|
|
| |
You're in luck, Neal, because I am currently writing a new version of the AAD page (for its upcoming 100 album anniversary) using my newly developed futuristic hyper-technological Aphasia 2 language.
Forbes, here I come!
(Wait, AAD was already in Forbes.) |
| |
hey you know what else doesn't scale well? The Album-a-day page. Too many albums on one page. I think you should switch to displaying the 20 most recent albums as well as have a complete listing on the artists ranked by number of contributions.
Album-a-day is never going to make the cover of Forbes until it uses dynamic web-programming. |
| |
Yes, it looks like it was most likely FAT, since the datasheets talk of a "DOS like FS" layed upon their wear-leveling flash layer. http://www.windriver.com/products/true_ffs/index.html
But I don't think it was due to a hard directory limitation, or problems with FAT. Instead, it appears that the large number of files ran the computer out of available RAM. So while the filesystem was valid, it was unable to be read under the circumstances. You might say that having a system need to read a full directory into RAM doesn't scale. You'd probably be right.
That is quite a software error, though not as bad as simply having a broken filesystem. |
| |
1319. Anonymous (adsl-68-122-238-160.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net) –
22 Feb 2004 01:38:03
[ BORING.COM ]
what up |
| |
1318. Tom 7 (gs82.sp.cs.cmu.edu) –
20 Feb 2004 15:10:16
[ News of the Tom ]
Hello. |
| |
1317. Anonymous (216-31-75-132.zianet.com) –
20 Feb 2004 14:25:12
[ News of the Tom ]
hello. My name is anonymous and I prefer to remain anonymous. |
| |
I hope so, too.
Fontographer doesn't work on my new computer. I think I actually have *too much* memory! |
| |
As long as we're discussing your fonts, I like them too! The best ones are whatever ones can be used for body text (Epilog's my favorite) but I printed out this poster-looking thing of all the Tombats and put it on the wall. Hope you can make more fonts when you aren't too busy! |
| |
|
|
| |
Just wanted to say thanks for the fonts Tom..
You rock dude :D |
| |
Really? It shouldn't bounce. Well, I will check my AOL mail... |
| |
Hey Tom
I know this is completly off topic but I tried to email you at your tom7@cs..... account and it bounced back. I also sent an email to your AOL account, I hope it finds you. I have a few questions regarding some fonts.
Thanks
|
| |
um.. pia-muk's "pre/post". :) |
| |
no way, prepst rocks a whole lotta wicked man, bustin'. "cool shit" as said by maigin |
| |
|
|
| |
I'm not sure if anyone out there would know this, but can you think of any movies that deal with empiricism? I bet you're all wondering where the hell this is coming from... |
| |
|
|
| |
1305. Tom 7 (h-66-167-161-198.phlapafg.dynamic.covad.net) –
16 Feb 2004 09:11:08
[ qmail hole ]
Ahaha. Exploitable or not, this was exactly the kind of bug that leads to real "security holes." My point is that given this discovery, there are likely to be more unknown problems, some which may be serious.
Also, thank you for providing me with a great example of the kind of blind patriotism I'm talking about! |
| |
1304. Anonymous (246-192.netfront.net) –
16 Feb 2004 02:39:14
[ qmail hole ]
ahem, Georgi Guninski did not find a security hole. He has found a way to make the qmail-smtpd program crash but nothing as spectacular as a security hole that allows you to exploit the machine under attack.
Please use a more appropriate term instead of your 'security hole' and continue to be infuriated by the fact that NOBODY ever actually found any exploitable holes. No one is going to ever root another machine via qmail-smtpd. Live with it. |
| |
1303. Andrew (yale128036074100.student.yale.edu) –
13 Feb 2004 01:41:49
[ Puzzlestorm! ]
Well, maybe back in '97 before the dot com boom it was possible. ;) |
| |
1302. Anonymous (hse-mtl-ppp66345.qc.sympatico.ca) –
10 Feb 2004 19:16:35
[ Supergreg ]
asdf |
| |
1301. Autonomous (user-12l29um.cable.mindspring.com) –
10 Feb 2004 06:07:10
[ News of the Tom ]
Anonymous Anonymous
is the first step is to admit your anonimity? |
| |
1300. Tom 7 (h-66-167-47-187.phlapafg.dynamic.covad.net) –
09 Feb 2004 10:33:11
[ Puzzlestorm! ]
They scan the entirety of DNS? It doesn't sound possible...
When they "caught" me it was just someone reporting it. |
| |
1299. Andrew (yale128036074100.student.yale.edu) –
09 Feb 2004 10:14:03
[ Puzzlestorm! ]
I was under the impression they do automated scanning of the DNS tables for these violations anyways. |
| |