sort of the same story. Started at KDE, found it bloated, went to gnome. In my case, I found gnome bloated as well so now I am at a minimalistic FVWM2 setup. I've set it up so that the mouse is no longer needed. All my common have keyboard shortcuts and the others I can start from a terminal. Its much easier to use.
no... bash + emacs FTW. Ultimate in speed and flexibility though the learning curve has a tendency to kill most users long before they can exploit these tools to their full capabilities.
and less than what social security, medicare, and medicade cost every minute. I have no problem with bashing excessive spending but atleast go after the big ones first.
Ummm... In Linux, the kernel doesn't differentiate between threads and processes. Everything is just a "task." Thus the argument for using threads due to context switch requirements is incorrect. With mmap and FIFOs, memory sharing within processes (among other things) becomes trivially easy and thus ease of IPC is also a horrible argument to use. Therefore, in Linux, there is no point in using actual threads except laziness. Case in point, postgres spawns a different process for every connection and uses memory mapped files to take care of table access. It is extremely fast, especially in environments with several thousand connections and more forming every second and extremely reliable. Note also that I have sometimes crashed postgres connections by inserting incorrect pieces of C code (accidentally) and requesting execution but that has never resulted in any problems in any of the other connections or tables. Note that in windows, process creation/duplication is a very slow process compared to threads (in Linux, its still pretty fast). Thus there may actually be an argument to use them there but some people re-implemented postgres' connection strategy to use threads instead of processes in windows and did not notice any appreciable performance increase.
Sort of... Then again, think of it as training. 70-80% or even more of the people you will have to interact with and work for will probably be 2nd or 3rd rate people and they cannot stand people smarter than themselves (whether they admit it or not). Just that unlike school, they control your paycheck. Better learn to get used to them so that one day you can fire them and put some actually 1st rate people in their place.
I am being picky here but oh well. Most UNIX systems and at least Linux if nothing else have gotten rid of the EOF character in favor of just recording the file size seperately. Tossing a ^D or multiple ^Ds in a file doesn't have an effect on reading it though the parser used may make a difference.
then again, if we really wanted to push the envelope, we could find an visual encoding (maybe the 2d barcodes that people are thinking about right now) and print it all to acid-free paper. Toss that into a hermetically sealed vault and you have several centuries of archiving right there. As long os the vault is not compromised, the data is safe. Now the only problem is being able to understand the format the stuff was archived in...
I should point out that tapes now have capacities in the range of 400GB+ AND last for several decades reliably. Trying to guess how much a tape can store by the amount of video is not a good idea. For example, H.264 can store the same quality of video in half the space as mpeg2. Does that mean that an H.264 DVD magically has more capacity? No, it means that we have found a better utilization of that space. Similarly, there are much better ways of storing a database to tape than to convert it to some sort of video and then try to make a VHD or VCD out of it.
anybody notice that the ending '}' gets caught in the// line comment and thus is not recorded in the code resulting in a mess of compile errors as the bytecode compiler tries to figure out what the hell you were trying to say?
2.5) Get sued by said crapware providers for violating contract.
4.5) Use extra profits to payback the crapware providers to get maybe half the profits you were getting before.
The truth hurts doesn't it. I would be very happy if companies like dell and HP started selling naked laptops. Heck, I would probably end up buying and recommending any major (HINT: Dell, HP, Lenovo) which did this but they aren't doing it yet.
2048 data points? how about using a dedicated tool such as gnuplot or ploticus? They can handle such data frequencies in milliseconds and automating them is trivial as compared to excel (is it even possible to automate excel?).
correction: the economies were inefficient. Horribly so, thats why they failed in the first place: they were unable to utilize their resources effectively. The government on the other hand, was quite efficient. I managed to monitor the activities of all its citizens and the KGB was known to be the one of the best espionage, spying, and policing organization in the world. Same with Maoist China. The economy was crap (they spent major portions of their time forging worthless metal and letting the crops rot) but keep in mind that the government of Maoist China was able to roll out initiatives like the great leap forward in less than 5 years. Try having the US government do that and it would take it more than a decade assuming that it didn't get killed in the middle.
I am also not saying that an extremely efficient government is a bad idea. Its probably possible but not easy to structure a government to be efficient and un oppressive, just that such governments have been few and far between in world history.
On a side note: I would be very interested in finding examples of governments which were efficient and did not oppress their citizens. Could make for some very interesting case studies.
Actually a wasteful system seems like a very good idea. Historically, there is a direct correlation between how oppressive and how efficient a government is. It seems like all governments have an inherent urge to oppress their constituents and that greater inefficiency slows it down. Then again, we all hae to pay for that in terms of taxes so it sucks either way.
