Have you checked the prices of things in silicon valley? Sure there is a huge concentration of multi-millionaires there, but that also has its down side. Most of those rich guys are trying to keep their dot-coms from going under and still pay for their house. A house which probably cost them five times what it is actually worth. On the other hand Bill Gates, the ultimate software mogul, has set up a 17 Billion (thats right with a "B") dollar charitable foundation. That should bring up the average a little.
Heres the real scoop before you believe the "unbiased" news that come from the protest groups themselves.
Protesters who were arrested were arrested for the following things: (1) Destruction of property (2) Directly assaulting police (3) Blocking traffic. The common tactics used by most truly non-violent protestors (the traffic blocking ones) was to block a street and use various paraphenalia like PVC pipes and chains to lock themselves together. The philly police had to clear these people and they did so with as little force as possible. To do otherwise is irresponsible on the part of the police. Several police have been injured or sprayed with unknown substances when they were either doing nothing (sitting in their patrol cars, etc.) Several more were injured (including the police commissioner) when they attempted to stop violent protestors from tipping over cars and other blatantly destructive activities.
Unlike Seattle no tear gas was ever used. The philly police were calmer and far gentler than their counterparts in Seattle. The police stopped several trucks and closed down a warehouse they were told housed equipment to be used for disruptive protests. I assume that these things will be sorted out now that the convention is over and the police have actual time to follow up. Incidentally the worst day of protests was the second day of the convention, not the first and not the last. Anyone who tells you differently is making things up.
As for the jail conditions, it was not uncommon for protesters to strip naked, piss, and crap all over their holding cells. They then demanded to be moved out of their squalid conditions. The police refused and let them sit in their own shit. Some protestors complained about the food because they were (1) vegetarians or (2) had dietary health problems. Food was usually on the order of cheese or pb&j sandwiches (for the lactose intolerant). Philly police site about 400 people in custody and over half have been released. Those still in custody are most likely being held because they will not disclose their real names to the police and will be released once they do. Several people still being held were the riot instructors. These are the people who trained and then were actively coaching the disruptive protestors on the sidelines.
Considering the incredible pressure and concerted effort put against the Philadelphia police, the city of philadelphia is very happy with its police force. All the pictures and videos I have seen on the local news have been relatively positive towards the police.
I disagree. Part of the whole point is that evolution is a very hard thing to start biochemically. The whole "seeding" idea partially springs from that, i.e. that life may have come from a cushier place where the initial evolutionary step would have been easier not more difficult.
Also since very little life is resistance to radiation, can it be infered that the seed was not either? Of course the flaw in this argument is that the resistance may have evolved out because it was largely unnecessary.
All I am saying is that this shouldn't be taken as an end-all be-all accurate experiment. It almost completely misses longevity of exposure. It also missed the absolute cold the bacteria should face in space and the incredible heat of re-entry too.
From reading the article it basically states that two types of bacteria were sent up. One is simple household stuff. The other is a bacteria reknown for its ability to withstand radiation. The common bacteria was killed, the resistant bacteria resisted although if saw a 1000 fold reduction in numbers.
Now here is my problem. The rocket wasn't even orbital. It basically only scratched the surface of space for a short time. Even doing that caused a three order of magnitude drop in the hardiest bacteria on the planet. It killed the weaker one, the one that would have most likely been the representative of our evolutionary ancestor. Does this really prove that life could have been seeded from somewhere else? Shouldn't the flight at least be orbital so the long term survival of the bacteria can be examined? All I'm saying is that a millenium in space is very different from the hour (ish?) the experiment used.
I think we need to be careful about what you consider a "port". For instance, if I remember correctly only Maya's rendering engine was ported to linux. This means you still need a bunch of SGIs to actually do the artistic stuff on, but you can just set up a linux rendering farm once you have the scenes finished.
I like MegaTF. Like I said, some stuff doesn't work, like 20mm Jump which makes HwGuys way to mobile. I also think scouts should have the air strike call ability so they can make an occassional kill. After all the scout should be scouting for someone right?
The new stuff is Great. Air mirvs and laser drones are perfect for hitting snipers nests with, weakening the way too powerful snipers. HwGuys used to suck, soldiers could take them out in a slugging match because the assault cannon took so much time to chew throught the soldiers armor. The 20mm gives them good firepower, but eats ammo like crazy so its not very good on offense. Its perfect for the defensive hwguy class. The jetjump makes scouts incredibly fast and mobile, important because mobility is all scouts have. The other stuff is just nice to have for defense, like the different kinds of mines and traps.
