I remember those same tests, in public schools of the state of Illinois. These surveys would show up every few years, and every student would do his or her best to "admit" to absurd practices of drug use and sexual conduct. It was a joke and every student knew it; I think we figured out that when the results are finally tabulated and presented to the powers that be (those who control the school curricula) that we'd be long out of the age group that was showing problems. In other words, we wouldn't be the ones subjected to supplemental moronic drug "education" classes and discussions.
One has to wonder about how these survey results were ever actually used.
Why is having a beer in hand at a bus stop "wrong?" Carbonated sugar water, colored and flavored with caramel and even cancer-causing sweeteners is just fine, but carbonated water, naturally flavored with fermented grain is "wrong?"
The only part about "guys at bus stops with beer in hand" that's wrong is the stereotype of the dirty drunken man on which you're most likely drawing your conclusions. Beer is a drink, and so is Diet Coke; loud, rude, irritating people drink both.
One simple technique: cards in promiscuous mode on the net are catching and processing every packet. Simple enough to throw out a packet with a destination address of 234.234.234.234 (or something similarly unique or bogus, and sniff out DNS lookups. The sniffer will often be logging 234.234.234.234 after doing a name lookup, and when the lookup packets go out, the source of the sniffer is identified.
That's just one of many tricks; others involve talking to sniffer candidates to see how the cards respond to packets differently when in promiscuous mode.
Am I loony, or is there a simple solution to cybersquatting? It's called instant credit card billing. When you register for a domain name, you have to put up the cash then. No more scamsters registering 500 hot domains to play them for two months hoping one of them is lucky, then denying to pay them off. If you register 500 domains, at $50 for two years, you'd better whip out that $25,000 limit Platinum Visa.
I'm glad Microsoft and friends are making headway into the future! Who would have guessed something as amazing as remote display technology would be available to real users in this year, 1999? Wow!
(export DISPLAY=remotehost:0 ;./thisprogram)
Re:winmodems aren't so bad
on
LinModems?
·
· Score: 1
And for the extra money you spent on that board you could have real I/O with SCSI.
Load does absolutely and directly affect CPU temperature. I can load the lm78/lm75 modules, load a graphical monitor (wmlm78, etc.) and WATCH the CPU temperatures rise as I add load. When I play Quake (which pegs one of my CPUs at 100%) its temperature rises 6 F. The other CPU remains where it was.
If you've got a passing knowledge of the stars, or can watch the sun for a few hours, knowing your direction is no problem. If you've got anything magnetic around, building a compass isn't much of a problem (shallow vessel, water, small leaf, light magnetic object). I would think losing a map would be much more of an inconvenience.
I'm quite sure Unix did not invent alpha-enumerated devices. Unix presents one large virtual filesystem, physical devices are mounted at points within it. You don't seem to understand the difference.
NT did not use drive letters to "emulate the feel of 9x." NT predates Windows 95 by years.
I understand how easy it is to criticize Linus from behind the security blanket you call anonymitiy, and I can't disagree with all your points, but I'm not sure you understand Linus's position (perhaps you understand it better than I). The kernel tree is very large, and I wouldn't want the job of coordinating all the development that goes on within. Just reading the linux-kernel mailing list is a job in itself.
I admire the job Linus is doing but I can't imagine a single person doing it any better. I've always found Linus a humble guy in the end. Show him something's really better your way, and in a way he can understand (considering the other work he does), and often he'll adopt it. He's made an occasional policy or kernel decision that might have upset me, but coordinating public devlopment can be acurately described as herding cats. It's an endless series of tradeoffs because everyone wants to go his own way; sometimes patches are rejected, sometimes the ideas they implement become the center of rabid e-mail debate, and sometimes they're quietly applied.
The sheer numbers of developers and different directions and goals of each pulls on Linus in a different direction. I've used Linux on a variety of architectures, and I wish Linus would focus more on keeping 'stable' release of the kernel clean across all architectures--these are the quality issues of which you speak. 2.2.10, for example, won't compile on an Alpha.
I can't say I see Linus holding back the performance of the kernel for reasons of stubbornness. Most of the performance improvement suggestions he receives present a risk in other areas (stability, security, portability). He's making trade-offs, and I personally admire most of the decisions he's making.
Scalability and performance issues are most often encountered when trying to make the Intel architecture do something it was never intended to do: be scalable. I think it's unfortunate that so many people continue to squeeze this twenty-year-old idol of cruft into such places when cleaner and better engineered alternatives exist.
I assume you meant 2.3.12 is working, but it's not. It doesn't even compile on an Alpha (chokes in some structure definitions for the Alpha board architecture definitions).
I'll look around for information on this... Alan Cox's diary specified that 2.2.10ac12 didn't have a fix for the NFS lockd problems, but I'm having more than that.
