If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#301
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
In article Char Jackson wrote: On 9 Jan 2018 13:11:55 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote: Char Jackson wrote: After the Berlin wall came down in '89, I used to regularly see Trabbies (Trabant) broken down beside the road. When they did run, they smoked and barely made it up even modest hills. They are _supposed_ to smoke. It's a 2-cycle engine, that's what makes it work. --scott No, I'm aware that they have 2-cycle engines. I'm talking about a volume of smoke way beyond what I'd expect. |
Ads |
#302
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
In article
Tim Streater wrote: In article , Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: Den 2018-01-09 kl. 14:16, skrev Tim Streater: In article , Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: Den 2018-01-09 kl. 10:58, skrev Tim Streater: In article , Wolf K wrote: On 2018-01-08 14:59, Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: [...] If you run the gasoline engine on bio-fuels produced from plants growing *today*, there is no issue with the C02 emissions. There is a net addition to the CO2 load, because it costs energy (ie, fuel) to produce the biofuel. That cost can be stated as the proportion of the fuel needed to produce it. That is, how many litres of some fuel does it take to produce 100 litres of the stuff? And how much land to produce the 100 litres each year every year? Or to produce enough biofuel for one vehicle's annual driving? What kind of "vehicle"? You can probably forget all those V8's... No, bio-fuel is not the only solution. There will be other fueld neededf and at the samre time another way to "build" our communities that does not need the amount of car travels as today. And bio-fuel is not only about growing stuff out on the fields, it is also gas produced from ordinary household waste. Biofuel is not a solution at all. So then, what is the solution to get rid of the fossil fuels? Nuclear. Much the safest and reliable. -- Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web, when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another computer, another word processor, or another network. -- Tim Berners-Lee |
#303
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
Char Jackson wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) wrote: Char Jackson wrote: After the Berlin wall came down in '89, I used to regularly see Trabbies (Trabant) broken down beside the road. When they did run, they smoked and barely made it up even modest hills. They are _supposed_ to smoke. It's a 2-cycle engine, that's what makes it work. --scott No, I'm aware that they have 2-cycle engines. I'm talking about a volume of smoke way beyond what I'd expect. Well, it *must* have been the best car for the people. The committee said so! Such superior quality and customer service can only come from focusing on a single obvious choice product for the masses. Also, the people were spared the confusion of having to choose from many different cars, and the effort of needing to test drive all of them before choosing! /sarcasm Believe it or not, that's the kind of stupidity that trolls cola. "Too much choice makes people less happy" and "All choices must be personally tried before making a choice". -- "Assuming, of course, infinite resources an patience to systematically go try them all to find that 'one' ... a needle in a haystack paradigm." - lying asshole "-hh" |
#304
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
Tim Streater wrote:
If the Japanese panicked and made a mess of the unnecessary evacuation that's hardly the fault of nuclear power. The problem is that people have been lied to about the scale of the danger. ^^^^ This is the kind of person who voted for Trump. It's all fake news, man! -- "the proliferation of cheaper servers via Linux OS is what also opened the floodgates to more spammers." - lying asshole "-hh" |
#305
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
Den 2018-01-10 kl. 10:15, skrev Tim Streater:
In article , Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: "The final death toll from Chernobyl is subject to speculation ... That's right: speculation. So show the non-speculative sources! Your words is worth nothing. And that it *is* hard to calculate is of course the reason the range is from 9,000 to 90,000. Still far from your figure of 75. |
#306
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
Den 2018-01-10 kl. 06:59, skrev DaveFroble:
Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: Den 2018-01-09 kl. 22:41, skrev Tim Streater: In article , Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: Den 2018-01-09 kl. 14:16, skrev Tim Streater: In article , Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: Den 2018-01-09 kl. 10:58, skrev Tim Streater: In article , Wolf K wrote: On 2018-01-08 14:59, Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: [...] If you run the gasoline engine on bio-fuels produced from plants growing *today*, there is no issue with the C02 emissions. There is a net addition to the CO2 load, because it costs energy (ie, fuel) to produce the biofuel. That cost can be stated as the proportion of the fuel needed to produce it. That is, how many litres of some fuel does it take to produce 100 litres of the stuff? And how much land to produce the 100 litres each year every year? Or to produce enough biofuel for one vehicle's annual driving? What kind of "vehicle"? You can probably forget all those V8's... No, bio-fuel is not the only solution. There will be other fueld neededf and at the samre time another way to "build" our communities that does not need the amount of car travels as today. And bio-fuel is not only about growing stuff out on the fields, it is also gas produced from ordinary household waste. Biofuel is not a solution at all. So then, what is the solution to get rid of the fossil fuels? Nuclear. Much the safest and reliable. Nuclear is a dead end and pushing the issues with waste storage onto many future generations. The nuclear *plans* are quite OK when in production but a real pain to decommission. So then, it's just an engineering issue, right? Better design, better planning, and such. Just where did that waste come from?... It comes from the process within the nucelar plant, of course. And the issue is the long time storage. 100,000 years or whatever. It should be a manageable problem. Some thinks that 100,000 years is manageable timeframe. I'm a little more sceptical. |
#307
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
On 01/10/2018 12:50 AM, DaveFroble wrote:
Tim Streater wrote: In article , Doomsdrzej wrote: Solar, thermal, wind, and for consistency, nuclear. The first three are worthless ... Right so far. ...and the last is the most dangerous thing on Earth. Total balls. At TMI and Fukushima, no one killed or injured. At Chernobyl (where they had to work very hard to make even a poorly designed reactor have a meltdown), less than 100 dead. Per terrawatt-hour of energy produced, much the safest way to generate electricity. As you'd know if you refer to the Without-the-hot-air website I referred you to. Anything can be dangerous. Three Mile Island, if I have my facts straight, was a rather new facility, with fairly new operators.Â* Inadequately trained operators. Water level was dropping in the core.Â* A particular valve had 600 PSI on one side, and 200 PSI on the otherside.Â* Closed, right?Â* WRONG!Â* If they had closed the valve, no problem would have occurred.Â* High pressure steam can be funny that way. I think better design might have given indications of the status of the valve. So, some rabble rouser says some things, and people who don't have a clue believe it, then the mob is off and running. I always get a kick out of people talking about TMI. I was stationed in Germany with the Army when it happened what I saw were the API reports in Stars and Stripes our "local" newspaper. Two of them stick with me. One was a picture of a man looking skyward thru what appeared to be a tube and the caption: "Worker measuring radioactive levels outside the Three Mile Island reactor building." Being a CBR NCO at the time I maintained a couple dozen of those "tubes". They were IM-174/PD Pocket Dosimeters. Not some device for measuring radiation in the air. You read them by looking thru them in the direction of some light, like the daytime sky. The other was a story that started out with a glaring headline and then told of a man coming home and finding his wife about to drink water from the tap. He slaps the glass out of her hand smashing it on the floor saying " You can't drink that, there has been a disaster at Three Mile Island." If the water she was going to drink came from the Susquehanna River below Wilkes-Barre radiation would be the least of her problems. The Lackawanna Sanitary Authority dumps raw sewage into the Lackawanna River which feeds into the Susquehanna River. According to a survey done by people from Penn State Univ. when they were talking about a recreational dam just below Wilkes Barre if this discharge stopped it would take at least 25 years before the water would be usable recreationally. There is also still considerable mine discharge in both the Lackawanna and Susquehanna Rivers. They fish the river around Wilkes Barre but people are told not to eat the fish. Yes, Three Mile Island is downstream from Wilkes Barre. But, sensationalism sells newspapers. And nothing feeds sensationalism like scare mongering "nuclear disaster" stories. bill |
#308
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
On 01/10/2018 12:44 AM, DaveFroble wrote:
Doomsdrzej wrote: On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:18:05 -0500, DaveFroble wrote: So then, what is the solution to get rid of the fossil fuels? Solar, thermal, wind, and for consistency, nuclear. The first three are worthless and the last is the most dangerous thing on Earth. Worthless?Â* Then I wonder what the solar panels I have are doing.Â* Sure seems to do away with my electric bill. Thermal can be very good, in locations where it's available. I can look out my window and see windmills.Â* Gee, I wonder what they are there for, if they are worthless for producing electricity. I have to ask, what do you know about "nuclear", or, are you one of those idiots that don't know anything about it, but curse the word? Anything can be dangerous.Â* Nuclear done right is as safe as anything else.Â* I have reason to "KNOW" this. Nuclear is always on. Hydrogen and oxygen reactions are rather eco friendly, though there are some nitrogen based products we could do without. Hydrogen is the only one that I believe has potential. Ok, how do you produce the hydrogen?Â* You gonna run some collection ships through Jupiter's atmosphere? They're going to mine it from the sun. Don't worry about the heat. They're going to go at night. bill |
