(are there any consumer NAT routers still sold that are wired only?)
There are, but they are normally more expensive and quite often have fewer features software features. I know that both Linksys (by Cisco Systems, Inc.:)) and D-link still make one or two wired only models.
They are normally buried under/behind the Ethernet cables and Ethernet switches.
Yes, but don't forget that the GPL does not disallow paying for the software, the major thing that the GPL disallows is redistribution without the source code.
So what I was saying is that we already proved that a placebo is effective. If you give out antibiotics as a placebo, we know that it works since it IS a placebo. The only important thing for the patient is that they swallowed something.
The only problem is using real drugs that are not a cure for the ailment causes other problems. In the case of antibiotics, it help creates super bugs. It would be better if the doctors were prescribing real (sugar) placebos.
Make them taste horrible if necessary. Say they are a newly developed drug that seems to help cure the ailment, such as ColdFX.
If the case is where the patient or guardian is unwilling to listen, then I have no problem with the physician relenting in the form of prescribing a placebo.
That would be a good use for it, as long as the placebo is really harmless in the real definition of placebo, not real drugs but useless for the symptoms (some with rather severe side affects) as is used in the the summary/article.
What should be allowed if for doctors to prescribe sugar-pills marketed under a fancy name, or perhaps homeopathic remedies (ie water). Yes it might be deceptive, but the very best cure is a placebo cure effected with a non active agent. The patient both gets cured and their exposure to toxicity is minimized.
Yep I think would be a good idea, but as mentioned in the article:
But, Dr. Brody said, doctors should resist using placebos, because they reinforce the deleterious notion that âoewhen something is the matter with you, you will not get better unless you swallow pills.â
This is the real reason that we are having this discussion at all.
That said, a lot of the "health" problems are psychological, like one of my aunts.
(since there's little to no loss in pumping that natural gas to the home).
Oh? The gas just magically appears at your home? They don't use large engines to compress the gas and push it down the pipeline from the well?
Northern-Western Alberta produces mostly Natural Gas (North-East is the tar-sands) and this gas mostly heads south. A large portion of it goes across the Rockies to Vancouver to be put on ships, and the rest heads towards Chicago.
disregard of public opinion on what? DMCA? The economy? the environment?
This Conservative government is known for only talking to the press in very controlled circumstances, having a "Harper dictates all" policy, rather than consulting party members, and making a huge percentage of bills votes of confidence (meaning if the opposition parties aren't willing to fight an election over it, it will pass.) This doesn't sound like a party that listens to the will of the people.
You're a (small 'c') conservative - that's fine. I think you're wrong, but democracy is all about dissent and differing opinions. It is also supposed to be about doing the will of the people, governing in a way that benefits the citizens rather than foreign corporations, with (if we're very, very lucky) a bit of truthful information thrown in. The current version of the Conservatives (and I voted PC back when Joe Clark ran things) is none of these things.
Yes, so much so that I get a kindly I know better than you canned, response from Mr. Prentice, and nothing at all from my Conservative MP Mr. Warkentin.
there has to be 100% accuracy in detection of malicious code, and the various C obsfucation contests show that's not an easy task.
This is where the coding standards of the project come in. The coding styles for most projects will say don't do anything tricky and in order for you code to be accepted into a project's repo, you have to conform to the coding standard. Proving that you are capable of following the coding standard is normally one of the requirements of getting write access to the repo.
The requirements are normally based around making the code easily readable, which includes using braces all the time, no multiple statements per line and following the correct indentation standard. These rules make the type of things done in the C obfuscation contests more or less impossible.
Great post, but I have one qualm. Microthreading/tasklet models are not explicitly incompatible with SMP systems. Theres nothing inherent to microthreads that would prevent, say, eight separate hardware threads all working in tandem to run a single solar system & its batch of microthreads.
Classical concurrency coordination mechanisms like mutexes and locks are not ideal for microthreading environments, so perhaps scaling out with these concurrency primitives might make abandoning stackless a logical step. Something like an actor model or a message passing scheme may however work extremely well in a stackless environment. Particularly if all you are doing is processing messages, you still want that ability to context switch extremely quickly.
My understanding is the main hold-back for concurrent Eve servers is things like guns firing at a ship thats already blown up, but the local thread doesnt know the ships blown up (not possible in their present non-concurrent environment). You can deal with this either by holding mutexes on the target, or you can use message passing and simply have the blown up ship send a message back saying "sorry, you cant shoot me, i already asploded," and then deal with that failure message in an async fashion.
