Computing desk | ||
---|---|---|
< June 13 | << May | June | Jul >> | June 15 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Is an if block considered a function for the purposes of determining whether a variable declared with the var keyword is global or local? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.116.187.1 ( talk) 01:59, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Are technological devices intended to travel into the past ( time machines) available now? 117.5.13.52 ( talk) 02:35, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
not to anyones knowledge. but they may exist, secretly. 70.114.254.43 ( talk) 01:02, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Answer Deleted by Temporal Accord Edict 34.55.a, Stardate 196944.2 |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
μηδείς ( talk) 20:07, 16 June 2012 (UTC) |
If you are right I would love to be able to stop myself being born. (Don't ask why, it is too complicated)-- 85.211.222.224 ( talk) 20:18, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
-- 113.105.70.226 ( talk) 03:54, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I've inserted a .swf file into a .pptx presentation after going to much trouble. But now, everytime I play the slideshow, the video keeps getting stuck. If it plays properly once, it gets stuck on all the subsequent trials, because the "Play" parameter in teh .swf file's properties keeps getting reset to false. Is there any way I can fix this? Thanks 204.4.182.16 ( talk) 05:36, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Can anyone suggest me any software which can covert video to gif? Ubuntu software centre software will be better! Please add a tb in my talk page if possible! -- Tito Dutta ✉ 08:30, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
ffmpeg foo.video bar.gif
¦
Reisio (
talk) 02:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
IPv1, IPv2, and IPv3 redirect to Internet Protocol, while IPv5 redirects to Internet Stream Protocol. Why is v5 different from the rest — was it simply an editorial decision, or is the protocol substantially different? And if the latter, in what ways? I notice the edit summary here, but the article text says nothing of that, unless I'm overlooking something. Nyttend ( talk) 11:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I am preparing to buy a computer, and I'm wanting to buy an Apple, for several reasons. I'm wondering what specs I need to max out on my Macbook, and which ones I can stand to not max out in order to save some cash. What I'll be using my computer for: spreadsheets, powerpoints, typing and saving papers, documents, watching movies/videos, lots of music storage, lots of music editing, and I do some on-the-side gaming such as League of Legends, Medeival Total War and the likes. I want my computer to be fast enough and with good enough graphics in order to run what I need. My biggest pet peeve is slow click-to-run ratio, or super lagging screen/graphics. Ziggums ( talk) 13:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
4 GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM 750GB 5400rpm Hard Drive; 8x DVD/CD SuperDrive 15.4-Inch LED-backlit Display, 1440-by-900 Native Resolution; AMD Radeon HD 6770M with 1GB GDDR5
would be enough for my needs? And if I get one of those RAM kits for 8GB would that increase it to 12GB, or replace it with 8GB rather than 4GB? Feel free to explain any of these things as well. My knowledge is rudimentary and I'm not too confident in it. Ziggums ( talk) 13:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
In attempting to minimize my questions... 1) In comparison, for my needs would I need this computer, or this beefier version? 2) I've decided I'll upgrade my RAM regardless, I enjoy the idea of maxing out whatever computer I have. So which brand would be better to use? I find Corsair quite a bit on Amazon, but the price differences between it and other brands aren't significant 3) Would I be better purchasing this computer from a store (Best Buy, etc.), or from somewhere such as Amazon? I'm currently looking in to my College's programs for discounts and such.
Thanks in advance, I hope this clears up what I need to know! Ziggums ( talk) 14:47, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I can't seem to find data anywhere about the average number of citations found on Wikipedia pages. Any ideas about data or where to look? (Isn't on any of the wikipedia statistics pages)
Thanks! -- Cucumbergelato ( talk) 14:35, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Sounds like what you're saying is that it's not at all a trivial question and that it's not so bad that I didn't find an answer elsewhere. You are indeed correct -- I am looking for the number of references rather than the number of citations. (I think I probably meant to say "number of sources cited" rather than "citations.") While it would be interesting to know just how many references are able to be visited via hyperlink, I'm guessing that's really the next step after determining the total (or average) number of references.
Until then, though, any estimates? I looked through 75 random articles and found them to average about 6.4 references, but this certainly isn't a large enough sample size, especially since one of them had 164 and many of them had none. What do you think the actual amount might be? (Or even, what feels right?)
