enough to saturate lots of simultaneous 7Mbps users.
Personally that's the approach that I think they should be pursuing, not hard caps. I don't do a lot on my up-to-10Mbps connection, but when I do I want it to be fast. I'd rather not have the economics screwed up because a bunch of freedom fighters are saturating the shared pipe 24 hours a day (and no, the cable companies can't just suck it up. My business is currently paying just under $600 a month for a 5Mbps SLAd synchronous connection, with a monthly cap no less. To think that $40 a month gets you unlimited 10Mbps is just asinine).
Another Cogeco user here (I've had their high speed service for about 5 years now). Overall I've been extremely satisfied, and have experienced extraordinarily little downtime, 10Mbps virtually around the clock, and the torrents I have downloaded seemed to work perfectly.
Dunno, but I would still have a high opinion of Cogeco even if this were true (though I don't see why they would explicitly lie about it. That part doesn't mesh).
I highly doubt this has any applicability to a subscription version of Office. When the subscription runs out, it doesn't suddenly encrypt all of your files. You are still free to bring those files to any of millions of capable machines, any print shop in the world, or use the long existing free "Viewer" versions.
A lot of claims here, and no real proof.
Yes, clearly I said it has nothing to do with it.
Regardless of the illusory strawman you've decided to attack, the CORE cause of Vista's failure was overreaching. Hell, the whole monolithic legacy nonsense is immediately discountable given that the failed parts of Vista -- the part that caused the reset -- was all new. It wasn't the modifications of existing code that caused the problems at all, and indeed after the great reset Microsoft very quickly created a parallel track with the legacy code to get to where they were, so if anything the actual history says something exactly opposite of Gartner's absurd evaluation.
Are you really this naive in real life, or do you just play it when you think it serves your argument?
A lot of claims here, but no real proof.
Without meaning to offend, you clearly are completely ignorant on the entire lifecycle that led to Vista, grossly evident in the quote above.
They shouldn't be, yet here this tripe is as a featured Slashdot story, as it will surely top the other meme sites.
And as you mentioned, it's just complete and utter bunk. The idea that OSX was just copied over to the iPhone is absurd. "OSX" on the iPhone is to OSX on the desktop as Windows CE is on PDAs and embedded devices (which Microsoft has been doing for at least 8 years or so) to the desktop -- yeah, there's some cross branding, shared libraries (from a source-code perspective -- C is cross-platform, even in the Windows world), API similarities, but underneath it all it isn't the same, and both are best-purposed for their respective targets, which is a much better decision than any run anywhere, lowest-common-denominator approach.
Of course I knew Gartner's opinion was nonsense when they went down the ridiculous-yet-truthy-through-repeated-assertion "monolithic" line of argument (which they likely picked up on Slashdot, it should be mentioned). Vista is a failure not because of any sort of code maintenance problem, but rather that Microsoft aimed far too high with Vista, taking far too many risks for a big, big change.
Like many such highly speculative (the whole WinFS initiative), large-scale projects, it failed spectacularly, and the result was a backtrack and then a polishing of XP to pretend it was something new. The failure of WinFS alone, which was to be a major foundation of a lot of the features of the new OS, was a massive failure for the project.
Banks are responsible for their own systems, and that is the full-time focus of those professionals. It is irrational, in my opinion, to expect them to take full culpability for the entire universe of client systems as well. Unless you're willing to accept a dictum that you must you BankOS running on BankHardware over the BankNet if you ever plan on accessing your money.
When you make demands on business, in the end the person who ends up paying is you, not "them". Personally I'd rather not subsidize people who can't take even rudimentary responsibility over their own risk factors, though I would like to see a great use of two-factor authentication and the like, as you rightly heralded.
Yes, absolutely. Without fail it was grossly overblown. The most remarkable thing about the whole Firefox memory leak issue was how strong the anecdotes and subjective opinions were
Did Firefox use a shitload of memory? Absolutely. As did any competitor doing anything similar.
You realize that we have amazing tools like debuggers, or at a higher level simply process performance metrics, right? The reason most complaints were shot down is because they usually had the credibility of someone yelling about how their Q-bracelet makes them feel so much better.
When you're faced with countless morons just repeating verbatim the proclamations by someone else, never putting the slightest bit of effort into actually providing credible metrics, then it deserves to be shouted down. If you believe that anyone who is anti-ignorance is a fanboy, you just keep on believing that.
I hear those evolution fanboys keep at it. God created the universe in 7 days, and those assholes should just believe it and quit shooting it down. The anti-Creationism has gone on long enough.
***BOGGLE***
Memory usage has been the #1 complaint about Firefox since it was called Firebird. "Wahhhhh, I tried Firefox but holy does it use a lot of memory!". Go to any clutching desperately to their copy of IE board right now -- any Microsoft centric type dev board -- and that's what you'll find recanted ad nausea, despite the fact that most of the memory usage is useful caching, and IE 7 is far worse.
So they're moving forward with the features and reducing a number in the task manager. Everyone is happy, and with more education and evangelism, maybe the morons will have to move onto a different whine to explain their irrational attachment to all things Microsoft.
Often they have all of the features and resolution, but they grossly sacrifice framerate. I've played a couple of console games, on current generation consoles, where it was around the 5fps. While it's a "what you're used to" thing, that is ridiculously unplayable once you become accustomed to 30fps+.
People who declare consoles graphically superior virtually never know what they're talking about -- there has yet to be a console that, on release, features better graphics than the mid-level computer hardware at the same time. Then it just rots and rots further behind, until an almost entry level 8800GT absolutely clobbers it dozens of times over.