If I were CCP I know what path I'd be taking. But thus far, CCP has focused largely on platform wins like asynch IO (although given the CPU usage their IO USED to be taking up perhaps that was in order) and proxy servers. They've systematically been ignoring the question of real concurrency.
Absolutely, the larger problem is the Python interpreter itself (CPython) and something called the Global Interpreter Lock (GIL). This lock prevents the real threading from having an actual impact and is the reason that CCP has not persued a OS threading.
Actually this [one thread per system] is a limit of Python. Currently Python is bound to a Single Core (this is called the GIL, Global Interpreter Lock) and it is the centre of a large amount of heated discussion in the Python Community about removing it or keeping it.
IronPython has removed it but has no support for stackless at this point so we would still have to completely rewrite the threading system.
We are continuing to look into options to enable us to span multiple CPU cores and thus 'grow' our architecture. I am hoping to get some more details on this for posting Soon(TM).
As for the server side, in the last week or two since the StacklessIO update went live on their servers, the servers have been able to handle large fleet battles incredibly well. Module lag is all-but nonexistent, even with several hundred per side battles. The problem is now one of memory; the removal of the IO-caused lag bottlenecks has shifted the bottleneck to server memory. Thankfully, that's a bit easier to fix, since the Stackless IO update lets them compile a 64 bit version of the client that can actually use more than 2gb of RAM.
Its not the clients that run out of memory, its the servers, Jita specifically, that were running out of memory.
Which is why you backup the files *inside* the encrypted partition and encrypt the files as they go onto your backup medium. You don't backup the image the entire partition.
Slashdot Mirror
(are there any consumer NAT routers still sold that are wired only?)
There are, but they are normally more expensive and quite often have fewer features software features. I know that both Linksys (by Cisco Systems, Inc. :)) and D-link still make one or two wired only models.
They are normally buried under/behind the Ethernet cables and Ethernet switches.
IANAL
Yes, but don't forget that the GPL does not disallow paying for the software, the major thing that the GPL disallows is redistribution without the source code.
While the healthy won't die or have any serious consequences, they can still pass it on the others, who may be a greater risk.
So what I was saying is that we already proved that a placebo is effective. If you give out antibiotics as a placebo, we know that it works since it IS a placebo. The only important thing for the patient is that they swallowed something.
The only problem is using real drugs that are not a cure for the ailment causes other problems. In the case of antibiotics, it help creates super bugs. It would be better if the doctors were prescribing real (sugar) placebos.
Make them taste horrible if necessary. Say they are a newly developed drug that seems to help cure the ailment, such as ColdFX.
If the case is where the patient or guardian is unwilling to listen, then I have no problem with the physician relenting in the form of prescribing a placebo.
That would be a good use for it, as long as the placebo is really harmless in the real definition of placebo, not real drugs but useless for the symptoms (some with rather severe side affects) as is used in the the summary/article.
What should be allowed if for doctors to prescribe sugar-pills marketed under a fancy name, or perhaps homeopathic remedies (ie water). Yes it might be deceptive, but the very best cure is a placebo cure effected with a non active agent. The patient both gets cured and their exposure to toxicity is minimized.
Yep I think would be a good idea, but as mentioned in the article:
But, Dr. Brody said, doctors should resist using placebos, because they reinforce the deleterious notion that âoewhen something is the matter with you, you will not get better unless you swallow pills.â
This is the real reason that we are having this discussion at all.
That said, a lot of the "health" problems are psychological, like one of my aunts.
You forget the Bloc's 50 seats, which yields a comfy majority. They're easy to rally as long as you have progressive legislation.
Ya, but no one above mentioned the Bloc, they were talking about the more "leftish" parties.
But as soon as you want something that can be construed to be against Québec's interest, though, you lose them in a jiffy.
Canada's history in one sentence. :)
(since there's little to no loss in pumping that natural gas to the home).
Oh? The gas just magically appears at your home? They don't use large engines to compress the gas and push it down the pipeline from the well?
Northern-Western Alberta produces mostly Natural Gas (North-East is the tar-sands) and this gas mostly heads south. A large portion of it goes across the Rockies to Vancouver to be put on ships, and the rest heads towards Chicago.
This Conservative government is known for only talking to the press in very controlled circumstances, having a "Harper dictates all" policy, rather than consulting party members, and making a huge percentage of bills votes of confidence (meaning if the opposition parties aren't willing to fight an election over it, it will pass.) This doesn't sound like a party that listens to the will of the people.
