January 4

Is there any x86 virtualization software package for python, which is the best one and easiest to use? i recently started to use python,and i want to load and run virtual environments in python.thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.112.48.34 (talk) 01:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you clarify? Do you mean that you want to simulate x86 instructions inside Python? In other words, a virtual machine that emulates an x86 CPU, implemented in Python? Here is an x86 emulator written in Python called PyEmu. Note that it is a CPU simulator and not a virtual machine - so it does not simulate the entire machine, meaning you do not have RAM, video display, a standard bus, or any peripherals; you will need to be very technically proficient to use it. You can navigate the source code here: http://pyemu.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ or check it out using SubVersion. Here is the specific Python script, PyCPU.py, that defines the x86 instruction set. Nimur (talk) 02:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx a lot! but dude, do you know about virtual machine that simulates an x86 cpu and the entire machine just like virtualbox but just for python.thanx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.42.24 (talk) 21:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am brand new to torrents. A few sites I've visited use some type of quality rating system for media torrents I am not grokking: "+2 / -0 (+2)"; "+0 / -1 (-1)", etc. Translation anyone? Thanks.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you link the site? F (talk) 00:08, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me that the layout is "Positive votes/Negative votes (Sum of votes)"... So for "+2 / -0 (+2)," two people said it was a good torrent, and no people claimed it was a bad torrent, resulting in a total overall score of (+2). I am not positive if this is, indeed, how it works, but it looks to me like it is. See if it applies for whatever sites you're using, and always be sure to read the comments (if available) to let you know if other people have discovered viruses contained in the files! Glodoski (talk) 09:53, 8 January 2011 (CST)

i accidentally revealed my IP adress to bad people! what can they do to me? I know they can find out approximately where I live and what internet service provider i use, but i dont really care about those things. but can they now hack into my computer and steal my files and things like this?--Voluptuous Nature (talk) 08:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, but probably not. It's similar to knowing your street address, except that your computer is probably much more secure against intrusion than your house is. I could be more specific if you give more details (such as what operating system you're running, and how you're connected to the Internet). -- BenRG (talk) 08:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I AM RUNNING WINDOWS VISTA AND I HAVE A CABLE MODEM WITH A ROUTER.--Voluptuous Nature (talk) 09:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You could unplug your modem, wait a couple minutes and then plug your modem back in to reset your IP address. Your ISP will likely assign you a new one when you reconnect. You could also STOP SHOUTING. Dismas|^(talk) 09:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SORRY FOR SHOUTING, IT'S JUST THAT THIS IS VEYR IMPORTANT. i tried to do this in the past. i unplugged the modem for 4 days (BECAUSE I WAS GOING ON VACATION) but when i returned from my trip and plugged in my modem. I had the same IP address. It's like I've been cursed!.--Voluptuous Nature (talk) 09:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, they don't know your IP address. They know your router's IP address. The router will most likely block any attempts to reach your computer. It won't do this for security reasons. Rather, it will block such attempts because the router has no way of knowing what computer they're trying to reach. Further, both Windows and most routers have built-in firewalls, although such things are probably un-necessary in your case. The router gives your computer a local IP address that only the router will understand (e.g., 192.168.1.101). Such addresses cannot be reached on the Internet. So, if they figured out that your IP address was assigned to a router, they'd have to break into the router (good luck with that) and then break into your computer (good luck with that, too).--Best Dog Ever (talk) 09:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I asked a similar question last year you might find interesting. Basically the answer is no, they can't do any hacking. They could DDOS your connection but that seems unlikely. 82.44.55.25 (talk) 10:47, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trolled again, user came back, user blocked. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 07:09, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Were they IP blocked? :) APL (talk) 16:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am having a problem viewing videos. They get stuck after downloading or showing about 5 seconds and then it goes into infinite buffering. I am using Vista and Firefox. Kittybrewster ☎ 14:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's usually just an issue of trying to view too much video with too little computer. You need a fair amount of everything to view proper videos, such as memory (RAM), CPU speed, graphics card capability, internet access speed, and, to a limited extent, free disk space. What are these figures for your computer ? If there's an option to view the video at a smaller size, reduced resolution, or lower frame rate, then try that. Otherwise, you may need to upgrade your PC. StuRat (talk) 16:57, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it's streaming online video, you might have more success downloading it first, then watching it from a local copy on your hard disk. For some reason a lot of software for playing streaming media is not particularly good at buffering. ¦ Reisio (talk) 18:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming Youtube and similar online video? I too have this problem sometimes; for me it's usually caused by not enough bandwidth on my connection because I'm downloading something else. My solution has been to download the video files to my computer using this (most sites) or this (youtube specific), and watch it with VLC. That doesn't work with all sites though. Upgrading your browsers version of flashplayer might also help 82.44.55.25 (talk) 18:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One suggestion is to do a reboot, then run the video alone, without any other processes running. This will allow you to get the most out of a limited computer. StuRat (talk) 23:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.google.com/support/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=56115 F (talk) 00:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can tell that typing on Dvorak is faster than typing on Qwerty by just looking at the keyboard layout, and speed typing records confirm it.
But is there any proof that Dvorak is better (e.g. less chance of RSI)? I am hoping for some scientific research in particular. 81.82.74.217 (talk) 14:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, skimming our Dvorak Simplified Keyboard article, I didn't see any confirmation in any tests that it's faster. The article mentions a single fast typist who uses DSK, but that isn't confirmation that DSK will be faster among the general populace. This Straight Dope article from 1981 mentions the skeptics in the 2nd entry, after Uncle Cecil unfortunately perpetuates the "received history" of the QWERTY keyboard in the first entry. (I've no idea on the RSI question, which was 81's actual question.) Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Last time I checked I could type faster than that little old lady who's held the fastest typist record for ages; that should tell you something about "records". If a person finds Dvorak more comfortable to type on (and I've heard from many people that it is), great, they should probably use it. ¦ Reisio (talk) 18:15, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This may be helpful. I can't find a scientific study at the moment, but I'm working on it. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 18:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ebay's fees are too high, and they only seem to favor big corporations nowadays. I think the 100 item/$5,000 per month limit is outright preposterous.

