Computing desk | ||
---|---|---|
< January 24 | << Dec | January | Feb >> | January 26 > |
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. |
e.g. say its an assignment for school, and i have not written anything in the pdf. could it still be traced back to me somehow? e.g. will i be lised in the file's author? Haddaya9 ( talk) 00:08, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I forgot my password so I clicked the "forgot password" option on Facebook. Like any other site, FB asks me: what is you email address. After entering that, instead of saying: "we may or we may have not sent you an email with a link to reset your password, you might want to check your spam folder" (which is still the "industry standard" as far as I know) it says: "Ah, welcome back John! You must be John Einstein, living in New York, and this is your picture. Right?". Actually FB also tells me "We don't even think you are John", probably based on cookies or browser signature. I can't see any reason how that information might help a user who lost his password. I do see a lot of opportunities for spammers to check if an email address belongs to a real person, to personalize the spam or even blackmail a john@bla.com who appears to be Mary on FB. FB doesn't even show a captcha before telling the personal details it knows related to the address just entered. FB must have tens of programmers, lawyers, and otherwise smart people thinking about the problem that users sometimes forget their password, and they come up with this. So my question is: why? Joepnl ( talk) 02:18, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
When I was younger, it was my understanding, correct or not, that the clock speed of a processor directly inversely with the time needed to complete a task. At some point it became apparent that clock speed is only one factor. It is no longer trivial to compare processors, assuming it ever was. What are the relevant factors in determining how quickly a processor will complete a task? Is there conceivably a simple system that could be employed when naming or describing a processor which would give a user the ability to compare processors without having to up benchmarks? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.17.65 ( talk) 06:30, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Okay,so then what would you say are all the important metrics to know when comparing processors?
It will help if you review (and fully understand) our article
instructions per cycle. In "trivially simple" computer architectures, one digital clock tick corresponds to one instruction execution. In any real computer, that is not accurate - and hasn't been for at least half a century! (Read
IBM System/360 architecture, for example). More to the point: very few useful software programs are designed or tuned at the machine-instruction layer - so "hardware instruction" is becoming a less and less useful term for describing software performance. Almost all modern software is compiled code that resides above an
operating system. Specialized software libraries are translated to hardware instructions, often in very complex ways that interact with other software and other hardware. So, to fully describe a processor's performance and execution time, we now depend more than ever on a full description of the complete system - all its hardware peripherals, and all its software components, and how they all interplay. Only a few very specialized programs are so simple that we can meaningfully talk about execution time in terms of total-number-of-instructions, instructions-per-clock-cycle, and clock-cycles-per-second.
Nimur (
talk)
19:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Is there any possible ways to get around this problem? I am using Windows 7, I never had this problem with Windows XP..
This is an exerpt from a .txt file, entitled ‚è[‚Ç‚Ý[ ; its folder name is y”wŒiz‹_“¹ê‚Á‚Û‚¢”wŒiPART1‚Æ•›ŽY•¨@
ˆÈã
‰ü•ÏA‰ü—Ç“™‚ÉŠÖ‚µ‚Ü‚µ‚Ä‚ÍAŽ©—R‚É‚µ‚Ä‚‚¾‚³‚¢B
‚Æ‚¢‚¤‚©Žv‚¢‚‚«‚ƨ‚¢‚Åì‚Á‚½‚©‚ç‚©A
Žg‚¢“¹‚ª‚‚Ü‚è–³‚³‚»‚¤‚ÈŠ´‚¶‚È‚Ì‚Å‘¢Œ`‚ª‚¢‚ë‚¢‚ë‚Æ‚¢‚¢‰ÁŒ¸‚È‚Ì‚Å
A‰ü—Ç“™‚µ‚Ä‚¢‚½‚¾‚¯‚é‚Æ•‚©‚è‚Ü‚·B
Õ“Ë‚µ‚½ê‡‚ÍA‚¨Žè”‚Å‚·‚ªƒŠƒl[ƒ€‚ð‚¨Šè‚¢‚µ‚Ü‚·B
‚È‚¢‚Æ‚¨‚à‚¢‚Ü‚·‚ª”O‚Ì‚½‚ßA¤‹Æ—˜—p‚Í‹ÖŽ~‚Å‚¨‚Ë‚ª‚¢‚µ‚Ü‚·B
ÅŒã‚ÉŽg—p‚³‚¹‚Ä’¸‚¢‚½Œ³MOD»ìŽÒ—lAŠeŽíMOD‚Ì»ìŽÒ—lAŠeŽíƒc[ƒ‹‚ÌŠJ”ŽÒ—lA
ƒeƒbƒNƒA[ƒc—lA‚RDƒJƒXƒ^ƒ€—‚ÉŠÖ‚í‚é‚·‚ׂĂ̕û‚ÉŠ´ŽÓ‚¢‚½‚µ‚Ü‚·B
These are all supposed to be Japanese characters, but for some reason the computer is unable to decipher them as such, and spits out these random symbols instead. The same happens for any Japanese executibles. I am assuming that Windows 7 already comes with Japanese locale, so I don't know what is causing the problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.235.221.120 ( talk) 09:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I used to post a lot on wordpress, but I had a habit of getting bored or distracted after a few months and letting my blog fade away, only to start again some months later. The last time I did this, I thought it best to start again on a new account rather than try to catch up on all that had happened in that time, and to get a chance to reorganise everything a bit different. However, some months after I stopped posting to that blog, I feel the need to try again, except now I regret that earlier decision and want to get all my old posts back, merging the two blogs into one and continuing from there, preferably without having to repost each of them one by one. However, now wordpress is messing me around in awkward ways and I have lost interest in the new redesigned site, and wish to migrate over to somewhere better. (I was looking at this 'blogger' site, but if anyone knows somewhere more suitable to what I want, I can check them out too) Of course, this would mean taking everything I have posted onto wordpress and copying and pasting it to the new site piece by piece, and having it all turn up on one day, rather than spread out over a couple of years as things are now. Is there any way of avoiding this? Some way of moving both wordpress blogs over to another site as quickly and easily as possible, and keeping all the dates they were posted the same, rather than setting them all to today?
