Some middle-aged guy on the Internet. Seen a lot of it, occasionally regurgitating it, trying to be amusing and informative.

Lurked Digg until v4. Commented on Reddit (same username) until it went full Musk.

Was on kbin.social (dying/dead) and kbin.run (mysteriously vanished). Now here on fedia.io.

Really hoping he hasn’t brought the jinx with him.

Other Adjectives: Neurodivergent; Nerd; Broken; British; Ally; Leftish

  • 0 Posts
  • 42 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 13th, 2024

help-circle

  • If you accept Pluto, you have to accept at least half a dozen trans-Neptunian objects as well as the asteroid Ceres, in which case planet nine already exists and would be Neptune. Well, most of the time anyway. Sometimes Pluto passes inside Neptune’s orbit.

    Or maybe you’d like to consider Triton, Neptune’s retrograde moon as a planet as well, on account of how it was probably a dwarf planet in its own right until Neptune plucked it out of its orbit. Once a planet, always a planet, right? Neptune even tried to do the same to Pluto which is why it has such a weird orbit.

    Be team dwarf planet. Lots of new friends outside the regular eight, and Pluto’s a founder member.



  • The whole ring -3 / MINIX business a while back put a serious amount of FUD into the market and Intel has been on the wane ever since.

    This is not necessarily unfounded FUD either. MINIX is literally there, lurking inside all modern Intel processors, waiting to be hacked by the enterprising ne’er-do-well. (NB: This is not to say that there aren’t ways to do similar things to AMD chips, only that MINIX is not present in them, and it’s theoretically a lot more difficult.)

    Then bear in mind that MINIX was invented by Andrew Tanenbaum, someone Linus Torvalds has had disagreements with in the past (heck, Linux might not exist if not for MINIX and Linus’ dislike of the way Tanenbaum went about it), and so there’s an implicit bias against MINIX in the data-centre world, where Linux is far more present than it is on the desktop.

    Thus, if you’re a hypothetical IT manager and you’re going to buy a processor for your data-centre server, you’re ever so slightly more likely to go for AMD.


  • I’ve been around just long enough to suspect that this will be part of a cycle going back and forth between tactile controls and touchscreens.

    That is, give it a decade and touchscreens will be the in-thing again. And another decade and someone will have the “fantastic new idea” of bringing tactile controls back.

    And there’ll be a combo breaker of some sort where a new technology comes along (probably no screens, or controls, only voice control) which a small few will absolutely love - due to sunk cost fallacy mostly - and no-one else will buy (compare: 3D TVs), and the cycle will begin again.

    Bonus points for: 1) Manufacturers managing to have cycles out of step with others because the market forces aren’t quite enough (people not having the money to buy new cars) to bring them all into line. 2) External factors like, say, the world ending, breaking the cycle.



  • Among other problems, this fails to account for non-typing activities performed by the monkey, such as damaging the typewriter or attacking the researcher.

    285 years increases to a few thousand if you alarmingly frequently have to clean the contents of a monkey’s colon out of a typewriter.

    And at some point you’d want to further “refine” your selection process by “repairing” the typewriter to have fewer keys and/or causing the typewriter to jam after the required key press. Monkeys like to press the same key over and over again. Good luck getting them to stop once they’ve pressed a key once.

    TL;DR monkeys are chaos, and this will not be easy.






  • I believe the joke was something like it was spelled “Netscape” but pronounced “Mozilla”. Web searches (at time of writing) for “pronounced Mozilla” seem to confirm this. I also seem to remember that its user-agent string identifier was “Mozilla” from the earliest version and never contained “Netscape”, which goes some way to explaining why I initially forgot the real history and assumed a rebranding to Firefox.



  • And here I was about to say that it had simply become Mozilla Firefox.

    I guess I pruned my knowledge (read: forgot) at some point because I know I went from using Netscape to the Mozilla Application Suite as my browser of choice, and then ultimately onto Firefox when that died. (Firefox and Thunderbird were well established and Seamonkey was still in its infancy, otherwise I probably would have switched to that instead.)

    Looking at the facts, the AOL buy-out is what must have got me to switch to MAS.


  • My question is this: Do Microsoft ship crap-infested versions to people who could make their lives uncomfortable, like, say, intelligence agencies, or do those agencies take a crap-infested version and have their IT security strip all the crap out?

    Because if I was in charge of an intelligence agency I’d be asking - with dangerous smile - for the crap-free version, turn IT loose on it anyway and then be, shall we say, horribly invasive to Microsoft if there’s anything still left in it.

    … and if I wanted Windows, I’d want whatever the end result of that is.

    On the other hand, maybe this has already happened and that “horrible invasion” is the cause of all the spyware crap in the consumer release.

    Sigh.


  • It’s not just about primes, it’s about proving the technologies and techniques needed to verify such a number is prime, which might then be extrapolated to things unrelated to proving things prime.

    For example, GIMPS (the organisation behind this find) was a great example of distributed computing long before people had multiprocessor supercomputers in their homes.

    But let’s not forget the hobby factor. You don’t get to decide what other people do for fun. If they want to lend a portion of their computer’s runtime to a distributed computing project, that’s up to them.

    Some people climb tall mountains, and that’s not of much use to anyone either.





  • Interesting. A quick search around finds someone confusing a bot into selling them a Chevy Tahoe for $1 at the end of last year.

    Can’t tell whether that one went to court. I can see an argument that a reasonable person ought to think that something was wrong with the bot or the deal, especially since they deliberately confused the bot, making a strong case in favour of the dealership.

    Now, if they’d haggled it down to half price without being quite so obvious, that might have made an interesting court case.