I don't know how many of you are using Linux in an NFS environment, but for anything more than casual file sharing, the 2.2 kernels and many of the 2.3 kernels can't even keep NFS going between themselves. They seem to make decent clients, but lockd is still broken as of 2.2.10ac12. knfsd still crashes servers sometimes. The user space daemon is fast enough for me (I don't have 40 clients banging on a server), but sometimes clients lose track of handles to the server. On my diskless clients, I seem to do a "mount -o remount,rw/" more often than I'm doing any work.
I know NFS can work... Linux had excellent NFS support for like three kernel versions somewhere in the 2.1 series. I think we should all make Linus use _only_ NFS for all his work for three months; that would get things fixed in a hurry.:)
That special protection is called "anonymity." It's an all or nothing situation: you're safe as long as everyone plays your game. You've got nothing to go on when someone turns on you.
So what were your contributions to the field? You aim some harsh comments at those "kids" at university who are there to learn about AI and happen to be in the awful situation of not knowing everything yet.
Yes, I actively use 10 workspaces through Window Maker, but I use the "maximize" feature about once a week. Reading text in a web browser at 10 points in a window 16 inches wide is almost impossible; my eyes lose the line I'm on in big chunks of text.
I'm running in 1600x1200 now, and I'm having a real hard time imagining why anyone would want to run a web browser any wider than 800 pixels anyway. Why people maximise a browser window, I will never know. What's the point of having work space at high resolution if you're going to limit yourself to one huge window?
The movie theatres are first and foremost bound BY LAW regarding the admittance of minors into movies rated for mature audiences, and can get in very big trouble with the industry and the government if they do not comply, I am sure.
I don't think this is true, at least in any legal sense. The theatres are private business, and like cable television channels, they can show whatever they want to whomever they want. I've seen no law proving otherwise. I won't deny that there is tremendous pressure from the Bible thumpers and the moralists to enforce age-based admittance rules, but I don't believe any of this is legal.
I've always heard the MPAA age ratings referred to as "voluntary." This means that the MPAA invented these ratings, and theatres have the option to use them to filter their human input; both parties are volunteers.
Theatres are at their own private (corporate) discression when they allow a person to see a movie. Perhaps mostly out of fear of civil lawsuit or boycott, they bow to the industry pressures and regulations. And as we all know, the children of our world are perfectly alright watching bar fights, rape and homicide, violent bodily mutilation, decapitation, and torturous amputation of major limbs as long as they don't hear those seven naughty words! That would be bad for them!
Slashdot Mirror
I remember those same tests, in public schools of the state of Illinois. These surveys would show up every few years, and every student would do his or her best to "admit" to absurd practices of drug use and sexual conduct. It was a joke and every student knew it; I think we figured out that when the results are finally tabulated and presented to the powers that be (those who control the school curricula) that we'd be long out of the age group that was showing problems. In other words, we wouldn't be the ones subjected to supplemental moronic drug "education" classes and discussions.
One has to wonder about how these survey results were ever actually used.
Why is having a beer in hand at a bus stop "wrong?" Carbonated sugar water, colored and flavored with caramel and even cancer-causing sweeteners is just fine, but carbonated water, naturally flavored with fermented grain is "wrong?"
The only part about "guys at bus stops with beer in hand" that's wrong is the stereotype of the dirty drunken man on which you're most likely drawing your conclusions. Beer is a drink, and so is Diet Coke; loud, rude, irritating people drink both.
... that if you stay in the business long enough, you'll eventually turn into a suicidal gay woman? Time to take up music.
I've never met a damn fine programmer who thought himself a "damn fine programmer."
One simple technique: cards in promiscuous mode on the net are catching and processing every packet. Simple enough to throw out a packet with a destination address of 234.234.234.234 (or something similarly unique or bogus, and sniff out DNS lookups. The sniffer will often be logging 234.234.234.234 after doing a name lookup, and when the lookup packets go out, the source of the sniffer is identified.
That's just one of many tricks; others involve talking to sniffer candidates to see how the cards respond to packets differently when in promiscuous mode.
JunkBuster. I haven't seen a banner ad in years.
Am I loony, or is there a simple solution to cybersquatting? It's called instant credit card billing. When you register for a domain name, you have to put up the cash then. No more scamsters registering 500 hot domains to play them for two months hoping one of them is lucky, then denying to pay them off. If you register 500 domains, at $50 for two years, you'd better whip out that $25,000 limit Platinum Visa.
I'm glad Microsoft and friends are making headway into the future! Who would have guessed something as amazing as remote display technology would be available to real users in this year, 1999? Wow!
./thisprogram)
(export DISPLAY=remotehost:0 ;
And for the extra money you spent on that board you could have real I/O with SCSI.
