Comment Re:Complementarity (Score 1) 118
(let's call him Rob)
No no no, scientifically his name must be Carl! Did no one teach you your A B C's?
(let's call him Rob)
No no no, scientifically his name must be Carl! Did no one teach you your A B C's?
and of course when you start dealing with SSD's or more expensive drives with smarter controllers your ability to actually do a write to every sector to achieve this goal is somewhat questionable
Every IDE drive made since the 90s has a multicore processor on it that is already more powerful than most hobbiest computers sold as actual computers just the decade before.
The translation between an address on disk to read or store a byte has not matched a static physical location since MFM drives, which most people these days have never seen or heard of.
Some brilliant hackers are only just recently reverse engineering these controllers, learning to run code directly on them.
This guy even has a Linux kernel running on a 2tb Western Digital HD controller chip, and reprogrammed it to silently watch for a certain string to be written by the PC and then return additional data.
His idea was to create a program that could be triggered remotely by getting said string to be written to disk, say by utilizing a webserver log file which puts even invalid requests into an error log.
That drive has a 150mhz 3 core ARM processor, which has a 32 bit memory map, direct access to the sata bus and direct access to the raw storage.
By pausing the HD CPU, memory locations can be changed and the currently running program modified, then the CPU can be unpaused and the code continues to run.
Basically anything you can do from the sATA interface is pretty garenteed not to be able to touch or even be aware of specific locations on the platters where data is stored.
No he means Silicone. Calculators obtain that by displaying 58008
You can't spell out "mama" on a 7 segment display
(Kids these days!)
And while I am at it, the order of the domain should have been reversed. So instead of e.g. tech.slashdot.org.us, It would have been better to go for us.org.slashdot.tech as you then follow the tree. Even neater if there would have been no dots, but slashes instead:
http://us/org/slashdot/tech//d... (Please note the second double slashes to show where the domain ends and the file system begins.
Actually in the 80s that is pretty much how it was.
UUCP mail was routed from one mail server to another to another before finally (hopefully!) landing in a users mail spool on a server they frequently checked more than others. This one done with whats called "bang paths" as they used ! as the separator, and the route was listed left to right ending with a double colon and the username.
Even at the time DNS replaced hosts.txt on the ARPAnet, there were still other connected networks like BITnet and CSnet using different protocols that used mixed forms of routing paths, and neither network required NSF approval to join like the ARPAnet did.
BITnet was IBMs VMS network, and anyone that had a VAX with the RSCS software installed and could afford a leased line was able to get on the network and get data to/from the arpanet.
There was a serious perceived threat from these other protocols, most of which lacked a unified or centrally managed naming lookup scheme (although that is exactly what RSCS was, although only for VAX)
At the time each protocol pretty much only looked out for their own, except for DNS which was advertized as "generic" and "non-proprietary" as only IP was required. DNS was also an open standard like IP and TCP. That was enough for DNS to "win" and become the one true naming system.
I'm not sure why they decided to use a right to left hierarchy beyond just trying to differentiate themselves from existing protocols...
But it doesn't follow the URL/URI standard because that wasn't to be invented for another 10 years or so.
As you say, hindsight is always 20/20
Excluding all ccTLDs, the original gTLDs are:
The first expansion added:
Then ICANN opened this new gTLD program. The listing of new gTLDs approved are here
I had the idea to use it for pre-blacklisting each and every one in my mail and web filters, but opted instead to go with a whitelisting approach hoping for easier maintenance (Thus the easy copy/pasting of the list at the top - sorry, I don't have link references anymore)
The applicant status page makes for better comedy however, as it lists the existing company name that requested the new top-level instead of the fake company name setup to handle domain registrations. (Currently the english TLDs start at page 4)
Most make sense from the twisted world view of trademark holders, but some are true WTF moments...
Amazon for example requested some obvious ones like
But they also have some strange requests like
Amazon requested a whole 76 TLDs, Google requested 102, Microsoft only 11, and surprisingly Apple only requested
ICANN bitched and moaned about not wanting to create
Also interesting is they already approved and delegated
Filtering on similarities shows
A whole 6 pages worth of results have objections linked to them, which sounds promising except there are 56 pages total
Sadly there is way too much money involved for much success of a massive grass-roots preemptive blocking and agreement to not allow such TLDs to resolve.
But I have no qualms about doing so and only white listing individual and specific domains if any of our customers or vendors go the retarded route of making their primary email or websites use one of these.
I'd give our non-english speaking friends a break, because despite the great technical problems involved at least they have a valid reason wanting a TLD in their native language.
Beyond that however, the rest so far look like money grubbing land grabs, stupid branding, or obvious scamming/spammer havens.
I wasn't disagreeing with the facts that were cited, only pointing out that the amount of work that you are going to get out of a particular amount of charge for a given application is directly proportional to that amount of charge, regardless of what the current or voltage levels are, because for any single given electrical application, the power demands tend to be invariant. Under such circumstances, more charge available means powering that particular application for more time, which results in more work being done.