Its a catch all up there with the other regulations like FAR 91.13 "Careless or Reckless Operation." Part a: No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.
Its a catch all. If you screw up while flying, you were probably flying an a careless or reckless manner. There are quite a few regulations like that floating about.
Hmm... If enough people started using encryption, Intel and AMD would probably start adding it as well. I doubt the extra hardware ill take more than a few thousand transistors. with the current limit of several hundred million, that should be trivial.
now if only CMD was as good as bash and you could use it exclusively (like me). Somebody needs to do a comparison of efficiency when using a GUI (any GUI) and the terminal and see how that pans out.
lisp is the only language I can think of which uses the `=' sign as equality. everything else I know uses the `==' operator for equality testing (in some form). Any othr languages like lisp?
Looking at my processor, it has been throttled down to 1 Ghz (norm speed 2.2Ghz) ever since I activated the CPU throttlers. The only time it has come back to full power was when I started compiling applications on it. So, how can a 1.6 Ghz processor on a more up to date acrhitecture (my laptop is nearly 2 years old now) have any problems running modern software?
Pure FUD.
You have ZERO evidence that there is a security risk here, yet that didn't stop you from spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Complain about *real* issues, not your delusional fantasies. Are you one of those people who gets a random email with attachments and then opens them on good faith? In security, it is best practice to assume the worst and work from there. Its called default deny and any security expert who knows his/her trade knows to keep it in mind. We don't need evidence to suspect a security risk. Just looking at MS' track record to lead us to assume that there is probably a security risk and then work from there.
WOW, tout a new fast way of getting more SWAP and then make it worthless. The only CPUs which can process this fast enough are high-end processors like the core duo or ones with hardware encryption (VIA C3 etc.) For the rest, the computer will spend more time encrypting then actually using the data in a meaningful way. Nice way to waste time.
"USB 2.0 hi-speed" is 60MB/sec, not 10. When you find a model which can actually hit that theoretical max of 60 mb/s, tell me so that I can buy a few. In reality, USB drives have problems to getting to half of that. Its sort of like how you can look at the max theoretical transfer speeds of SATA1, SATA2, and the interface (150MB/s, 300MB/s, and 10GB/s respectively) but not really get any useful information whatsoever.
Slashdot Mirror
sort of the same story. Started at KDE, found it bloated, went to gnome. In my case, I found gnome bloated as well so now I am at a minimalistic FVWM2 setup. I've set it up so that the mouse is no longer needed. All my common have keyboard shortcuts and the others I can start from a terminal. Its much easier to use.
no... bash + emacs FTW. Ultimate in speed and flexibility though the learning curve has a tendency to kill most users long before they can exploit these tools to their full capabilities.
and less than what social security, medicare, and medicade cost every minute. I have no problem with bashing excessive spending but atleast go after the big ones first.
no. Its more of a quiet settle along and relax kind of piece. Its very aptly named.
Ummm... In Linux, the kernel doesn't differentiate between threads and processes. Everything is just a "task." Thus the argument for using threads due to context switch requirements is incorrect. With mmap and FIFOs, memory sharing within processes (among other things) becomes trivially easy and thus ease of IPC is also a horrible argument to use. Therefore, in Linux, there is no point in using actual threads except laziness. Case in point, postgres spawns a different process for every connection and uses memory mapped files to take care of table access. It is extremely fast, especially in environments with several thousand connections and more forming every second and extremely reliable. Note also that I have sometimes crashed postgres connections by inserting incorrect pieces of C code (accidentally) and requesting execution but that has never resulted in any problems in any of the other connections or tables. Note that in windows, process creation/duplication is a very slow process compared to threads (in Linux, its still pretty fast). Thus there may actually be an argument to use them there but some people re-implemented postgres' connection strategy to use threads instead of processes in windows and did not notice any appreciable performance increase.
Sort of... Then again, think of it as training. 70-80% or even more of the people you will have to interact with and work for will probably be 2nd or 3rd rate people and they cannot stand people smarter than themselves (whether they admit it or not). Just that unlike school, they control your paycheck. Better learn to get used to them so that one day you can fire them and put some actually 1st rate people in their place.
so... I guess suggesting the Violin-Romance No. 1 by Beethoven for stress relief would be a waste of time here?
