I tried this, but it didn't help much.

As I ran out of memory, it will throw away the disk cache (including copies of currently running programs, IIRC) until it's constantly running back to the disk to grab the next chunk of needed code or data. At any rate, I had the exact same symptoms, but perhaps more acutely. A SSD might really help this as the random access thrashing wouldn't delay I/O nearly as much..

Linked to by the article, this might address this situation: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=ODQ3Mw

My solution was to learn the key combination Alt-SysRq-F - this basically tells the kernel to find the process taking the most memory and kill it. Hitting this (possibly a couple times) was the only realistic way to solve the situation, as I couldn't get to a terminal (due to the system being totally unresponsive) to check the currently running processes. (see also: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Magic_SysRq_key ) Note: it might need to be enabled, though in my experience it was enabled for some of the mainstream distros.

As long as I get a $50 break on a new CPU!

Seriously, if you get less you should pay for less. They'd still be competing with their other chips (and AMD's).. so it's not like you shouldn't get what you pay for.
That being said, this is like Intel creating a similar avenue as overclocking.. getting more performance from a cheaper chip. I'd really be tempted to get a crippled / cheaper CPU and just crack it to get the full-price speed.

I don't know about you, but I think this is hugely awesome!

It also reminds me of a Stargate Atlantis episode.. I hope it goes better for the Rwandans.

According to the article, it uses this "Opal" storage spec. (didn't find it on wikipedia..)
Below from: http://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/resources/storage_application_note_encrypting_drives_compliant_with_opal_ssc

Storage Application Note: Encrypting Drives Compliant with Opal SSC

This document provides examples of the communication between a host and a storage device implementing the TCG Storage Security Subsystem Class: Opal SSC and the TCG Storage Architecture Core Specification.

Examples are provided for the following scenarios:.

        * Discovering whether a storage device supports Opal SSC
        * Taking ownership of the storage device
        * Activating the Locking SP
        * Changing the Admin1 PIN in the Locking SP and adding users
        * Configuring Locking Objects (LBA ranges) *
        * Unlocking ranges
        * Erasing a range
        * Enabling the MBR shadow
        * Un-shadowing the MBR
        * Reverting the TPer
        * Reverting the Locking SP
        * Using the DataStore table

For further reading, here's what looks like the spec:
http://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/files/static_page_files/9FE14508-1D09-3519-AD7D21A695E9B8EE/Opal_SSC_1.00_rev3.00-Final.pdf

Presumably, no data is actually 'deleted' upon power-down, just the key is lost. Presumably this works by keeping the entire HDD encrypted - no wipe is needed when the drive is repurposed.

That's a stupid estimate. Since they admitted there is so much uncertainty, they should have just said 130 million. (Or better, 0.13 billion to retain the significant digits)

The article also links to: http://cio-nii.defense.gov/sites/oss/Open_Source_Software_(OSS)_FAQ.htm#Q:_Doesn.27t_hiding_source_code_automatically_make_software_more_secure.3F

Excerpt:

    Q: Doesn't hiding source code automatically make software more secure?

No. Indeed, vulnerability databases such as CVE make it clear that merely hiding source code does not counter attacks:

        * Dynamic attacks (e.g., generating input patterns to probe for vulnerabilities and then sending that data to the program to execute) don’t need source or binary. Observing the output from inputs is often sufficient for attack.
        * Static attacks (e.g., analyzing the code instead of its execution) can use pattern-matches against binaries - source code is not needed for them either.
        * Even if source code is necessary (e.g., for source code analyzers), adequate source code can often be regenerated by disassemblers and decompilers sufficiently to search for vulnerabilities. Such source code may not be adequate to cost-effectively maintain the software, but attackers need not maintain software.
        * Even when the original source is necessary for in-depth analysis, making source code available to the public significantly aids defenders and not just attackers. Continuous and broad peer-review, enabled by publicly available source code, improves software reliability and security through the identification and elimination of defects that might otherwise go unrecognized by the core development team. Conversely, where source code is hidden from the public, attackers can attack the software anyway as described above. In addition, an attacker can often acquire the original source code from suppliers anyway (either because the supplier voluntarily provides it, or via attacks against the supplier); in such cases, if only the attacker has the source code, the attacker ends up with another advantage.

Hiding source code does inhibit the ability of third parties to respond to vulnerabilities (because changing software is more difficult without the source code), but this is obviously not a security advantage. In general, “Security by Obscurity” is widely denigrated.

In one experimental attack conducted in the study, researchers were able to first disable the ICD to prevent it from delivering a life-saving shock and then direct the same device to deliver multiple shocks averaging 137.7 volts that would induce ventricular fibrillation in a patient. The study concluded that there were no “technological mechanisms in place to ensure that programmers can only be operated by authorized personnel.” Fu’s findings show that almost anyone could use store-bought tools to build a device that could “be easily miniaturized to the size of an iPhone and carried through a crowded mall or subway, sending its heart-attack command to random victims.” ..

Though the adversarial conditions demonstrated in Fu’s studies were hypothetical, two early incidents of malicious hacking underscore the need to address the threat software liabilities pose to the security of IMDs. In November 2007, a group of attackers infiltrated the Coping with Epilepsy website and planted flashing computer animations that triggered migraine headaches and seizures in photosensitive site visitors.13 A year later, malicious hackers mounted a similar attack on the Epilepsy Foundation website.14

Hey, are you a coffee drinker?

For myself, I've noticed that if I drink lots of coffee, I can think really fast for a few hours (note: fast != better), but then I've tuckered myself out and I can't keep going at the end of the work day.

Try cutting back your caffeine intake and see how it compares. Let us know how it goes!

You can try formatting it in linux!

In Linux (or at least in some older distros (maybe try knoppix!)), you can format the floppy in different formats by using a different device file.

e.g. "fdformat /dev/fd0*360" (sorry, I can't remember the exact file name)"

Tom's root-boot (rtbt) disk (http://www.toms.net/rb/) uses this technique to get about 1.7MB onto a 1.44MB floppy. You can go downwards as well.

Perhaps doing this a few times (or using it at that size) would help it work better?

If you have a 5.25" drive, there's a good chance you can hook it up to even a new system, if you have the right cables.

However, I agree that it's probably best to format it on the old system if possible (or on whichever side has the more finnicky FDD) - that should ensure the best compatibility on that side.