#309
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
In article , Doomsdrzej
wrote: The computers are indeed faster and more powerful today, but they're being bogged down with over-bloated operating systems and apps, and people installing a pile of background-running rubbish they don't really need or use (as well as anti-malware in the Windows systems). There was a recent article where the keyboard input of an old Apple II appeared on the screen faster than when using any modern computer (although it was only tiny fractions of a second difference). I like watching some of the The 8-Bit Guy's videos and he made a point about how quickly the computers of yesteryear loaded compared to today's. My old TI994/A was ready to go the moment you flipped the switch and it seems that even later computers like the Atari ST were too. They were primitive and could only do a fraction of what today's machines can but its users could get to work immediately rather than wait for the OS to load, the anti-virus, the VPN and all of the other junk. sleep/wake is instant. shut down/reboot takes longer, but even that is just a few seconds these days. |
#310
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 09:51:22 -0500, nospam
wrote: In article , Doomsdrzej wrote: The computers are indeed faster and more powerful today, but they're being bogged down with over-bloated operating systems and apps, and people installing a pile of background-running rubbish they don't really need or use (as well as anti-malware in the Windows systems). There was a recent article where the keyboard input of an old Apple II appeared on the screen faster than when using any modern computer (although it was only tiny fractions of a second difference). I like watching some of the The 8-Bit Guy's videos and he made a point about how quickly the computers of yesteryear loaded compared to today's. My old TI994/A was ready to go the moment you flipped the switch and it seems that even later computers like the Atari ST were too. They were primitive and could only do a fraction of what today's machines can but its users could get to work immediately rather than wait for the OS to load, the anti-virus, the VPN and all of the other junk. sleep/wake is instant. It is. However, in some operating systems, putting the computer to sleep is risky. Depending on the hardware you're using, it can lead to an unwakeable machine in Linux and anyone who isn't a complete liar admits that it's the truth (ie: ignore Faggot Ahlstrom, Peter the Klöwn and chrisv who will claim it's a lie). Windows and the Mac fare much better, obviously. shut down/reboot takes longer, but even that is just a few seconds these days. With an SSD, an M.2 or NVMe, sure. With a traditional hard disk, not so much. |
#311
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
Bill Gunshannon wrote:
On 01/10/2018 12:44 AM, DaveFroble wrote: Doomsdrzej wrote: On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:18:05 -0500, DaveFroble wrote: So then, what is the solution to get rid of the fossil fuels? Solar, thermal, wind, and for consistency, nuclear. The first three are worthless and the last is the most dangerous thing on Earth. Worthless? Then I wonder what the solar panels I have are doing. Sure seems to do away with my electric bill. Thermal can be very good, in locations where it's available. I can look out my window and see windmills. Gee, I wonder what they are there for, if they are worthless for producing electricity. I have to ask, what do you know about "nuclear", or, are you one of those idiots that don't know anything about it, but curse the word? Anything can be dangerous. Nuclear done right is as safe as anything else. I have reason to "KNOW" this. Nuclear is always on. Hydrogen and oxygen reactions are rather eco friendly, though there are some nitrogen based products we could do without. Hydrogen is the only one that I believe has potential. Ok, how do you produce the hydrogen? You gonna run some collection ships through Jupiter's atmosphere? They're going to mine it from the sun. Don't worry about the heat. They're going to go at night. bill STOP IT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm an old man, I cannot handle the stress. You're making me laugh myself to death! -- David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: DFE Ultralights, Inc. 170 Grimplin Road Vanderbilt, PA 15486 |
#312
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
In article , Doomsdrzej
