you can't issue a search just for usenet groups only.
Actually, you can: by restricting the query to a whole hieararchy. Just add, e.g., group:comp.* to your search.
Lately, though, I've found the results to be incomplete (by searching for my own posts).
I really wish someone got around to solve the binary problem once and for all, so Usenet again could be for discussions. By all means, it needs upgrades, like native Unicode support
Usenet is encoding-agnostic: Unicode support depends solely on your client.
and better anonymisation
Pick a server that encrypts your IP. Even some of the free ones will do this (e.g.: news.albasani.net, news.aioe.org).
I haven't seen one since '98. If it's coming back into stile, it seems nobody's bothered to tell the women
....
Have you tried clearing the cache?
>>and a crap web browser with no plugin or extension support.
>
>Flash runs like shit on netbooks.
Your only criteria for web browsers is that they run flash well????
The built in browser in the iPad is *horrible* for casual browser. It's basically unusable for me. I do like the iPad for some things, but those are very specific & constrained uses, and web browsing is certainly not one of them.
If you define enough real world processes as calculation, you prove none of our laws of physics are the real ones.
For just one example, Nature can't be storing irrational numbers as infinite series expressions (where would the infinitely large registers to store them be?). Another way to put this is, if some process in Nature counts as a calculation, Nature can't be doing that calculation using numbers such as pi or e, but rather finite approximations of such numbers, that allow results in finite time.
There exists a small number of physicists who are willing to entertain the idea that Nature does not, in fact, deal with any irrational numbers. If all measurable values are quantized (including time and space), then Nature need not bother with "real" numbers. Nature might be perfectly content to get by with, say, some large algebraic extension of the rationals.
I think the limiting factor is the SATA bus. Pack a 3.5-inch drive with NAND and a good controller and you will absolutely swamp a 3Gb SATA bus.
The typical IO bottleneck is due to IOPS, not bandwidth. Most people using SSDs would still see the same improvement on SATA1.
"Ignorance is the soil in which belief in miracles grows." -- Robert G. Ingersoll