Despite no numbers out yet, helpful nonetheless. -- Cucumbergelato ( talk) 20:31, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I was wondering why always when I start typing into my address bar en.wikiepdia.org using Firefox (after I have dumped all history and cookies), the first dropdown suggestion is always Wikipedia's article on syllogism, i.e., I type en. (that's as far as I get), and then the drop down menu provides as a first suggestion:
W Syllogism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/syllogism
My computer is pretty much scrubbed regularly (and my browser history and cookies are scrubbed constantly) so I can't imagine this would be so consistent (it's been this way for a long, long time) and come from something from my computer's settings – but I have no idea. Thanks in advance for any replies.-- 108.14.195.239 ( talk) 16:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
This might open up a can of worms, but I just felt I should ask it. I read on a Finnish Linux wiki site that Linux bootloaders offer a "single-user boot mode", where the user is dropped straight into a shell, run by root. The user now has full root privileges over the computer without ever having to type the root password. Doesn't this mean that anyone who has physical access to a Linux computer has full access to all data stored within it, even if he/she doesn't know anything about its configured usernames and passwords? Is this considered a security risk? JIP | Talk 19:19, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
scope of access | attack | defence | comment |
---|---|---|---|
non root user access through network or local terminal | carry out privilege escalation exploits against OS /software and become root | update software regularly. | GNU/Linux is pretty decent in this regard, holes are few and get closed rapidly. BSD is even better. They stop the casual attacker and thwart practically all user level malware from touching the system or other users |
access at boot time | at the bootloader stage use the single user mode available by default or edit the kernel boot parameters to boot to a root terminal (fairly trivial) | set a grub password | unfortunately this isn't usually insisted upon by default making most linux systems vulnerable in their default install. However enabling it is a trivial step. |
machine is bootable using CD/USB | boot into an OS (any Live linux) that gives full accces to the disk, run cold boot attack software that can get the encryption keys from the RAM | BIOS password | this attack is again fairly easy to carry out against almost all machines as users fail to set BIOS passwords |
unlimited physical access | remove harddrive and plug it into another computer | encrypt drive | |
unlimited physical access immediately following (abrupt) shut down | manipulate hardware (chill and move RAM to another motherboad to carry out a cold boot attack and get encryption keys in RAM, use them on hard drive | don't let the situation arise |
Computing desk | ||
---|---|---|
< June 13 | << May | June | Jul >> | June 15 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Is an if block considered a function for the purposes of determining whether a variable declared with the var keyword is global or local? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.116.187.1 ( talk) 01:59, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Are technological devices intended to travel into the past ( time machines) available now? 117.5.13.52 ( talk) 02:35, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
not to anyones knowledge. but they may exist, secretly. 70.114.254.43 ( talk) 01:02, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Answer Deleted by Temporal Accord Edict 34.55.a, Stardate 196944.2 |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
μηδείς ( talk) 20:07, 16 June 2012 (UTC) |
If you are right I would love to be able to stop myself being born. (Don't ask why, it is too complicated)-- 85.211.222.224 ( talk) 20:18, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
-- 113.105.70.226 ( talk) 03:54, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I've inserted a .swf file into a .pptx presentation after going to much trouble. But now, everytime I play the slideshow, the video keeps getting stuck. If it plays properly once, it gets stuck on all the subsequent trials, because the "Play" parameter in teh .swf file's properties keeps getting reset to false. Is there any way I can fix this? Thanks 204.4.182.16 ( talk) 05:36, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Can anyone suggest me any software which can covert video to gif? Ubuntu software centre software will be better! Please add a tb in my talk page if possible! -- Tito Dutta ✉ 08:30, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
ffmpeg foo.video bar.gif
¦
Reisio (
talk) 02:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
IPv1, IPv2, and IPv3 redirect to Internet Protocol, while IPv5 redirects to Internet Stream Protocol. Why is v5 different from the rest — was it simply an editorial decision, or is the protocol substantially different? And if the latter, in what ways? I notice the edit summary here, but the article text says nothing of that, unless I'm overlooking something. Nyttend ( talk) 11:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I am preparing to buy a computer, and I'm wanting to buy an Apple, for several reasons. I'm wondering what specs I need to max out on my Macbook, and which ones I can stand to not max out in order to save some cash. What I'll be using my computer for: spreadsheets, powerpoints, typing and saving papers, documents, watching movies/videos, lots of music storage, lots of music editing, and I do some on-the-side gaming such as League of Legends, Medeival Total War and the likes. I want my computer to be fast enough and with good enough graphics in order to run what I need. My biggest pet peeve is slow click-to-run ratio, or super lagging screen/graphics. Ziggums ( talk) 13:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
4 GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM 750GB 5400rpm Hard Drive; 8x DVD/CD SuperDrive 15.4-Inch LED-backlit Display, 1440-by-900 Native Resolution; AMD Radeon HD 6770M with 1GB GDDR5
would be enough for my needs? And if I get one of those RAM kits for 8GB would that increase it to 12GB, or replace it with 8GB rather than 4GB? Feel free to explain any of these things as well. My knowledge is rudimentary and I'm not too confident in it. Ziggums ( talk) 13:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
In attempting to minimize my questions... 1) In comparison, for my needs would I need this computer, or this beefier version? 2) I've decided I'll upgrade my RAM regardless, I enjoy the idea of maxing out whatever computer I have. So which brand would be better to use? I find Corsair quite a bit on Amazon, but the price differences between it and other brands aren't significant 3) Would I be better purchasing this computer from a store (Best Buy, etc.), or from somewhere such as Amazon? I'm currently looking in to my College's programs for discounts and such.