wrote: I like watching some of the The 8-Bit Guy's videos and he made a point about how quickly the computers of yesteryear loaded compared to today's. My old TI994/A was ready to go the moment you flipped the switch and it seems that even later computers like the Atari ST were too. They were primitive and could only do a fraction of what today's machines can but its users could get to work immediately rather than wait for the OS to load, the anti-virus, the VPN and all of the other junk. sleep/wake is instant. It is. However, in some operating systems, putting the computer to sleep is risky. only poorly designed operating systems. sleep/wake has been around for more than 25 years and works exceptionally well. Depending on the hardware you're using, it can lead to an unwakeable machine in Linux and anyone who isn't a complete liar admits that it's the truth (ie: ignore Faggot Ahlstrom, Peter the Klöwn and chrisv who will claim it's a lie). Windows and the Mac fare much better, obviously. linux is open source, so find out what's wrong and implement a fix. shut down/reboot takes longer, but even that is just a few seconds these days. With an SSD, an M.2 or NVMe, sure. With a traditional hard disk, not so much. that's why i said these days. hds are only useful for larger assets and less commonly used assets. everything else is ssd. |
#313
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
In article
DaveFroble wrote: Bill Gunshannon wrote: On 01/10/2018 12:44 AM, DaveFroble wrote: Doomsdrzej wrote: On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:18:05 -0500, DaveFroble wrote: So then, what is the solution to get rid of the fossil fuels? Solar, thermal, wind, and for consistency, nuclear. The first three are worthless and the last is the most dangerous thing on Earth. Worthless? Then I wonder what the solar panels I have are doing. Sure seems to do away with my electric bill. Thermal can be very good, in locations where it's available. I can look out my window and see windmills. Gee, I wonder what they are there for, if they are worthless for producing electricity. I have to ask, what do you know about "nuclear", or, are you one of those idiots that don't know anything about it, but curse the word? Anything can be dangerous. Nuclear done right is as safe as anything else. I have reason to "KNOW" this. Nuclear is always on. Hydrogen and oxygen reactions are rather eco friendly, though there are some nitrogen based products we could do without. Hydrogen is the only one that I believe has potential. Ok, how do you produce the hydrogen? You gonna run some collection ships through Jupiter's atmosphere? They're going to mine it from the sun. Don't worry about the heat. They're going to go at night. bill STOP IT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm an old man, I cannot handle the stress. You're making me laugh myself to death! -- David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: DFE Ultralights, Inc. 170 Grimplin Road Vanderbilt, PA 15486 |
#314
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 10:44:42 -0500, nospam
wrote: In article , Doomsdrzej wrote: I like watching some of the The 8-Bit Guy's videos and he made a point about how quickly the computers of yesteryear loaded compared to today's. My old TI994/A was ready to go the moment you flipped the switch and it seems that even later computers like the Atari ST were too. They were primitive and could only do a fraction of what today's machines can but its users could get to work immediately rather than wait for the OS to load, the anti-virus, the VPN and all of the other junk. sleep/wake is instant. It is. However, in some operating systems, putting the computer to sleep is risky. only poorly designed operating systems. The operating system itself is fine but certain elements of it are not. ACPI, in Linux, is a hit or a miss. sleep/wake has been around for more than 25 years and works exceptionally well. Not with all hardware in Linux. Depending on the hardware you're using, it can lead to an unwakeable machine in Linux and anyone who isn't a complete liar admits that it's the truth (ie: ignore Faggot Ahlstrom, Peter the Klöwn and chrisv who will claim it's a lie). Windows and the Mac fare much better, obviously. linux is open source, so find out what's wrong and implement a fix. They've been trying forever and not managed to get everything working right. In some cass, just changing a line in GRUB is all that it takes. In other cases, it's perfect out of the box whereas in others, nothing works at all. It's next to impossible to make the unliminted amount of hardware configurations work as well as they do so I can't fault the developers too much. Apple's job is much easier which is why it generally works perfectly. shut down/reboot takes longer, but even that is just a few seconds these days. With an SSD, an M.2 or NVMe, sure. With a traditional hard disk, not so much. that's why i said these days. hds are only useful for larger assets and less commonly used assets. everything else is ssd. As it should be. |
#315
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
Wolf K wrote:
Ground effect heat pumps will cut heating/cooling costs by at least 50%. They are twice to three times as efficient a air-to-air heat pumps, aka "air conditioners". Not a new technology either. A local theatre recently replaced a ground sink AC system that was installed in 1934 by Carrier, using an underground ammonia loop. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|