Load does absolutely and directly affect CPU temperature. I can load the lm78/lm75 modules, load a graphical monitor (wmlm78, etc.) and WATCH the CPU temperatures rise as I add load. When I play Quake (which pegs one of my CPUs at 100%) its temperature rises 6 F. The other CPU remains where it was.
If you've got a passing knowledge of the stars, or can watch the sun for a few hours, knowing your direction is no problem. If you've got anything magnetic around, building a compass isn't much of a problem (shallow vessel, water, small leaf, light magnetic object). I would think losing a map would be much more of an inconvenience.
I'm quite sure Unix did not invent alpha-enumerated devices. Unix presents one large virtual filesystem, physical devices are mounted at points within it. You don't seem to understand the difference.
NT did not use drive letters to "emulate the feel of 9x." NT predates Windows 95 by years.
I understand how easy it is to criticize Linus from behind the security blanket you call anonymitiy, and I can't disagree with all your points, but I'm not sure you understand Linus's position (perhaps you understand it better than I). The kernel tree is very large, and I wouldn't want the job of coordinating all the development that goes on within. Just reading the linux-kernel mailing list is a job in itself.
I admire the job Linus is doing but I can't imagine a single person doing it any better. I've always found Linus a humble guy in the end. Show him something's really better your way, and in a way he can understand (considering the other work he does), and often he'll adopt it. He's made an occasional policy or kernel decision that might have upset me, but coordinating public devlopment can be acurately described as herding cats. It's an endless series of tradeoffs because everyone wants to go his own way; sometimes patches are rejected, sometimes the ideas they implement become the center of rabid e-mail debate, and sometimes they're quietly applied.
The sheer numbers of developers and different directions and goals of each pulls on Linus in a different direction. I've used Linux on a variety of architectures, and I wish Linus would focus more on keeping 'stable' release of the kernel clean across all architectures--these are the quality issues of which you speak. 2.2.10, for example, won't compile on an Alpha.
I can't say I see Linus holding back the performance of the kernel for reasons of stubbornness. Most of the performance improvement suggestions he receives present a risk in other areas (stability, security, portability). He's making trade-offs, and I personally admire most of the decisions he's making.
Scalability and performance issues are most often encountered when trying to make the Intel architecture do something it was never intended to do: be scalable. I think it's unfortunate that so many people continue to squeeze this twenty-year-old idol of cruft into such places when cleaner and better engineered alternatives exist.
I think he's doing a very good job.
I assume you meant 2.3.12 is working, but it's not. It doesn't even compile on an Alpha (chokes in some structure definitions for the Alpha board architecture definitions).
I'll look around for information on this... Alan Cox's diary specified that 2.2.10ac12 didn't have a fix for the NFS lockd problems, but I'm having more than that.
I think he's using the Windows client, as he hinted above.
I don't know how many of you are using Linux in an NFS environment, but for anything more than casual file sharing, the 2.2 kernels and many of the 2.3 kernels can't even keep NFS going between themselves. They seem to make decent clients, but lockd is still broken as of 2.2.10ac12. knfsd still crashes servers sometimes. The user space daemon is fast enough for me (I don't have 40 clients banging on a server), but sometimes clients lose track of handles to the server. On my diskless clients, I seem to do a "mount -o remount,rw /"
:)
more often than I'm doing any work.
I know NFS can work... Linux had excellent NFS support for like three kernel versions somewhere in the 2.1 series. I think we should all make Linus use _only_ NFS for all his work for three months; that would get things fixed in a hurry.
That special protection is called "anonymity." It's an all or nothing situation: you're safe as long as everyone plays your game. You've got nothing to go on when someone turns on you.
So what were your contributions to the field? You aim some harsh comments at those "kids" at university who are there to learn about AI and happen to be in the awful situation of not knowing everything yet.
Bruford?
I think you might have missed a joke or two in there.
Yes, I actively use 10 workspaces through Window Maker, but I use the "maximize" feature about once a week. Reading text in a web browser at 10 points in a window 16 inches wide is almost impossible; my eyes lose the line I'm on in big chunks of text.
I'm running in 1600x1200 now, and I'm having a real hard time imagining why anyone would want to run a web browser any wider than 800 pixels anyway. Why people maximise a browser window, I will never know. What's the point of having work space at high resolution if you're going to limit yourself to one huge window?
I've always heard the MPAA age ratings referred to as "voluntary." This means that the MPAA invented these ratings, and theatres have the option to use them to filter their human input; both parties are volunteers.
Theatres are at their own private (corporate) discression when they allow a person to see a movie. Perhaps mostly out of fear of civil lawsuit or boycott, they bow to the industry pressures and regulations. And as we all know, the children of our world are perfectly alright watching bar fights, rape and homicide, violent bodily mutilation, decapitation, and torturous amputation of major limbs as long as they don't hear those seven naughty words! That would be bad for them!
In my country it is.