In short, THEY NO LONGER FAVOR THE SMALL-TIME SELLERS

Therefore, what other popular auction sites favor the small-time sellers better? When you list them, please link me (or state) the comprehensive fee structures. I need to make sure that the costs of selling on those sites will be considerably less than on eBay. Thanks, you all. --68.95.116.192 (talk) 18:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC) (Section header changed to bold to avoid confusion. APL (talk) 19:25, 4 January 2011 (UTC) )[reply]

There isn't really a great answer here so far as I can see. If you're selling arts and crafts, or really anything you've manufactured at home, Etsy is a popular choice, though as far as I can tell it does not allow auctions.

Craigslist used to be the standard answer for this question, but from what I've heard they've gone downhill.

Wikipedia has a category, but smaller names places will mean less sellers and lower takes. APL (talk) 19:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is MS Windows commonly used in the above countries, or do they use their own home-brewed computer operating systems? 92.15.22.77 (talk) 21:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, yes, don't know, and don't know, respectively --Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 21:35, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Iran seems also to have quite a few Windows users, according to StatCounter.com. The statistics from North Korea, however, seems not reliable [1]. --Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 21:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, we love Windows 7 here in Sweden [2]! --Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 21:46, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All I get from those Statcounter links is a plain text page without any graphics. 92.15.22.77 (talk) 21:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why isnt Mr. Gates in prison for supplying technology to America's enemies? 92.28.251.68 (talk) 23:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's called the global economy. Corporations are overseas now, Microsoft is no exception. What gain is there in limiting Microsoft (besides monopoly-breaking, but that's another matter). If America did that, they would be damaging our own economy and breaking many, many capitalist laws. This is an OS, not nuclear warheads! ResMar 03:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ResMar, I think your comment here is very wrong. In USA it is generally unlawful to do business with an enemy nation. Currently that just covers Cuba. But until very recently it also covered North Korea. (See Trading with the Enemy Act 1917) In addition to that, there are a number of economic sanctions in place that prevent US nationals from doing business, or certain types of business with a number of non-enemy nations such as Libya.

Here's an article that discusses some of those difficulties. [3] APL (talk) 06:10, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well Mr. Gates has had little to do with Microsoft for several years so it's not clear why you would expect him to be in prison. Also AFAIK Microsoft does not allow most of their software products to be exported to Iran, the same with many other US companies. E.g. [4]. Frankly, I don't even know why you bring this up since this is so often mention in EULAs (I've seen it many times and I don't really give a damn), surely if you care about such bans you would have noticed by now. Of course Microsoft does not have a magic wand to wave away all piracy. I believe I've heard before Windows will stop working if you put your location as Iran or something like that but can't find any refs at the moment although I did find [5]. Nil Einne (talk) 16:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that neither Russia nor China are conceivably "America's enemies" in a legal sense. Both Russia and China are extremely valued trade partners with the United States. They are not under any embargoes that I know of. Some software is generally prohibited for export via export controls, but the Windows OS is not among them. (Software that is used to simulate nuclear weapons, for example, would be. Software that allowed high levels of encryption might be. Software that lets you type text documents would not be.) --Mr.98 (talk) 19:44, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Red Star OS for North Korea. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 19:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is it safe to write that this image was shot on December 30, 1944, according to metadata? Twilightchill t 22:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The image is taken from a Russian site. You have to ask the webmasters there. --Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 22:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would point out that the metadata appears to have been manually added, and is inconsistent: the claim is that the photograph was snapped and digitized in 1944 (a logistic impossibility). Probably, whoever scanned the original film negative or photographic print also added this EXIF tag (it is doubtful they scanned it in 1944). You should use caution trusting that tag unless you can independently verify it. Nimur (talk) 22:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The page itself just says the photo is from 1944 (which seems plausible). If I were writing it in an article, I would just say it is a photograph from 1944. For almost all purposes, the exact date will not matter. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:46, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]