Over all I find Mega TF to be much better balanced than standard TF. Snipers are still a bit too powerful, but oh well.
Let me know when MegaTF comes out for Quake 3. That would be cool, all the fun, more eye candy and no cheaters. Regular TF doesn't interest me though, the classes are too unbalanced. I mean, have you ever seen a kill leader who wasn't a sniper? At least with air mirvs, jetscouts, laser drones, and 20mm cannons you can give the snipers a little hell too. Of course that doesn't mean making the mistakes of the past again, like implementing the 20mm jump.
Wow, when I first read this I was amazed and outraged. I why I hadn't heard of this before. Then I realized that I had. The big protests around the WTO meeting in Seattle from Nov 30 to Dec 3. The CNN coverage is here. Suffice it to say this is not as cut and dry as the previous post makes it seem.
To summarize, some of the protestors on Nov 30 were violent. They crowded the meeting participants when they left and even pulled some of them into the crowd. It was a serious security problem. The crowd was forcibly dispersed using tear gas. Baton wielding riot police retrieved the delegates who had been pulled into the crowd by the militant protestors. On all subsequent days the police enacted a secure no-protest zone. Anyone attempting to enter it was tear gased. Most of the people were non-violent protestors, but the police couldn't take the chance on them turning militant and threatening the delegates safety again. They also warned the protestors to disperse before they gassed them. The protestors should have been expecting it by Dec 1 (the day mentioned in the post) because it had already happened the day before.
The problem is violent media doesn't really effect the victims, it effects those who commit the crime. Many serial killers talk about commiting their crimes "as if it was a game." Soldiers also talk about killing this way. They shoot someone and are amazed at how easy it was -- "just like training." The most common phrase that came up when Mark Bowden was interviewing soldiers involved in the Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia for his book Blackhawk Down was "it felt like we were in a movie."
Still think the media has no effect on us? Granted much of the relationship is actually reversed. The "experts" look at the data and say "violent offenders listen to violent music so its the musics fault." Actually, violent people like violent materials so they are more likely to possess them. Quite a difference. Its time parents in this country start doing their jobs though.
Yeah and with all the juice you're pouring through its batteries, they should last about two or three years. Then you need a whole new set. Thats a several thousand dollar maintainance fee, ouch. Hope you get the extended warranty.
He has to do that in the comics as well though. What bothered me most was how one dimensional some of the other characters were, especially Cyclops. Wolverine and Rogue were treated well, as were Magneto and Prof. X, but Storm and Cyclops were kinda weak. I wish Cyclops had come off as more of leader and less of an arrogant pretty boy.
What pressure/temperature are these figures at since methane is a gas at room temperature? Its fine if methane has slightly more power per pound, but it it takes five times more space to store it then its not worth it.
Actually most things follow a bell-shaped efficiency curve. However power plants are probably scaled so that each generator is at the top of the bell so you are probably right.
As for the consistently generate moderate amounts of power comment, this is exactly what hybrid cars do to increase efficiency.
Chrysler advocated a gasoline fuel cell several years ago. Essential the reaction is the same but the gas is broken down to more base compounds first. Its what provides the power so coupled with the motor it would effectively form the "engine". Its not exactly a battery substitute since it produces electricity, it does not store it. To my knowledge the Chrysler design did not use a battery, the fuel cell just worked harder when you "hit the gas."
The battery buffer is the problem since even a small one still weights several hundred pounds and will suffer from the same problems I mentioned with hybrid cars.
By electric vehicle I meant something that was purely electric, i.e. was plugged into the wall and run off batteries. Anything else is some sort of hybrid.
Why do we still use gasoline instead of another power source? There are many reasons but here are a few:
The chemical energy stored in gasoline is very high for its weight while still being easily accessible. Methane and ethanol all have less energy stored per unit weight. This means that cars powered by gasoline can out accelerate these alternative fuel cars because they can release the chemical energy faster and turn it into kinetic energy. They also have better range because they have smaller lighter fuel tanks which weigh less. In many alternative fuel cars you loose a lot of trunk space to the fuel tank.
More energy per weight is diesel fuel. The problem here is that the energy is harder to release easily since diesel doesn't burn at room temperature at one atmosphere. This means the energy is harder to release and performance drops. Fuel efficiency is slightly better however.
