From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Oct 27 14:05:30 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA29953 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 14:05:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from hwcn.org (main.hwcn.org [199.212.94.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29941 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 14:05:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hoek@hwcn.org) Received: from james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (ac199@james.hwcn.org [199.212.94.66]) by hwcn.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA28190; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:06:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (ac199@localhost) by james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA23895; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:06:32 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca: ac199 owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:06:31 -0500 (EST) From: Tim Vanderhoek X-Sender: ac199@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca To: Alfred Perlstein cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Parity Ram In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sun, 26 Oct 1997, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > more bits means more chance of error even if they are "error-correcting" > bits? > But greater chance of catching error... -- Outnumbered? Maybe. Outspoken? Never! tIM...HOEk