Slashback: Memory, Constancy, Triumph

Tonight's slashback with news of how you can help rebuild the foundations of the Internet (at least a small corner), more on slimming down the old Cathode Ray Tube, a new compiler which costs a bit more than GCC, and more.

Why not put 'em on Freenet while you're at it ... Imran Ghory writes: "Google has put out an appeal to get NetNews CDs (produced by Sterling Software and CD Publishing Corporation) which archived usenet between 1992 to 1995. Looks like Google is reviving Deja's idea of a total usenet archive."

This sounds like a worthy objective, worth rooting around for -- maybe they'll even give you a credit somewhere.

They know that of which they speak. Hot on the heels of the inexorable GCC project's 3.0.1 release, zealot (and a number of other people) wrote with the news that "Intel will release its latest compilers (the ones that optimize for P4 and can do some auto-vectorization of code) for Linux this Thursday. I'd love to see some performance numbers for compiled code on a P4 if anyone gets their hands on this ... maybe the autovectorization could help some gimp plugins speed up."

You cannot stop the chess updates Álvaro Begué writes: "Junior is the new World Micro Computer Chess Champion, Shredder won in the single processor category (five years in a row) and Goliath won the blitz tournament. Congratulations to all of them. Check out the official website."

Maybe the durned things will stick around forever. In addition to the IBM research on making ultra-slim CRT monitors, an Anonymous Coward points to another article on the future of CRTs: "This is a new technology that can integrate into existing production lines and can halve the depth of a CRT type tube. A TV normally 22 inches deep would be only 11 inches."

Comments

Compiler costs

[Red Moose]

Jesus christ! $399-499 for a goddamn compiler! Surely that sort of thing can't happen in the current tech meltdown. Wouldn't a more sensible price be better (say under $100)? I would expect that less companies would be likely to invest in this as if you look around at the belt-tightening going on, aren't free things more attractive now?

Also, are they doing those mods in compliance with the GPL? Also, someone give me a goddamn reason why GLibc 2.2.4 should not be compiled with GCC 3.0.1. I did and it works without any problem (then again I don't know jack about the real reason).

Re:Compiler costs

[mattis_f]

Since Intel is mainly a hardware producer, you'd think they would give away their compiler and even open up the source for it - and thereby boost their chip sales. Apparently, a program sold today is more worth to intel than 10 P4's in a week. Of course, they will have to offer support and maintain the compiler as well - which will cost money in the future. They're making a lot of strange decisions over in Santa Clara these days.

Yeah, I'm not happy either...

[alexhmit01]

I said some foolish things on USENET, but fortunately it seems to be just before the Google archives. I'm really hoping that none of my postings will be discovered...

I guess I can be accountable for my youth.

CRT

[Mike Schiraldi]

Funny how everyone wants what they don't have:

"I hate this stupid CRT. I wish i had an LCD monitor. Cheapskate boss."

"I can't wait 'till i get this laptop back to the office so i can plug it into a CRT instead of having to squint at a stupid LCD."

Bloated Compiler?

[Carnage4Life]

I'm not exactly sure what compiler bloat is supposed to mean since what matters is the assemby the compiler generates and not how many lines of code the compiler was written in. Secondly it is very likely that a compiler written by Intel engineers for an Intel chipset will perform better than a general purpose compiler written by volunteers on Intel chipsets. Finally there are many that would argue that the Intel compiler has been of higher quality than gcc for quite sometime especially with regards to C++.

PS: The fact that a post as empty as yours is at +4 is a sure sign that all the good posters have either left Slashdot or no longer actively partcipate. Sad. :(

If Google wants the "NetNews CD Series" ...

[Lumpish Scholar]

... why don't they try searching for it?-)

(I'd love to see JMS's preproduction Netnews postings about Babylon 5, myself.)

Re:Technical Info, Please!

[TheGratefulNet]

The CRT will always be with us, but its time in the mainstream is coming to an end. This sounds too much like a marketing ploy, and goes too far against physics to be
anything else.

speaking as someone who almost entirely converted to lcd (I run dual SGI 1600sw lcd's at home in xinerama mode. mmmm - nice!), I have to admit it falls down badly when it comes to photo work. the colors really aren't real and the viewing angle makes monitor calibration all but impossible.

I do all my code devel on lcd's. but when I need to do photo retouching, it will ALWAYS be done [finally] on a crt. sad but true.

backup of usenet:

[mgblst]

I have a backup of the first few years. I have posted it here for posterity, but removed the header:

Test

This is a Test

TEST

Test!

anymore i have left out??