As for fuel cells, I think the big problem is that you lose performance again. They don't combust gasoline they release the energy using a different chemical reaction. It works more slowly but more uses all the energy more completely and produces less harmful by products. This is nice, but makes for lower performance.
Electric cars are nice, but all the batteries are heavy and they take hours to recharge. You lose range and convenience. Hybrid cars are nicer because you power a set of batteries with a small gas engine. The batteries then power the wheels. Honda makes one of these I believe. The problem is that after two to three years you need a new set of batteries because current battery technology wears out too easily. And that many batteries are expensive.
I've also heard of all kinds of wacky fuels like vegetable oil. The guy did this to his volkswagen and got the oil from local fast food places that usually have to pay to get rid of it. His car exhaust smelled like french fries. No sure why this caught on, probably because it was an obscure idea that isn't practical on the large scale.
Basically what is preventing the widespread adoption of an alternative fuel is that nobody wants to loose anything. Nobody wants a slower car with shorter range. Nobody wants to pay more for such a car either. People also don't like to buy unproven technology. If you want an accepted alternative fuel car which is more efficient, buy a diesel.
BTW has anyone done studies to see if, after the power loss in transmission of the electricity to the house and the loss in the car itself, electrically powered cars actually pollute less than gas. The engine is less efficient, the transmission of the power to the house loses efficiency, and the power plant creates pollution just like the car would. By advocating electric cars are we simply changing the location of the pollution instead of reducing they levels of it?
Alright my big question is this: How is this different from what Mozilla is doing?
Microsoft is turning IE into a programming platform which is (unfortunately) proprietary. The Mozilla Group is turning their browser in a similar programming platform and they announced that they were doing it months ago. I find it interesting that when Mozilla says this the reaction on Slashdot is "great what a wonderful ambitious idea." When Microsoft does it, the reaction is "Its a monopoly. This is horrible."
The only difference I can see between the two of these is that mozilla is using open specs to do what they want. They basically have to since they are Open Source. Microsoft used Closed Source development because they always do.
Many computer companies never were enthusiasts. Apple started out that way but IBM never did and many other startups stopped being enthusiasts very early when they realized they could make a buck.
Enthusiasts are not an accurate predictor. While linux seems to be taking off, tons of other enthusiast projects have gone nowhere. Tons of enthusiasts still write text adventures on the net, but I doubt a video game company is really going to start developing them commercially again.
Companies develop for a platform for several reasons. One, it has the most marketshare so they can make more profit. Two, its easiest to develop for so they can make lots of profit. Three, its what the company itself uses so they know there is a market. Linux faces many problems because its not the marketshare leader and its not what the company uses either. It can easily slip under the non-technical management radar even though the techs all use it at home. All things being equal Linux is probably easier to develop for, but a company may not have many/any professional linux programmers, so all things may not be equal.
BTW you have no "right" to overclock. So while AMD may be hurting its enthusiast market, its also going to make more money because many of those enthusiasts are going to have to buy more expensive chips now.
I want Starblazers on DVD dadgummit! The real problem is I would love to have the Japanese versions of vintage anime on DVD (Starblazers/Space Cruiser Yamato or G-Force/Gatchaman) but I'm not sure if the studios or distributors are willing to go to the trouble. Please release my american favorites in their unbastardized original forms! I beg of you!
Am I the only one who liked the original cut of Blade Runner better? I found the Directors Cut hard to follow and I really appreciated the expository voice overs in the original theatrical release. You don't find good voice over like that anymore. Granted the studio's happy ending was a lot weaker than the directors cut, but I still prefer the original version of the movie in the end. It sucks because all you can buy is the directors cut these days.
Dunno, I have been slowly losing respect for Ridley Scott. Gladiator's ending was just sooo contrived. I guess everyone's entitled to some mistakes.
The articles misses the big driving factor for Open Source development. He states that there is none because OS is not driven by the monetary economy. While I think OS may actually be more monetarily efficient in the long run, he missed the driving factor behind Open Source.
Open Source developers are driven by pride. If you create or maintain an OS project, this is something you can take pride in. This is important because while you can make lots of money from producing a crappy product, you cannot take much pride in it when everyone can see how crappy it really is. This pride aspect actually drive OS creators to make better software more than money ever could.
He also states that OS programmers tend to write small efficient codes that do exactly what they need very well. Somehow he sees this as a disadvantage. When does bloated code become a selling point?
