anyfoo

5 ms·

61.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
niobe's excellent reply covered it already, but just to be blunt: You usually share the channel with some of your neighbors' networks, so the assessment that only you are using it is usually not correct. This is also why it's
62.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
Hah, I do the exact same. (Only in zsh.)
63.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
That is exactly what I expect, or did I misread you? I expect its text output on stderr, and stdout being reserved for its video (or whatever) output. Maybe the name “stderr” is a bit misleading. It’s totally common for non-error output t
64.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
I know what "exponentially" means, I know what "quadratically" means (and how it's not exponentially), and I know the inverse square law. Hence my question why the article claims "signal strength" decrease
65.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
Glad you were able to sort it out properly. I guess maybe I'm also lucky to much less rarely work with, shall we say, consultation-resistant engineers than discussion forums sometimes make you believe.
66.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
Kind of irrelevant, because you could also ask "Do you also think that f(x) = x^1 is polynomial? How about f(x) = x^0?" The distinction was clearly between polynomial (specifically quadratic) and exponential, leaving those trivial
67.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
I'm actually not sure that they don't actually mean exponentially. There's something about not only increasing the distance, but potentially also the modulation (and thus the symbol rate) stepping down, which maybe in total c
68.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
> Wi-Fi signal strength decreases at an exponential rate as you move further away from a router. This is surprising to me. I'd have guessed it decreases quadratically (i.e. due to the inverse square law), not exponentially. The para
69.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
I just said that I always do `command --help 2>&1 | less`?
70.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
Due to boring circumstances outside of my control, I have to use WiFi for the most part, so I've got quite some experience with making it run optimally (or rather, as optimally as I managed to, not as optimally as I would like it to)
71.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
I guess this is a point where I disagree with GNU. Then again, the reasons why I disagree are subtle enough that I don't care too much... I think this particular thing doesn't matter very much in practice, so go do your thing GN
72.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
I'm sorry, but "they committed some debug code that made the program exit(0)" for me is pretty much equivalent to "they committed some debug code that made the program not work correctly".
73.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
Why not have the program exit with exit code 0 on success, and non-0 on failure, like almost every program in a POSIX environment ever ?
74.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
Just make it fprintf(stderr, ...) debugging instead.
75.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
Then that's utterly and horribly wrong? And in my decades of experience, I've fortunately only relatively rarely had to deal with that particular kind of atrocity.
76.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
Disagree. stdout is only reserved for actual processed command output. It may be empty, it may be invalid because the input was invalid (shit in, shit out), but it may never be things intended for a human to read. If one wants to use a page
77.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
Does no one know what exit codes and stderr vs. stdout is anymore? I work with old and new code bases used by many clients in complicated setups, but adding a warning to stderr while stdout was left untouched, and proper exit codes maintain
78.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
Netsplits, where the entire IRC network would "split" into two (or more) effectively independent networks because some a link between two servers went down, were extremely common. I don't know if daily, or weekly, but common
79.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
I haven't had this in a long time, except for on the (fortunately rare) occasion that I have a fever. Fever dreams are already hell, but if they're non-sensical programming/computer science fever dreams, they were extra hell.
80.
by anyfoo 5mo ago
Wow. Did anyone else have some serious trouble with this? The first color was obvious to me, as it was designed to be (it even tells you if you intentionally misclick). But at the very next color, the first "test color", I literal
81.
by anyfoo 6mo ago
Unless instances are sparse, higher code density is of course always better, because of the instruction cache (and the microcode cache, if this doesn't get "pinhole optimized" away or something like that, I know nothing about
82.
by anyfoo 6mo ago
This would have blown me away back in the late 80s/early 90s. (Or maybe not, if it doesn't perform better than random, I haven't actually tried it out yet. Some more examples would have been nice!) I wonder how far you could
83.
by anyfoo 6mo ago
I think once you lost the game once, it's much easier to lose it again relatively shortly after. It takes some long term distraction (and nobody mentioning it) to forget about it again.
84.
by anyfoo 6mo ago
Which reminds me that I just lost the game. I also lost the game not too long ago, but before that, I think I didn't actually lose it for a decade of more? And losing it wasn't even because it was mentioned anywhere, I genuinely j
85.
by anyfoo 6mo ago
Hah? It being my gaming machine has nothing to do with the problem. It’s also my FPGA development machine, though it gets used less for that. It only happens to be the only Linux workstation in my home (the others are Macs or OpenBSD).
86.
by anyfoo 6mo ago
A big problem I have with ssh carts is that they are not universally supported. For me, there is always some device or daemon (for example tinyssh in the initramfs of my gaming pc so that I can unlock it remotely) that only works with “plai
87.
by anyfoo 7mo ago
No, I get you. I'm stating that Winamp might have been "special" because it had a software equalizer, and its volume control might have actually changed the preamp level. This would be fairly unusual for other app of its time
88.
by anyfoo 7mo ago
Winamp had a software equalizer with a preamp, which was noteworthy. Are you sure changing the volume did not mean changing the preamp level in Winamp? If you turned off the preamp (could be directly done in the EQ window I think), what did
89.
by anyfoo 7mo ago
I feel like that was super common. Apart from changing the volumes of entire channels (e.g. changing the level of Line In vs. digital sound), volume was a relatively “global” thing. And I’m not sure if that was still the case in 1997, but
90.
by anyfoo 7mo ago
The virtualization itself is not the bizarre part. The bizarre part is where the actual OS is 16 bit and runs as the singular "task" of a thin 32 bit layer that merely calls itself a "memory manager". The details of that

More ›