many thanks,
86.15.83.223 ( talk) 16:57, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
So, I am in the process of setting up a website within which I can organise various personal projects, each hosted on a different part of the site, and for my university course, I need to upload my work to a website for some reason, so I thought why not put it on my own website rather than using something simple and easy like google. However, some of the items on my site are... well things I'd rather not have my tutors see if at all possible, and thinking of it, the same goes for people there for each of the different projects, they don't need to know what is going on elsewhere on the site, unless it also involves them directly. so, would it be possible to set up the site such that people linked to one section cannot access the others without a separate link, or at least knowing the address of those other sections? something like
[project1].[mysite].co.uk, [project2].[mysite].co.uk and so on, or mysite.co.uk/project1, mysite.co.uk/project2...
or something along those lines? Where unless people know the name 'project2' they would not be able to access those pages, or even know they existed?
86.15.83.223 ( talk) 18:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Computing desk | ||
---|---|---|
< January 24 | << Dec | January | Feb >> | January 26 > |
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. |
e.g. say its an assignment for school, and i have not written anything in the pdf. could it still be traced back to me somehow? e.g. will i be lised in the file's author? Haddaya9 ( talk) 00:08, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I forgot my password so I clicked the "forgot password" option on Facebook. Like any other site, FB asks me: what is you email address. After entering that, instead of saying: "we may or we may have not sent you an email with a link to reset your password, you might want to check your spam folder" (which is still the "industry standard" as far as I know) it says: "Ah, welcome back John! You must be John Einstein, living in New York, and this is your picture. Right?". Actually FB also tells me "We don't even think you are John", probably based on cookies or browser signature. I can't see any reason how that information might help a user who lost his password. I do see a lot of opportunities for spammers to check if an email address belongs to a real person, to personalize the spam or even blackmail a john@bla.com who appears to be Mary on FB. FB doesn't even show a captcha before telling the personal details it knows related to the address just entered. FB must have tens of programmers, lawyers, and otherwise smart people thinking about the problem that users sometimes forget their password, and they come up with this. So my question is: why? Joepnl ( talk) 02:18, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
When I was younger, it was my understanding, correct or not, that the clock speed of a processor directly inversely with the time needed to complete a task. At some point it became apparent that clock speed is only one factor. It is no longer trivial to compare processors, assuming it ever was. What are the relevant factors in determining how quickly a processor will complete a task? Is there conceivably a simple system that could be employed when naming or describing a processor which would give a user the ability to compare processors without having to up benchmarks? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.17.65 ( talk) 06:30, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Okay,so then what would you say are all the important metrics to know when comparing processors?
It will help if you review (and fully understand) our article
instructions per cycle. In "trivially simple" computer architectures, one digital clock tick corresponds to one instruction execution. In any real computer, that is not accurate - and hasn't been for at least half a century! (Read
IBM System/360 architecture, for example). More to the point: very few useful software programs are designed or tuned at the machine-instruction layer - so "hardware instruction" is becoming a less and less useful term for describing software performance. Almost all modern software is compiled code that resides above an
operating system. Specialized software libraries are translated to hardware instructions, often in very complex ways that interact with other software and other hardware. So, to fully describe a processor's performance and execution time, we now depend more than ever on a full description of the complete system - all its hardware peripherals, and all its software components, and how they all interplay. Only a few very specialized programs are so simple that we can meaningfully talk about execution time in terms of total-number-of-instructions, instructions-per-clock-cycle, and clock-cycles-per-second.