I'm wondering how long it will take for this idea to be incorporated into that DARPA powered armor project. These are definitely better than the kangaroo suit for increasing infantry movement.
All ESR says is "trusted clients make for bad security". Big deal we all knew that. However untrusted clients make for inefficiency because the centralized servers have to do almost everything. In gaming using a trusted client would be great because you could run a distributed client-side AI. In other words using a trusted client would be nice because it would allow you create more elegant solutions to common gaming problems.
Basically what you are saying is that there is no such thing as a trustworthy client. While true, I didn't have any trouble with massive amounts of multiplayer Quake cheating until the source was released. I also haven't seen any versions of quake that get rid of the cheating problem either. I submit to you that a CS trusted client doesn't seem to be as easy to break as you suggest.
I went to a Behe lecture at U of Delaware a while back. Very interesting.
For those of you interested Behe is a biochemist who examined basic cellular functions. His belief and book on intelligent design (called Darwin's Black Box) was derived from his research.
The basic idea is that while macroscopic evolution works, biochemical evolution is a lot sketchier. This is a problem since you need biochemical evolution before you can even get to the standard evolution we've all grow up with. I.e. for the eye to evolve you need a cell sensitive to light which is not an easy thing biochemically.
Basically his conclusion is that many biochemical functions require a lot of unique biochemical parts (lets say more than ten different complex molecules). If one part is removed (which is done in lab rats by playing with their genes) the process stops working completely. This means that these functions cannot gradually evolve from a less functional form (as Darwin postulated but did not prove) but have to simply appear at much higher improbability.
He then compares biology to a mouse trap. A mouse trap needs all its parts to work and was made not evolved. Likewise blood clotting needs all its biochemical parts to work, so it was most likely made not evolved.
Anyway thats the gist of his work. I hope this is on topic an not treated like flame bait.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you checked the prices of things in silicon valley? Sure there is a huge concentration of multi-millionaires there, but that also has its down side. Most of those rich guys are trying to keep their dot-coms from going under and still pay for their house. A house which probably cost them five times what it is actually worth. On the other hand Bill Gates, the ultimate software mogul, has set up a 17 Billion (thats right with a "B") dollar charitable foundation. That should bring up the average a little.
Philadelphia media does like to rail on its own cops. Only a couple weeks ago we had them heavily covering an alleged police beating.
Heres the real scoop before you believe the "unbiased" news that come from the protest groups themselves.
Protesters who were arrested were arrested for the following things: (1) Destruction of property (2) Directly assaulting police (3) Blocking traffic. The common tactics used by most truly non-violent protestors (the traffic blocking ones) was to block a street and use various paraphenalia like PVC pipes and chains to lock themselves together. The philly police had to clear these people and they did so with as little force as possible. To do otherwise is irresponsible on the part of the police. Several police have been injured or sprayed with unknown substances when they were either doing nothing (sitting in their patrol cars, etc.) Several more were injured (including the police commissioner) when they attempted to stop violent protestors from tipping over cars and other blatantly destructive activities.
Unlike Seattle no tear gas was ever used. The philly police were calmer and far gentler than their counterparts in Seattle. The police stopped several trucks and closed down a warehouse they were told housed equipment to be used for disruptive protests. I assume that these things will be sorted out now that the convention is over and the police have actual time to follow up. Incidentally the worst day of protests was the second day of the convention, not the first and not the last. Anyone who tells you differently is making things up.
As for the jail conditions, it was not uncommon for protesters to strip naked, piss, and crap all over their holding cells. They then demanded to be moved out of their squalid conditions. The police refused and let them sit in their own shit. Some protestors complained about the food because they were (1) vegetarians or (2) had dietary health problems. Food was usually on the order of cheese or pb&j sandwiches (for the lactose intolerant). Philly police site about 400 people in custody and over half have been released. Those still in custody are most likely being held because they will not disclose their real names to the police and will be released once they do. Several people still being held were the riot instructors. These are the people who trained and then were actively coaching the disruptive protestors on the sidelines.
Considering the incredible pressure and concerted effort put against the Philadelphia police, the city of philadelphia is very happy with its police force. All the pictures and videos I have seen on the local news have been relatively positive towards the police.
Since the show was completely taped before they even aired a single episode, I doubt that they could change the ending if they wanted to.
I disagree. Part of the whole point is that evolution is a very hard thing to start biochemically. The whole "seeding" idea partially springs from that, i.e. that life may have come from a cushier place where the initial evolutionary step would have been easier not more difficult.
