Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: How not (Score 3, Interesting) 244

by Crass Spektakel (#49689691) Attached to: RTFM? How To Write a Manual Worth Reading

I am already happy when the author has read and some early manpages of sudoers (imho the worst, by far).

Todays "sudoers" manpage has already been cleaned up a lot and is still a horrible read. But in the past it was something like "the relevant configuration is a hierarchical list of geometrical weighted values. Each one represents a position in a list relative to its anchor". And yes, that was just a weird way of saying "/etc/sudoers contains configuration keywords with options".

Overall I had the impression the author was a sociopath showing off his mathematical skills while keeping the core knowledge unavailable to others.

Comment: I would buy... (Score 1) 284

by Crass Spektakel (#48464171) Attached to: Is LTO Tape On Its Way Out?

From 1981 to 2011 I have been using Tape Backups for my private, business and customer systems. It was cheap, reliable and fast, my first drive had 5MB with a transferrate of 20KB/s, my last drive hat 200GB with a transfer rate of 30MB/s.

But no more.

Drives are fucking expensive (and they die a lot), media are fucking expensive (and are no better than other media),

Lets say I could buy a drive with 2TB for â200 and a 2TB media for â10 or a 10TB for â500 and a 10TB media for â50 then I would at least consider using tape again.

But right now I pay â1600 for a 2TB drive and â40 for a 2TB catridge. Thats insane, I can buy 60TB of hard disk storage just for the drive alone and get another 2TB cheaper than buying tapes.

And trust me, hard drive stored in a dark, locked box will work even better than tapes.

Comment: Creeper OS (Score 1) 77

by Crass Spektakel (#48223603) Attached to: PCGamingWiki Looks Into Linux Gaming With 'Port Reports'

I do not think SteamOS is of any relevance today. And it wont be important next year.

I do not think Steam 4 Linux is a perfect alternative to windows. And at best it will be a acceptable although rough alterantive to windows next year.

But I do now that Steam 4 Linux DOES deliver. Not big time but every month a little bit bigger. I bought over 200 games for Steam and even though I did care little about running games on Linux I still have over 60 games running on linux.

I did not expect that when Steam 4 Linux was announced.

So while Steam 4 Linux does NOT replace my windows game machine - a massive tower costing â1000 and eating 400W to give me bleeding edge results - it gives me two great bonuses:

I now have 60 games running on my el cheapo Notebook with Ubuntu which did cost me â300 and uses 30W. I can run another 140 games through Steam Remote gaming as long as my windows system is also running. I am planning to buy an el cheapo Nettop based on AMD Beema for â100, converting my Big-Screen TV into a gaming station. And I will get another one of these for my bed room.

There will be more games.

There will be better support.

Maybe we will see Steam directly installed into smart TVs. So I would not even need to add some el cheapo nettop box.

This will be slow like it has been for two years but maybe suddenly in five years I will say "ok lets play something different" and find it surprising that this game does not run on linux. Maybe I will even find it surprising that this game does need a extra computer instead of running directly on my TV.

Then I will open my Steam inventory and see that 80% of my games are available for Linux and are running natively on my TV. Then I will just wonder why I should bother for the other 20%. I will start to ignore these 20% and keep an old Windows system in the attic next to my Amiga and my C64 just in case I want to play these 20% again. Which I wont like I never played most Amiga games ever again.

Mission accomplished.

Comment: The first shot is free... (Score 1) 150

by Crass Spektakel (#48148767) Attached to: If Your Cloud Vendor Goes Out of Business, Are You Ready?

You simply do not understand how "cloud storage" works.

We had all this even back in the 1980ths, just using different buzz words. All these storage/service-solutions do a win-doublewin-bet, they do not aim at a short term profit, they try to claim their market share. As soon as the competitors start to fail and die or their architecture become dominating they will just raise prices or at least stop lowering them.

Comment: does not matter (Score 0) 159

The amount of released CO2 simply does not matter because when the plant regrows it will absorb exactly the same amount again.

The only question is the total amount of CO2 in the biosphere, not the output of single reactions inside the biosphere. Reducing the total amount can be either done by "growing" more CO2 containers or store CO2 by industrial methods eg underground. The later sounds strange but works pretty well, a single plant with a 10MW power source can easily outperform a 100km forest in CO2 reduction.

Comment: x86 IS efficient (Score 4, Informative) 168

by Crass Spektakel (#46097923) Attached to: AMD Announces First ARM Processor

Actually x86 IS efficient for for something completely different. The architecture itself is totally unimportant as deep inside it is yet another micro code translator and doesn't differ significantly from PPC or Sparc nowadays.

x86 short instructions allow for highly efficient memory usage and for a much, much, much higher Ops per Cycle. This is just that big of a deal that ARM has created a short command version of ARM opcodes just to close in. But then this instruction set is totally incompatible and also totally ignored.

Short instructions do not matter on slow architectures like todays ARM world. These just want to safe power and therefore it fits in well that ARM also is a heavy user of slow in-order-execution.

A nice example, increasing a 64 bit register in x86 takes ONE byte and recent x86 CPUs can run this operation on different register up to 100 times PER CYCLE, all commands to be loaded in THREE to EIGHT Cycles from memory to cache. On the other hand, the same operation on ARM takes 12 bytes for a single increment operation, to load some dozend of these operations would take THOUSANDS of clock cycles.

And now you know why high end x86 is 20-50 times faster than ARM.

Invest in physics -- own a piece of Dirac!