Nimur (
talk)
19:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Is there any possible ways to get around this problem? I am using Windows 7, I never had this problem with Windows XP..
This is an exerpt from a .txt file, entitled ‚è[‚Ç‚Ý[ ; its folder name is y”wŒiz‹_“¹ê‚Á‚Û‚¢”wŒiPART1‚Æ•›ŽY•¨@
ˆÈã
‰ü•ÏA‰ü—Ç“™‚ÉŠÖ‚µ‚Ü‚µ‚Ä‚ÍAŽ©—R‚É‚µ‚Ä‚‚¾‚³‚¢B
‚Æ‚¢‚¤‚©Žv‚¢‚‚«‚ƨ‚¢‚Åì‚Á‚½‚©‚ç‚©A
Žg‚¢“¹‚ª‚‚Ü‚è–³‚³‚»‚¤‚ÈŠ´‚¶‚È‚Ì‚Å‘¢Œ`‚ª‚¢‚ë‚¢‚ë‚Æ‚¢‚¢‰ÁŒ¸‚È‚Ì‚Å
A‰ü—Ç“™‚µ‚Ä‚¢‚½‚¾‚¯‚é‚Æ•‚©‚è‚Ü‚·B
Õ“Ë‚µ‚½ê‡‚ÍA‚¨Žè”‚Å‚·‚ªƒŠƒl[ƒ€‚ð‚¨Šè‚¢‚µ‚Ü‚·B
‚È‚¢‚Æ‚¨‚à‚¢‚Ü‚·‚ª”O‚Ì‚½‚ßA¤‹Æ—˜—p‚Í‹ÖŽ~‚Å‚¨‚Ë‚ª‚¢‚µ‚Ü‚·B
ÅŒã‚ÉŽg—p‚³‚¹‚Ä’¸‚¢‚½Œ³MOD»ìŽÒ—lAŠeŽíMOD‚Ì»ìŽÒ—lAŠeŽíƒc[ƒ‹‚ÌŠJ”ŽÒ—lA
ƒeƒbƒNƒA[ƒc—lA‚RDƒJƒXƒ^ƒ€—‚ÉŠÖ‚í‚é‚·‚ׂĂ̕û‚ÉŠ´ŽÓ‚¢‚½‚µ‚Ü‚·B
These are all supposed to be Japanese characters, but for some reason the computer is unable to decipher them as such, and spits out these random symbols instead. The same happens for any Japanese executibles. I am assuming that Windows 7 already comes with Japanese locale, so I don't know what is causing the problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.235.221.120 ( talk) 09:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I used to post a lot on wordpress, but I had a habit of getting bored or distracted after a few months and letting my blog fade away, only to start again some months later. The last time I did this, I thought it best to start again on a new account rather than try to catch up on all that had happened in that time, and to get a chance to reorganise everything a bit different. However, some months after I stopped posting to that blog, I feel the need to try again, except now I regret that earlier decision and want to get all my old posts back, merging the two blogs into one and continuing from there, preferably without having to repost each of them one by one. However, now wordpress is messing me around in awkward ways and I have lost interest in the new redesigned site, and wish to migrate over to somewhere better. (I was looking at this 'blogger' site, but if anyone knows somewhere more suitable to what I want, I can check them out too) Of course, this would mean taking everything I have posted onto wordpress and copying and pasting it to the new site piece by piece, and having it all turn up on one day, rather than spread out over a couple of years as things are now. Is there any way of avoiding this? Some way of moving both wordpress blogs over to another site as quickly and easily as possible, and keeping all the dates they were posted the same, rather than setting them all to today?
many thanks,
86.15.83.223 ( talk) 16:57, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
So, I am in the process of setting up a website within which I can organise various personal projects, each hosted on a different part of the site, and for my university course, I need to upload my work to a website for some reason, so I thought why not put it on my own website rather than using something simple and easy like google. However, some of the items on my site are... well things I'd rather not have my tutors see if at all possible, and thinking of it, the same goes for people there for each of the different projects, they don't need to know what is going on elsewhere on the site, unless it also involves them directly. so, would it be possible to set up the site such that people linked to one section cannot access the others without a separate link, or at least knowing the address of those other sections? something like
[project1].[mysite].co.uk, [project2].[mysite].co.uk and so on, or mysite.co.uk/project1, mysite.co.uk/project2...
or something along those lines? Where unless people know the name 'project2' they would not be able to access those pages, or even know they existed?
86.15.83.223 ( talk) 18:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)