Also since very little life is resistance to radiation, can it be infered that the seed was not either? Of course the flaw in this argument is that the resistance may have evolved out because it was largely unnecessary.
All I am saying is that this shouldn't be taken as an end-all be-all accurate experiment. It almost completely misses longevity of exposure. It also missed the absolute cold the bacteria should face in space and the incredible heat of re-entry too.
From reading the article it basically states that two types of bacteria were sent up. One is simple household stuff. The other is a bacteria reknown for its ability to withstand radiation. The common bacteria was killed, the resistant bacteria resisted although if saw a 1000 fold reduction in numbers.
Now here is my problem. The rocket wasn't even orbital. It basically only scratched the surface of space for a short time. Even doing that caused a three order of magnitude drop in the hardiest bacteria on the planet. It killed the weaker one, the one that would have most likely been the representative of our evolutionary ancestor. Does this really prove that life could have been seeded from somewhere else? Shouldn't the flight at least be orbital so the long term survival of the bacteria can be examined? All I'm saying is that a millenium in space is very different from the hour (ish?) the experiment used.
I think we need to be careful about what you consider a "port". For instance, if I remember correctly only Maya's rendering engine was ported to linux. This means you still need a bunch of SGIs to actually do the artistic stuff on, but you can just set up a linux rendering farm once you have the scenes finished.
I like MegaTF. Like I said, some stuff doesn't work, like 20mm Jump which makes HwGuys way to mobile. I also think scouts should have the air strike call ability so they can make an occassional kill. After all the scout should be scouting for someone right?
The new stuff is Great. Air mirvs and laser drones are perfect for hitting snipers nests with, weakening the way too powerful snipers. HwGuys used to suck, soldiers could take them out in a slugging match because the assault cannon took so much time to chew throught the soldiers armor. The 20mm gives them good firepower, but eats ammo like crazy so its not very good on offense. Its perfect for the defensive hwguy class. The jetjump makes scouts incredibly fast and mobile, important because mobility is all scouts have. The other stuff is just nice to have for defense, like the different kinds of mines and traps.
Over all I find Mega TF to be much better balanced than standard TF. Snipers are still a bit too powerful, but oh well.
Let me know when MegaTF comes out for Quake 3. That would be cool, all the fun, more eye candy and no cheaters. Regular TF doesn't interest me though, the classes are too unbalanced. I mean, have you ever seen a kill leader who wasn't a sniper? At least with air mirvs, jetscouts, laser drones, and 20mm cannons you can give the snipers a little hell too. Of course that doesn't mean making the mistakes of the past again, like implementing the 20mm jump.
Wow, when I first read this I was amazed and outraged. I why I hadn't heard of this before. Then I realized that I had. The big protests around the WTO meeting in Seattle from Nov 30 to Dec 3. The CNN coverage is here. Suffice it to say this is not as cut and dry as the previous post makes it seem.
To summarize, some of the protestors on Nov 30 were violent. They crowded the meeting participants when they left and even pulled some of them into the crowd. It was a serious security problem. The crowd was forcibly dispersed using tear gas. Baton wielding riot police retrieved the delegates who had been pulled into the crowd by the militant protestors. On all subsequent days the police enacted a secure no-protest zone. Anyone attempting to enter it was tear gased. Most of the people were non-violent protestors, but the police couldn't take the chance on them turning militant and threatening the delegates safety again. They also warned the protestors to disperse before they gassed them. The protestors should have been expecting it by Dec 1 (the day mentioned in the post) because it had already happened the day before.
The problem is violent media doesn't really effect the victims, it effects those who commit the crime. Many serial killers talk about commiting their crimes "as if it was a game." Soldiers also talk about killing this way. They shoot someone and are amazed at how easy it was -- "just like training." The most common phrase that came up when Mark Bowden was interviewing soldiers involved in the Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia for his book Blackhawk Down was "it felt like we were in a movie."
Still think the media has no effect on us? Granted much of the relationship is actually reversed. The "experts" look at the data and say "violent offenders listen to violent music so its the musics fault." Actually, violent people like violent materials so they are more likely to possess them. Quite a difference. Its time parents in this country start doing their jobs though.
Yeah and with all the juice you're pouring through its batteries, they should last about two or three years. Then you need a whole new set. Thats a several thousand dollar maintainance fee, ouch. Hope you get the extended warranty.
