Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Tape-based storage is still used, though nowadays the
"tapes" are a far different structure than the old 1/2"
reels commonly portrayed in old movies, or even the 1/4"
cartridge units some may be familiar with. Today's units
are weird-looking and designed to be used with automated
storage systems ("jukeboxes").
If you have a paper audit trail you have clear evidenceIn article <ers29b$8qk_003@s1016.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
In article <erpmth$c02$1@blue.rahul.net>,
kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote:
[.....]
It isn't a corral. A corral implies a loss of freedom. I can still write
a check or see a teller if I want.
For now.
... and thus it will remain.
I can pay a bill while I'm at work of
on vacation. I have lost nothing.
You have lost the physical paper trail. Doesn't it bother you
that electronic checks can be applied against your account without
any physical permission written by you?
The physical permission can be forged more easily than the electronic one.
When it gets to the bank, they do all the work electronically. As a
result, whether I do on line banking or not, the actual work is done
electronically. If the security in the bank and broken, not using on line
banking will not protect me.
That being said, a great deal of what she has been writing
attaches to really elementary computer and OS design which,
offhand, reading both of you going at it, she seems to
understand bet
This from the idiot that said that the only proper Linux install isCertainly that was true as recently as 5-7 years ago, but I
haven't messed with Linux on those levels in some time so
that *might* have changed though I see no reason why it
should have. (That and a buck will get you a cup of coffee.)
You are full of shit. I am assessing the solution I gave based onIn article <eos0u259h8fld2e3k6mhot9h6kobif44dj@4ax.com>,
MassiveProng <MassiveProng@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Feb 07 13:24:40 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com Gave us:
Note that you do not have to swap code if it's reentrant; you can
overwrite it in the RAM if the code segment resides on a device
whose retrieval speed is equiavlent to memory fetches. OTOH,
you do have to preserve data.
RULES:
2 500MB code blocks that are in the form of a FILE (FileA, FileB)
that has to be processed in 500MB RAM.
You're solution:
Run (we call this the name of the executable) both together on the
machine at the same time.
The REAL solution:
A simple batch file.
run FileA
run FileB
You are assessing this from the user POV.
You're an idiot. Consider that a "branch prediction".There is a lot of
background code executing behind the user mode runs of fileA.exe
and fileB.exe.
All the more reason to run them one at a time, dipshit.Consider the number and locations of instructions
needed to do the I/O in behalf of those two user EXE files.
No. It is memory whose addressing is larger than available physical
memory.
This is one way to do a full restore. Note that it may also restore
the cause of the problem.
AFAIK, only our system had enough dates stored in each file's
RIB (retrieval information block) that could do this.
ALL online transactions have the capacity to print a bon-fideI can pay a bill while I'm at work of
on vacation. I have lost nothing.
You have lost the physical paper trail.
No, they cannot. I am the ONLY authenticator of EVERY transaction.Doesn't it bother you
that electronic checks can be applied against your account without
any physical permission written by you?
I am talking of a complete and total and correct image of the drive.
I know you are. A complete and total and correct image of the
drive will also include its bad spots.
Oh, good grief. You have a serious design flaw here if you are
overwriting you backup copies.
I agree 100%In article <ers2eb$8qk_004@s1016.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
In article <erppm2$c02$5@blue.rahul.net>,
kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote:
In article <erpb68$8qk_001@s934.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
snip
Computer usage
by the general population requires more than this. You keep
looking at the load balance from a naive user POV.
No, you are just making stuff up because you've been shown to be wrong
about the real world of computers today.
Keep thinking like that and you'll never learn something.
From you! You have been shown to be wrong on this subject.
You think I'm wrong only becaues you don't have my knowledge.
Do you also think that people, who are experts in fields not
your own, are also wrong?
It appears that what you call knowledge is in fact a bunch of
misconceptions about hardware issues. You have made several statements
that are simply false on the subject. You may know things about the
coding of some old OSes but you are out of your depth when you try to talk
about hardware.
If you have a paper audit trail you have clear evidence
of all your transactions in your hands. All other arguments
are without substance.
I've given it a whirl but the voice quality is seriously inferior to standardEeyore wrote:
Ken Smith wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
Doesn't it bother you that electronic checks can be applied against
your account without any physical permission written by you?
You mean a debit ?
I could hardly live without it.
Even if you did try, at the bank the check causes an electronic transfer
of money. These days, the checks don't travel. It has been a long time
since physical money went from bank to bank in reaction to a check.
Back in 1971 when I opened my first bank account, they still posted you the paid
cheques. That soon disappeared.
Electronic debits are invaluable. I just signed up to a telecoms provider whose
call charges are insanely cheap. They won't accept cheques and stuff. It all has
to be done electronically.
http://www.call1899.co.uk/index2.php#
I'm still having some trouble believing this. Landline calls inside the UK are 4
pence regardless of duration ! Calling the USA / Canada / France / Germany /
Singapore even ! costs 1p per minute plus 4p connection charge.
I use Skype for all international and local calling these days.
1.2p anywhere.
It's esp valuable for business calling those 800 numbers in the US -
they're free.
I have found it greatly superior.Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Ken Smith wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
Doesn't it bother you that electronic checks can be applied against
your account without any physical permission written by you?
You mean a debit ?
I could hardly live without it.
Even if you did try, at the bank the check causes an electronic transfer
of money. These days, the checks don't travel. It has been a long time
since physical money went from bank to bank in reaction to a check.
Back in 1971 when I opened my first bank account, they still posted you the paid
cheques. That soon disappeared.
Electronic debits are invaluable. I just signed up to a telecoms provider whose
call charges are insanely cheap. They won't accept cheques and stuff. It all has
to be done electronically.
http://www.call1899.co.uk/index2.php#
I'm still having some trouble believing this. Landline calls inside the UK are 4
pence regardless of duration ! Calling the USA / Canada / France / Germany /
Singapore even ! costs 1p per minute plus 4p connection charge.
I use Skype for all international and local calling these days.
1.2p anywhere.
It's esp valuable for business calling those 800 numbers in the US -
they're free.
I've given it a whirl but the voice quality is seriously inferior to standard
telephony.
FOR FUCKS SAKE LET THIS THREAD DIEOn Sun, 25 Feb 07 13:44:15 GMT, jmfbah...@aol.com Gave us:
I am talking of a complete and total and correct image of the drive.
I know you are. A complete and total and correct image of the
drive will also include its bad spots.
You're an idiot.