I am being picky here but oh well. Most UNIX systems and at least Linux if nothing else have gotten rid of the EOF character in favor of just recording the file size seperately. Tossing a ^D or multiple ^Ds in a file doesn't have an effect on reading it though the parser used may make a difference.
then again, if we really wanted to push the envelope, we could find an visual encoding (maybe the 2d barcodes that people are thinking about right now) and print it all to acid-free paper. Toss that into a hermetically sealed vault and you have several centuries of archiving right there. As long os the vault is not compromised, the data is safe. Now the only problem is being able to understand the format the stuff was archived in...
I should point out that tapes now have capacities in the range of 400GB+ AND last for several decades reliably. Trying to guess how much a tape can store by the amount of video is not a good idea. For example, H.264 can store the same quality of video in half the space as mpeg2. Does that mean that an H.264 DVD magically has more capacity? No, it means that we have found a better utilization of that space. Similarly, there are much better ways of storing a database to tape than to convert it to some sort of video and then try to make a VHD or VCD out of it.
anybody notice that the ending '}' gets caught in the // line comment and thus is not recorded in the code resulting in a mess of compile errors as the bytecode compiler tries to figure out what the hell you were trying to say?
2.5) Get sued by said crapware providers for violating contract.
4.5) Use extra profits to payback the crapware providers to get maybe half the profits you were getting before.
The truth hurts doesn't it. I would be very happy if companies like dell and HP started selling naked laptops. Heck, I would probably end up buying and recommending any major (HINT: Dell, HP, Lenovo) which did this but they aren't doing it yet.
mod parent up. Excellent point.
2048 data points? how about using a dedicated tool such as gnuplot or ploticus? They can handle such data frequencies in milliseconds and automating them is trivial as compared to excel (is it even possible to automate excel?).
define "easy-to-understand." I bet that most congressmen consider their laws to have just the right amount of "easiness-to-understand."
correction: the economies were inefficient. Horribly so, thats why they failed in the first place: they were unable to utilize their resources effectively. The government on the other hand, was quite efficient. I managed to monitor the activities of all its citizens and the KGB was known to be the one of the best espionage, spying, and policing organization in the world. Same with Maoist China. The economy was crap (they spent major portions of their time forging worthless metal and letting the crops rot) but keep in mind that the government of Maoist China was able to roll out initiatives like the great leap forward in less than 5 years. Try having the US government do that and it would take it more than a decade assuming that it didn't get killed in the middle.
I am also not saying that an extremely efficient government is a bad idea. Its probably possible but not easy to structure a government to be efficient and un oppressive, just that such governments have been few and far between in world history.
On a side note: I would be very interested in finding examples of governments which were efficient and did not oppress their citizens. Could make for some very interesting case studies.
Actually a wasteful system seems like a very good idea. Historically, there is a direct correlation between how oppressive and how efficient a government is. It seems like all governments have an inherent urge to oppress their constituents and that greater inefficiency slows it down. Then again, we all hae to pay for that in terms of taxes so it sucks either way.
Its a catch all up there with the other regulations like FAR 91.13 "Careless or Reckless Operation."
Part a: No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.
Its a catch all. If you screw up while flying, you were probably flying an a careless or reckless manner. There are quite a few regulations like that floating about.
Hmm... If enough people started using encryption, Intel and AMD would probably start adding it as well. I doubt the extra hardware ill take more than a few thousand transistors. with the current limit of several hundred million, that should be trivial.
now if only CMD was as good as bash and you could use it exclusively (like me). Somebody needs to do a comparison of efficiency when using a GUI (any GUI) and the terminal and see how that pans out.
lisp is the only language I can think of which uses the `=' sign as equality. everything else I know uses the `==' operator for equality testing (in some form). Any othr languages like lisp?
Looking at my processor, it has been throttled down to 1 Ghz (norm speed 2.2Ghz) ever since I activated the CPU throttlers. The only time it has come back to full power was when I started compiling applications on it. So, how can a 1.6 Ghz processor on a more up to date acrhitecture (my laptop is nearly 2 years old now) have any problems running modern software?
You have ZERO evidence that there is a security risk here, yet that didn't stop you from spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Complain about *real* issues, not your delusional fantasies. Are you one of those people who gets a random email with attachments and then opens them on good faith? In security, it is best practice to assume the worst and work from there. Its called default deny and any security expert who knows his/her trade knows to keep it in mind. We don't need evidence to suspect a security risk. Just looking at MS' track record to lead us to assume that there is probably a security risk and then work from there.
WOW, tout a new fast way of getting more SWAP and then make it worthless. The only CPUs which can process this fast enough are high-end processors like the core duo or ones with hardware encryption (VIA C3 etc.) For the rest, the computer will spend more time encrypting then actually using the data in a meaningful way. Nice way to waste time.