Sorry -- I didn't see the markings saying 'for Apple fanboys only'. I'll leave Rik to deliver some more uncritical praise to those that do not deserve it.
/me steps off
84 posts • joined 20 Apr 2007
Sorry -- I didn't see the markings saying 'for Apple fanboys only'. I'll leave Rik to deliver some more uncritical praise to those that do not deserve it.
/me steps off
Me intended to use the flame icon. Feh.
Steve Jobs was *not* a genius. He was a creative manipulator, who excelled in making others work for him.
Or did you guys at El Reg really think he thought up even one of his 'brilliant' ideas himself?
What about the wet celery and the flying helmet?
Don't you mean "Not commercial"? There's no stinkin' market for relatively simple, open tools that have been available forever. I'm not a fan of mutt, but the fact that it's not about e-mail clients in general could've been mentioned in the title. Would make many of us a lot less pissed off.
Do the words 'crap ISP' mean anything to you?
What's wrong w/ a text editor, the sendmail utility, a Maildir, and something to fill it?
Mine has it embossed on the front >:P
twm(1) is like ed(1), except that it doesn't throw '?' for every error.
This ``Gnome Shell'' seems rather primitive compared to /pkg/bin/zsh.
We're not there yet, although we could have been. INMOS Transputer. 'nuff said.
...dealing with x86 and IBM PC brain-damage any longer is going to 'help' the climate 'recover' (that is, I gather that from the original article). And, 'utility computing' is really such a good idea; it's not like we're moving all data centers to semi-centralized locations. Also, we won't be depending on the integrity of the computing 'utilities', and even if we would, they would be in the hands of trustworthy companies like IBM and the reborn Sun Microsystems, won't it? Besides, developing 'data nodes' to deploy at the exact places they are needed is just science fiction; in the real world, it's just a hassle having to change our busi^W^W^Wservice them in such diverse environments, isn't it?
#endif /* SARCASM */
``When there's a mass market audio player that support FLAC (or, for that matter, OGG Vorbis) out the box,''
flac - Free Lossless Audio Codec
flac is a command-line tool for encoding, decoding, testing and analyz-
ing FLAC streams.
``Anybody who can tell the difference between a 320kbps MP3 and a FLAC file on normal kit has bat-like hearing.''
I can easily hear the difference on some random CMI8738 card, so s/bat/cat/ I guess...
...then again, MP3 is heavily dependent on LAME encoders (pun sincerely intended).
``the same people who will ''[...]``and I for one feel they should be denied anything to listen to on general principal.''
Hm, care to have some of my tooth enamel about those idiots?
``That said, if you feel a need for a FLAC file, I will gladly transcode an MP3 to FLAC at zero gravity, so that the heavy bits are normalised, for £2500 per megabyte.''
% <crap.mp3 | mpa -d | flac -c - >crap.flac # ? :X
There weren't any shackles to begin with, and Vorbis is still a lossy format.
Of course, distribution in a non-lossy format (like FLAC, some non-lossy Sun Audio subformat, or even M$WAV compressed with bzip2) still strikes too close to home, doesn't it?
Two parties with delusions of grandeur brought together -- what's next, SGI switching from Itanium to Opteron? 8)7
*contiues to pet his SPARCs*
That just means they can't figure his Perl code out.
``into Servers it goes.''
``although i suggest some measure of relaxation is in order''
Nah, I'm having way too much fun 8)
...is that even the wikifiddlers have more correct information than presented here. Things like 'where's the any key?' designed to lighten the load on the reader only works for people who have 1) a shallow sense of humor and 2) never seen Type 5 keyboards. If that cliche'd crap is meant to be funny, you're failing, because the issue with shallow coverage in computing has been covered more times than the maximum core storage capacity of the machine in question.
El Reg staff, please don't make this another Reg Dev. And categorize articles correctly -- AFAIK there are no chips in this machine and it's certainly not a PC. Just the /idea/ of wikifiddlers being more thorough than El Reg is repulsive, but something tells me we shouldn't shun making that comparison. Here you are.