You're a (small 'c') conservative - that's fine. I think you're wrong, but democracy is all about dissent and differing opinions. It is also supposed to be about doing the will of the people, governing in a way that benefits the citizens rather than foreign corporations, with (if we're very, very lucky) a bit of truthful information thrown in. The current version of the Conservatives (and I voted PC back when Joe Clark ran things) is none of these things.
Yes, so much so that I get a kindly I know better than you canned, response from Mr. Prentice, and nothing at all from my Conservative MP Mr. Warkentin.
True, but:
Liberal Popular Vote: 26.24%
NDP Popular Vote: 18.20%
Green Popular Vote: 6.80%
Add that up, and it comes to: 51.24%
A majority govt. So, with the voting of this mediocre election, the NDP, Greens, and Liberals would form a majority coalition govt.
A majority of the votes, yes, but not the majority of the seats.
Liberal Seats: 76/308
NDP Seats: 37/308
Green Seats: 0/308
= 113 seats or 36.6%
This in part of the reason that coalition don't happen in Canada.
there has to be 100% accuracy in detection of malicious code, and the various C obsfucation contests show that's not an easy task.
This is where the coding standards of the project come in. The coding styles for most projects will say don't do anything tricky and in order for you code to be accepted into a project's repo, you have to conform to the coding standard. Proving that you are capable of following the coding standard is normally one of the requirements of getting write access to the repo.
The requirements are normally based around making the code easily readable, which includes using braces all the time, no multiple statements per line and following the correct indentation standard. These rules make the type of things done in the C obfuscation contests more or less impossible.
Right right right right right... and wrong.
Great post, but I have one qualm. Microthreading/tasklet models are not explicitly incompatible with SMP systems. Theres nothing inherent to microthreads that would prevent, say, eight separate hardware threads all working in tandem to run a single solar system & its batch of microthreads.
Classical concurrency coordination mechanisms like mutexes and locks are not ideal for microthreading environments, so perhaps scaling out with these concurrency primitives might make abandoning stackless a logical step. Something like an actor model or a message passing scheme may however work extremely well in a stackless environment. Particularly if all you are doing is processing messages, you still want that ability to context switch extremely quickly.
My understanding is the main hold-back for concurrent Eve servers is things like guns firing at a ship thats already blown up, but the local thread doesnt know the ships blown up (not possible in their present non-concurrent environment). You can deal with this either by holding mutexes on the target, or you can use message passing and simply have the blown up ship send a message back saying "sorry, you cant shoot me, i already asploded," and then deal with that failure message in an async fashion.
If I were CCP I know what path I'd be taking. But thus far, CCP has focused largely on platform wins like asynch IO (although given the CPU usage their IO USED to be taking up perhaps that was in order) and proxy servers. They've systematically been ignoring the question of real concurrency.
Absolutely, the larger problem is the Python interpreter itself (CPython) and something called the Global Interpreter Lock (GIL). This lock prevents the real threading from having an actual impact and is the reason that CCP has not persued a OS threading.
CCP Lingorm
Actually this [one thread per system] is a limit of Python. Currently Python is bound to a Single Core (this is called the GIL, Global Interpreter Lock) and it is the centre of a large amount of heated discussion in the Python Community about removing it or keeping it.
IronPython has removed it but has no support for stackless at this point so we would still have to completely rewrite the threading system.
We are continuing to look into options to enable us to span multiple CPU cores and thus 'grow' our architecture. I am hoping to get some more details on this for posting Soon(TM).
As for the server side, in the last week or two since the StacklessIO update went live on their servers, the servers have been able to handle large fleet battles incredibly well. Module lag is all-but nonexistent, even with several hundred per side battles. The problem is now one of memory; the removal of the IO-caused lag bottlenecks has shifted the bottleneck to server memory. Thankfully, that's a bit easier to fix, since the Stackless IO update lets them compile a 64 bit version of the client that can actually use more than 2gb of RAM.
Its not the clients that run out of memory, its the servers, Jita specifically, that were running out of memory.
nitpick: Regarding Canada's retail tax rate... it was 7% and has been reduced to 6%. The 5% rate is what is promised if we re-elect bush-junior.
Really? At least in Alberta the GST that has been charged at 5% since January 1st, 2008.
Here is the CBC article about it. http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2007/10/30/econstatement.html
Unless you keep backups.
Which is why you backup the files *inside* the encrypted partition and encrypt the files as they go onto your backup medium. You don't backup the image the entire partition.