Thanks in advance, I hope this clears up what I need to know! Ziggums ( talk) 14:47, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I can't seem to find data anywhere about the average number of citations found on Wikipedia pages. Any ideas about data or where to look? (Isn't on any of the wikipedia statistics pages)
Thanks! -- Cucumbergelato ( talk) 14:35, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Sounds like what you're saying is that it's not at all a trivial question and that it's not so bad that I didn't find an answer elsewhere. You are indeed correct -- I am looking for the number of references rather than the number of citations. (I think I probably meant to say "number of sources cited" rather than "citations.") While it would be interesting to know just how many references are able to be visited via hyperlink, I'm guessing that's really the next step after determining the total (or average) number of references.
Until then, though, any estimates? I looked through 75 random articles and found them to average about 6.4 references, but this certainly isn't a large enough sample size, especially since one of them had 164 and many of them had none. What do you think the actual amount might be? (Or even, what feels right?)
Despite no numbers out yet, helpful nonetheless. -- Cucumbergelato ( talk) 20:31, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I was wondering why always when I start typing into my address bar en.wikiepdia.org using Firefox (after I have dumped all history and cookies), the first dropdown suggestion is always Wikipedia's article on syllogism, i.e., I type en. (that's as far as I get), and then the drop down menu provides as a first suggestion:
W Syllogism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/syllogism
My computer is pretty much scrubbed regularly (and my browser history and cookies are scrubbed constantly) so I can't imagine this would be so consistent (it's been this way for a long, long time) and come from something from my computer's settings – but I have no idea. Thanks in advance for any replies.-- 108.14.195.239 ( talk) 16:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
This might open up a can of worms, but I just felt I should ask it. I read on a Finnish Linux wiki site that Linux bootloaders offer a "single-user boot mode", where the user is dropped straight into a shell, run by root. The user now has full root privileges over the computer without ever having to type the root password. Doesn't this mean that anyone who has physical access to a Linux computer has full access to all data stored within it, even if he/she doesn't know anything about its configured usernames and passwords? Is this considered a security risk? JIP | Talk 19:19, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
scope of access | attack | defence | comment |
---|---|---|---|
non root user access through network or local terminal | carry out privilege escalation exploits against OS /software and become root | update software regularly. | GNU/Linux is pretty decent in this regard, holes are few and get closed rapidly. BSD is even better. They stop the casual attacker and thwart practically all user level malware from touching the system or other users |
access at boot time | at the bootloader stage use the single user mode available by default or edit the kernel boot parameters to boot to a root terminal (fairly trivial) | set a grub password | unfortunately this isn't usually insisted upon by default making most linux systems vulnerable in their default install. However enabling it is a trivial step. |
machine is bootable using CD/USB | boot into an OS (any Live linux) that gives full accces to the disk, run cold boot attack software that can get the encryption keys from the RAM | BIOS password | this attack is again fairly easy to carry out against almost all machines as users fail to set BIOS passwords |
unlimited physical access | remove harddrive and plug it into another computer | encrypt drive | |
unlimited physical access immediately following (abrupt) shut down | manipulate hardware (chill and move RAM to another motherboad to carry out a cold boot attack and get encryption keys in RAM, use them on hard drive | don't let the situation arise |