If anyone at Reg HQ likes to clean up the rather large pile of vomit in front of me here, they can reach me at the e-mail adress associated with my account.
...it has to spread across a 72-processor cluster.
WTF? If your team finds parallel programming harder than pure-sequential, it should be disqualified.
``digital definition of a gigabyte - so 1 GB = 1 billion bytes.''
According to the wikifiddlers:
digital (no comparative or superlative)
1. Having to do with digits (fingers or toes); performed with a finger.
2. Property of representing values as discrete numbers rather than a continuous spectrum.
* digital computer, digital clock
3. Of or relating to computers or the Computer Age.
``computer operating systems''
Of course, 'digital' (pun intended) hardware communicates in decimal, doesn't it?
Plaintiffs don't know what they're talking about, let alone deserve anything beyond a good LARTing.
``why not use a USB drive?''
The obvious answer is 'because USB is crap'.
``For one thing, there's no guarantee you will get the same drive letter, and that confuses backup software. ''
Of course the systems whose administrators care to back up properly generally run messDOS, Windoze, or half an OS, right?
``A second thing is you can't just pull our drive out - you have to eject it,''
Like powering it off...
``and we ensure the operating system's cache is flushed and the drive powered down properly.''
...after unmounting it, of course?
``The downside is that the caddy is very bulky,''
*mutters something about 2.5" and smaller drives*
``However, Room claimed that the caddy system can actually be cheaper than tape for SMEs.''
So are 8" floppy drives and appropriate media.
``but with hard disk that's not the case.''
Their 'solution' seems to use ATA crap, so this statement is at a bit dubious.
The Point(TM): The only downside I see this thing having is an arse.
``Unbuntu is not yet suitable for domestic users.''
It isn't. It'll never be. Heck, it's not suitable for 'us techies' either. Try a real UNIX, like the Berkely Software Distribution -> http://netbsd.org, http://openbsd.org, http://freebsd.org (and a few minor variants I can't be bothered to list here) :)
If you're that paralyzed, is a direct neural interface -- i.e., using a few 'tentacle' nerves and connecting 'em to a traditional electronic interface -- not a better option? :X
I know, not here :) It was still the final straw, however.
Anyway, back on topic...
``This is beginning to take on the smell of a Flame Forum.''
I only had to read the first sentence from your previous post to reach the exact same conclusion.
``If you are so smartie pants that these articles B-O-R-E you , go write your own paper.''
I don't do papers. They obstruct research horribly.
``Maybe we have had parallel systems for years in UNIX.''
Except for some Big Iron and most embedded stuff, every single system that really matters.
``How many of the daily masses have a parallel UNIX system running in their home?''
Since when are n00bs and other assorted lusers of any relevance to computing?
``Since in todays multi-threaded programs/ applets/ processes, there is no "master" processor. The king and subject are the same.''
You're way off. Most -- if not all -- Unices boot on one processor and then initialize the others, and the kernel is the King. The latter was, is, and remains the most significant component impacted by security issues. This 'research' changes nothing.
``Early on even M$ allowed the option of dedicated processors for certain tasks, unfortunately, it wasn't the system. Not that it would make much difference in their bloated malware.''
If M$ crap is the issue at stake here, this research loses even more credibility.
``I use windows because I have to in an academic environment.''
Ha, in my lab, if such ethically questionable material was even brought up for consideration, there would be a redundancy in the department at short notice.
``We have some macs, but they are old PPC's.''
POWER is a hell of a lot better than IBM PC-based crap.
``I use it because many applications are available for it.''
Yes, there are /many/ applications available for it. However, most do about the same. Do you prefer drooling on little icons over actual research and subsequent progress?
``I don't like it because I don't trust M$ to do what is in my best interest.''
There are many Unices available for both IBM PCs and Macintoshes. I strongly suggest you take a look at them before conducting faux research and responding to criticism by flaming ur arse off.
