How Did I Get All This Stuff?

By -
I'm running verify disk on my Mac right now, and I see my hard drive has 183,231 folders, and over 700,000 files. Now I used to now my way around a UNIX volume to the extent I could say what almost every directory (folder) was for, but no one but no one can keep track of 183,231 folders.

Comments

  1. Bob Murphy2:49 PM

    Not entirely relevant, but I've been meaning to ask you computer gurus: How can I be that when I'm, say, copying a folder from my hard drive to a zip drive, that the files remaining etc. can keep changing? I.e. I can understand if the Time Remaining is off, because the computer improperly estimates how long it will take to move x files over. But how can the computer be mistaken about how many files it still needs to copy over?!

    If it matters, I am running Windows XP. And please don't just tell me, "Get a Mac." Fine, if that's part of your answer, but please explain specifically how my Windows XP can be so dumb.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob Murphy2:50 PM

    Just to clarify, the progress bar will be moving along, filling in the empty bar, but then it will zoom back the other way. And the files remaining will be winding down to zero, but then will jump back up to 200.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wabulon4:35 PM

    I dunno, Bob. Aside from the trivial answer--"Dumb programmers"--all I can think of is:

    a) It sometimes revises the total upon looking at a file, e.g., an archive.

    b) It bases the "files remaining" on some summary information gathered from directories which turns out to be out of date.

    c) Others have access to your files and are modifying your inventory during the copying.

    d) God.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Murray Tyson5:50 PM

    Just so I can keep comfortable track in my head, I try to limit files on my computer to 103,074.

    ReplyDelete
  5. gcallah2:03 PM

    I suspect Wabulon's a) and b).

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more