A 12 volt 1 amp-hour battery will store the exact same amount of energy as a 6 volt 2 amp-hour battery. Both store 12 watt-hours of energy.
However if your load requires 12 volt, minimum 10.5 volt, then being powered by the 12 volt 1 amp-hour battery will provide for an hour of useful work, while being powered by the 6 volt battery will likely result in NO work what so ever, despite both providing the same amount of energy.
It's hard to argue 1 hour of work is less than zero hours of work, or that one equals zero.
Meanwhile, money made from selling Windows software to computer makers slid by three percent due to continue soft demand by consumers for personal computers
Yes, I too have been both softly demanding and loudly demanding a personal computer OS from Microsoft, yet all they want to push is some tablet OS unsuited for business work on a personal computer.
At least they aren't acting surprised about their choice.
Dark Matter on the other hand, is something which is not predicted by any theory we currently have.
Before you are at all taken seriously, you have a ton of explaining to do then.
Since you claim General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and the laws of Thermodynamics are all not current theories we have, you must start by explaining what each one of those theories explains and then some
You have to explain why the Sun exists, since it can't with the amount of gravity we actually see.
You have to explain the cosmic microwave background image, and why it shows in multiple ways what you claim doesn't exist.
Why does the image indicate 25% barionic matter and 75% non-barionic if that isn't actually the case?
Why does the image show missing spectral lines for missing matter which you claim isn't missing because it doesn't exist?
Why are solar systems the shape we see them in if gravity works the way you claim?
Why are galaxies the shape we see them in if gravity works the way you claim?
Why are galactic clusters the shape we see them in if gravity works the way you claim?
How do you explain the galactic filaments since there isn't enough gravity for the universe to look the way it looks?
Once you create a theory to answer all of those, you'll finally be caught up to "now" and can then proceed to wow us with the additional predictions your theory makes that turn out to be the case.
Until then, the evidence is strongly against all of your claims.
You and the people who modded you up should be ashamed.
I don't think time spent studying the monster manuals or magic would be of much aid in the actual spiritual journey we face on earth even if you could make various other claims of benefit.
I don't think the time you personally spend posting to slashdot is of much aid in real life either.
You stop all of your hobbies at my request, and we will talk about me stopping mine at yours.
My own character (who appears whenever I need to advance the metaplot or something) is a Paladin of Khorne, and if you know the lore behind those two things you're probably wondering what the hell I'm smoking)
Khorne the chaos god? A paladin?!
I find what you've been smoking interesting, and would like to subscribe to your campaign!
When you call Bradley Manning a whistle blower, you lose all credibility.
Pft, coming from yourself - who just committed 10 federal crimes today alone - you sir have less than no credibility.
The people with zero credibility have way way more credibility than you do, so naturally they win.
Stop being a criminal and perhaps others might care somewhat about your opinions of the law.
The key thing often forgotten by those who argue against anyone ever voting for a 3rd party is that they somehow think that all voters are "owned" by the 2 major parties. And if someone chooses to vote for a 3rd party, they are somehow "taking votes away" from a major party candidate.
I've never understood that line of reasoning.
Voting 3rd party is akin to "stealing" votes from the two major parties exactly the same as me purchasing a bag of potato chips is "stealing" that money from the entertainment industry.
If someone wishes to claim I was "stealing" my own vote which is mine to do with as I please, then let them step up to the plate first and allow me to dictate how they spend their vote. Otherwise it's nothing more than hypocritical to demand the same of me.
As you already mentioned, each person who votes increases the fractions denominator, and the fact neither of the major two parties counters show an increase in the numerator is by intent and design. This despite the system in place that declares a winner based off the largest fraction, no matter how small of a percentage it normalizes to in the end.
How does any of that help the fact HTTPS://slashdot.org/ returns a 302 redirection back to HTTP://slashdot.org/ ???
Setting up a special "secure" website with SSL certificate is pretty useless if you only redirect to a single non-encrypted URL.
Unless of course you are claiming HTTP(no S) is encrypted with magic or something, which seems to be what you are implying by pointing out the TLS server/client auth lines in that certificate that won't even apply.....
What's even more hilarious, people like the GP who claim to hate a type of article then proceed to post in each and every one of them are in reality raising two counters in a database somewhere when they #1 click on the article and #2 post a comment.
This indicates to slashdot that the article was both interesting to read as well as interesting enough to have participation, and the interpreted result is the readers want MORE articles of that nature!
So when people say "complaining is the only way to get change", they are very correct in fact but incorrect about as far as you can be in outcome. Complaining in the comments will cause more such articles in the future, not less.
As you already stated, the only way to assure less such articles is to skip the ones uninteresting to you and to post what you do want to see in the firehose to be upvoted for the front page.
Anyone who doesn't use the firehose to down vote articles and then complains about articles on the front page are nearly as bad as people who refuse to vote then continuously bitch about who does get voted in to government ("nearly" because the outcome is magnitudes less important in daily life here on slashdot than who runs the worlds biggest countries)
Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.