Anyway, on a much more personal note, this was it -- I'm withdrawing as an active participant from the engineering community (never had much to do with Ivory Towers, Inc.). I've been flamed, declared a kook, and subsequently either banned or ignored for life about everywhere I offer my honest opinion. I'm tired of treating this game like it's a matter of life (110V) and death (120000V). If someone wants to bear the fruits of my expertise, they'll have to ask /very/ nicely for it from now on. Congratulations on being the final straw.
``You mean it's not news to you.''
This is not Reg Dev. If you want to impress a bunch of newbies with your 1337 h4x0r skillz, go there.
``If it annoys, you, tough.''
Indeed. What I see here is some selfish student proud to have published a paper at all, and only here to boost his/her/it's ego instead of doing something really useful.
``Personally I'm just grateful that most of the articles are less annoying than reading the same comments posted time and time again. "I already knew that."''
Yes, that's /very/ personal indeed.
``"As a Reg reader I'm automatically a Real Techie."''
"As a paper author I'm automatically a Real Scientist."
``Along with the oh-so-clever variations of MS with $instead of S.''
Those mutations serve the purpose of conveying one's general attitude towards the entity in question.
``That actually got tired and sad when had been around for more than a few minutes, years ago.''
Instances of arrogant intolerance got tired and sad for more than a few seconds, millennia ago.
``The getting coat stuff is getting old too. Sad.''
Indeed very sad -- I'm sorry to inform you that my command of the English language is not sufficient to understand the expression 'getting coat' -- can you explain? :X
``And I'm even sadder for still bothering to read comments (though I don't think I'll bother from now on''
That's not a very scientific attitude.
``- noone ever seems to add anything other than to stoke their own egos.)''
Yes, a perfect example turned up right here.
Adding insult to... insult?
Ergo: personal attacks are not going to make up for a mind. Nor do lame attempts at anonymity. You are not interested at all in science, only in fame and success. Well, let me tell you, that PhD will be worth nothing this way, /if/ you get it. I really hope your instructor, mentor, or whoever else oversees you will read and consider this before deciding to hand out one.
Your information is incorrect. Many UNIX systems are highly parallel, which covers the systems the article concerns itself with.
``read the paper''
I'm sorry to inform you that I've hard more than my fair share of annoyance this week. Besides, if the merit of this paper is nonexisting, why bother *at all*?
``The problem is real''
Yes, we already know that for quite some time, too.
``and confirmed by *working exploits*''
You've totally wasted your time here. We already knew there were problems and we've taken steps to correct them. What more do you offer?
``on current software/hardware.''
As Dijkstra would point out (although not quite in the same words), these problems arise from incorrect design, and can be fixed accordingly by making the design correct. Since this kind of software design is ages old, and the design issues have been explored thoroughly (and, hopefully, fixed in decently managed designs), this is a closed issue -- adding to it will only make the issue more opaque to newbies and the life of historians more difficult.
The time and effort wasted here would better be spent on either coming up with something new and/or actually finding and fixing remaining instances of such problems.
Parallel systems have been used for a very long time now -- do you really think these issues haven't been investigated throughly yet? Of course, newbie programmers and beancounters may not be aware, but since when are those the primary audiences of the Reg?
Does any potentially clueful person use that crap? :X I expected physicists to know better and get some non-IBM workstations in instead...
...which would make this a non-issue.
...heck, seems like Web Sheriff doesn't get it -- or at least they won't admit it. I know Prince -- it's not a matter of income or power. He's really not gonna complain about me sharing a decent rip of his music. The point is that he is a very spiritual person and the symbolism of having his himself used in this manner is something he can't live with. I would certainly hate my face being on countless cheap fan products and having my work exposed in very low quality for a bunch of morons to drool over. Wouldn't you?
That's why it's called a 'witch hunt'.
Reading the comments above, I sense a tinge of fundamentalism. Everything here is discussed, /except/ matters concerning the moral status of kiddie pr0n:
-Is there always harm done in making it?
