Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 1 Mar 2007 07:18 In article <FYOdnftsiv3NFHjYRVnyjwA(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:es3ujm$8qk_002(a)s823.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <es1hop$89d$5(a)blue.rahul.net>, >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>In article <es15jr$8qk_003(a)s924.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>>In article <eruv57$vf3$8(a)blue.rahul.net>, >>>> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >> <snip> >> >>>>And my mother just bought an ink pen that is supposed to prevent >>>>lifting their signatures. I don't understand this one but her >>>>area's latest alert is to use a special pen to sign checks. >>> >>>This can be the rumor mill running away. Use a blue pen to sign. >> >> It's not likely a rumor. Their local radio station designs >> their programming to provide services to their listeners. It's >> probably one of the few remaining who do so; the guy who is >> behind this kind of programming has retired and does this >> stuff for a hobby. The shows are regular and have experts >> provide the latest information and take calls to answer questions. >> >> If it's a rumor, then the experts believe it, too. > >Doesn't mean it isn't a rumour. If experts are advising to do something, then I would not consider the advice to be a rumor. These are real experts and not your idea of an expert. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 1 Mar 2007 07:21 In article <es45pa$fiu$4(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >In article <es3ujm$8qk_002(a)s823.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>In article <es1hop$89d$5(a)blue.rahul.net>, >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>In article <es15jr$8qk_003(a)s924.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>>In article <eruv57$vf3$8(a)blue.rahul.net>, >>>> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >><snip> >> >>>>And my mother just bought an ink pen that is supposed to prevent >>>>lifting their signatures. I don't understand this one but her >>>>area's latest alert is to use a special pen to sign checks. >>> >>>This can be the rumor mill running away. Use a blue pen to sign. >> >>It's not likely a rumor. Their local radio station designs >>their programming to provide services to their listeners. It's >>probably one of the few remaining who do so; the guy who is >>behind this kind of programming has retired and does this >>stuff for a hobby. The shows are regular and have experts >>provide the latest information and take calls to answer questions. >> >>If it's a rumor, then the experts believe it, too. > >That happens all the time. Lots of people get fooled by good sounding >stuff that they have never really experimented on. > This radio station has experts who know the subject. For example, and IRS person is on for shows about income taxes. A lawyer for estate planning. A doctor for medical subjects. Computer geeks for computer usages. And the people are local which means the people know each other. This station does a lot of shows with the retire auld farts in mind. There still is a Santa Claus in some areas of the US. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 1 Mar 2007 07:25 In article <8ab6a$45e5c387$4fe73b0$13095(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, "nonsense(a)unsettled.com" <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: >Ken Smith wrote: >> In article <es3v6k$8qk_001(a)s823.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: > >>>There exists a Murphy's Law corrollary that guarantees each time >>>a file is opened an error will be introduced. > >> This is simply bogus BS. > >Any time you open a file in a writable mode an error may >be introduced. In our biz, it seemed to be worse than that. If we were about to submit the tapes for FCS (first customer ship) to SDC (software distribution center), an error would magically creep in. :-) > >Now consider your linux system. Every time access any file, >changes are written. Believe it or not, an error may be >introduced. Knowing Murphy as intimately as I do, some >significant number will end up introducing an error. When >it is, in my case, the error will be important. It was always just before we had to ship. > >"Reliable" systems are defined by a threshold in the number >of errors/some_number of operations. But you knew that, no? > >BAH's career included a requirement that she be paranoid >about all things that can go wrong. Those were the easy ones. I had to think of the ones nobody would have thought could happen. >There's no sense arguing >these issues because in the different worlds you live in >each of you is right. Yep. > >Also, check out "real time reliable" systems. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 1 Mar 2007 07:27 In article <epccu25dvaomn9ak8i5fmq0lks6prbbtuh(a)4ax.com>, MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: Aren't you out of vital bodily fluids yet? /BAH
From: Phil Carmody on 1 Mar 2007 07:41
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: > In article <ersjj1$ui3$9(a)blue.rahul.net>, > kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: > >In article <45E1CD23.26249F55(a)hotmail.com>, > >Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >[....] > >>> No, not only the addressing appears larger. The total memory appears to > >>> be more. Merely allowing an address space that is larger is merely > >>> address translation. You only get into virtual memory when it appears the > >>> programs as though the machine has more memory than there is physical RAM. > >>> This is exactly what I was telling you when I directed you to how the word > >>> "virtual" is defined. > >> > >>To the processor itself the VM should be transparent. It should 'look' and > >>behave like acres of RAM. A good example of where the such a task should be > >>offloaded from the CPU itself. > > > >No, that isn't done. VM systems are also usually multitaskers. You could > >create one that isn't but the rule is that they are. Here's how it the > >operation breaks down in a multitask environment. > > > >- Running Task A > >- Task A does a page fault on the real memory > >- OS gets an interrupt > >- Perhaps some checking is done here > >- OS looks for the page to swap out > > Swap out from where? Main memory, obviously. That's what we're talking about. > If the CPU architecture has write-through > cache you don't have to move the contents of the page you need > to remove in order to fetch the page that Task A needs from > memory. Wrong. If it's not moved onto the swap medium, it's lost. My kind of computing doesn't like losing data, yours might, but as we know BAH computing is BAD computing. > >- Complex issue of priority on swapping skipped here. > >- OS marks the outgoing page to be not usable > >- OS starts swap actions going > >- OS looks for a task that can run now > >- OS remembers some stuff about task priorities > >- OS switches to new context > >- Task B runs > >- Swap action completes > >- OS gets interrupt > >- OS marks the new page as ready to go > >- OS checks the task priority information > >- OS maybe switches tasks > >- Task A or B runs depending on what OS decided. > > > > > >This way, a lower priority task can do useful stuff while we wait for the > >pages to swap. > > Priorities are usually set based on hardware at the level you're > talking about. You're gibbering again. Were you attempting to counter something he said? Phil -- "Home taping is killing big business profits. We left this side blank so you can help." -- Dead Kennedys, written upon the B-side of tapes of /In God We Trust, Inc./. |