-Is not-for-profit distribution and use of it an explicit and/or implicit encouragement?
-Should recorders of kiddie pr0n that may be abusive not rather learn proper ethics instead of being condemned on the spot?
I know this is probably not the right place for it's discussion, and said discussion will inevitably end up in a flamewar (YAY); however, I suggest you consider analyzing instead of repressing moral conflicts before posting.
The only way to emasculate a eununch is to write and release a self-hosting compiler for the platform concerned. Next time, please know your history before writing and/or naming an article.
It's more a matter of association (ICT <-> beancounters, lappy <-> naivety, mobo <-> egocentric ``tweakers'') than the exact meaning of the words.
``stuck up geeks lack of social skills blaat blaat''
While I can't speak for the rest of the readers, I can certainly assure you that my social skills are a lot more developed than those of the mainstram population, whether I qualifiy as ``geek'' or not. Stereotypes are a useful tool (since they're often true among the soulless, faceless masses), but, like with any tool, be careful not to overuse it.
I hope that was a troll, spoof, or otherwise exaggerated rant. It's uncohesive, in factual error, and you're blaming the wrong people for the wrong things. You don't even seem to have a clue about what computers are, the possibilities, the current limitations; you don't even know that very few people engaged in ``Computer Science'' (as the branch is called) archive the glory you seem to associate with them. Even those that do get it unjustly in most cases. You will very probably reel back from the content when just casually reading the NetBSD project's documentation and mailing archives.
Overall, you seem to have the typical mind of an aged beancounter.
AFAIK, it stands for ``Cretin''.
...especially considering that the majority of people identifying themselves as an ``IT specialist'' are a bunch of dumb and ignorant beancounters.
s/Title/Subtitle. A bit sleepy, I guess.
I usually don't comment on titles (after all, the're usually funny), but I have to offer my explicit compliments on this one :^)
Hah, pipes weren't even mentioned. No wonder M$ had a large interest in the ``conference''.
Don't forget that in UNIX space, there isn't any real difference between the operating system and the luser environment. The closest thing to such a split would be the BSD base system/ports collection one -- and even that is very shaky.
Your point is stronger than you seem to think.
``Unfortunately the real world doesn't work that way does it?''
I prefer to believe that clueful people are by nature closer to the Real World(TM) than the mass of people who deceive themselves every day in order to stay happy.
``The fandom has received some really BAD press over the last 4 years.''
The mainstream press is run by a bunch of n00bs -- why should we care about bad press from those folks?
``Today most people see sci fi fans as pretty much mainstream.''
Once a subculture becomes mainstream it ceases to exist, taking most cluefulness on it's way >/dev/null.
``I spell it out because it needs to be drilled into the consciousness of society ''
Never try -- while ultimately success seems compellingly at hand, the stereotypes will just sink from the subconscious to the underconscious -- the subversion will be even more out of anyone's control.
Remember, those people are effectively brainwashed from birth. The only way for them to get a clue is a long evolution over many generations -- if they will attain it at all before their extinction.
``It can't be cataloged into one group. You need to think of the fandom like a spectrum. ''
Duh -- that's true everywhere in this universe for any 'it'.
``An article about furries that doesn't make us all out to be complete perverts.''
Hm, the title of your comment doesn't exactly support that position. [sorry, but Fish, barrel, shotgun.]
``Suppose it'll always seem odd to people outside of it,''
And to people on the inside. That's the beauty of it.
``I wish "the media" would stop being so obsessed with investigating us like we're some sort of depraved sex cult.''
Wait -- we are, and we're having a lot of fun in the process 8)
``LAST thing they are going to do is get them covered in assorted bodily fluids.''
Not had the chance yet to build up an ``appreciation'' for those forms, but it sounds like fun >:P
The Point(TM): don't take yourself so seriously :P
``The 'animal self inside' people are, in my experience, a relatively small proportion of the fandom, ''
Yup -- that's exactly the reason why I tend to stay out of most fandom affairs.