He has to do that in the comics as well though. What bothered me most was how one dimensional some of the other characters were, especially Cyclops. Wolverine and Rogue were treated well, as were Magneto and Prof. X, but Storm and Cyclops were kinda weak. I wish Cyclops had come off as more of leader and less of an arrogant pretty boy.
What pressure/temperature are these figures at since methane is a gas at room temperature? Its fine if methane has slightly more power per pound, but it it takes five times more space to store it then its not worth it.
Actually most things follow a bell-shaped efficiency curve. However power plants are probably scaled so that each generator is at the top of the bell so you are probably right.
As for the consistently generate moderate amounts of power comment, this is exactly what hybrid cars do to increase efficiency.
Chrysler advocated a gasoline fuel cell several years ago. Essential the reaction is the same but the gas is broken down to more base compounds first. Its what provides the power so coupled with the motor it would effectively form the "engine". Its not exactly a battery substitute since it produces electricity, it does not store it. To my knowledge the Chrysler design did not use a battery, the fuel cell just worked harder when you "hit the gas."
The battery buffer is the problem since even a small one still weights several hundred pounds and will suffer from the same problems I mentioned with hybrid cars.
By electric vehicle I meant something that was purely electric, i.e. was plugged into the wall and run off batteries. Anything else is some sort of hybrid.
Why do we still use gasoline instead of another power source? There are many reasons but here are a few:
The chemical energy stored in gasoline is very high for its weight while still being easily accessible. Methane and ethanol all have less energy stored per unit weight. This means that cars powered by gasoline can out accelerate these alternative fuel cars because they can release the chemical energy faster and turn it into kinetic energy. They also have better range because they have smaller lighter fuel tanks which weigh less. In many alternative fuel cars you loose a lot of trunk space to the fuel tank.
More energy per weight is diesel fuel. The problem here is that the energy is harder to release easily since diesel doesn't burn at room temperature at one atmosphere. This means the energy is harder to release and performance drops. Fuel efficiency is slightly better however.
As for fuel cells, I think the big problem is that you lose performance again. They don't combust gasoline they release the energy using a different chemical reaction. It works more slowly but more uses all the energy more completely and produces less harmful by products. This is nice, but makes for lower performance.
Electric cars are nice, but all the batteries are heavy and they take hours to recharge. You lose range and convenience. Hybrid cars are nicer because you power a set of batteries with a small gas engine. The batteries then power the wheels. Honda makes one of these I believe. The problem is that after two to three years you need a new set of batteries because current battery technology wears out too easily. And that many batteries are expensive.
I've also heard of all kinds of wacky fuels like vegetable oil. The guy did this to his volkswagen and got the oil from local fast food places that usually have to pay to get rid of it. His car exhaust smelled like french fries. No sure why this caught on, probably because it was an obscure idea that isn't practical on the large scale.
Basically what is preventing the widespread adoption of an alternative fuel is that nobody wants to loose anything. Nobody wants a slower car with shorter range. Nobody wants to pay more for such a car either. People also don't like to buy unproven technology. If you want an accepted alternative fuel car which is more efficient, buy a diesel.
BTW has anyone done studies to see if, after the power loss in transmission of the electricity to the house and the loss in the car itself, electrically powered cars actually pollute less than gas. The engine is less efficient, the transmission of the power to the house loses efficiency, and the power plant creates pollution just like the car would. By advocating electric cars are we simply changing the location of the pollution instead of reducing they levels of it?
Alright my big question is this: How is this different from what Mozilla is doing?
Microsoft is turning IE into a programming platform which is (unfortunately) proprietary. The Mozilla Group is turning their browser in a similar programming platform and they announced that they were doing it months ago. I find it interesting that when Mozilla says this the reaction on Slashdot is "great what a wonderful ambitious idea." When Microsoft does it, the reaction is "Its a monopoly. This is horrible."
The only difference I can see between the two of these is that mozilla is using open specs to do what they want. They basically have to since they are Open Source. Microsoft used Closed Source development because they always do.
Just something to think about...
Many computer companies never were enthusiasts. Apple started out that way but IBM never did and many other startups stopped being enthusiasts very early when they realized they could make a buck.
Enthusiasts are not an accurate predictor. While linux seems to be taking off, tons of other enthusiast projects have gone nowhere. Tons of enthusiasts still write text adventures on the net, but I doubt a video game company is really going to start developing them commercially again.
Companies develop for a platform for several reasons. One, it has the most marketshare so they can make more profit. Two, its easiest to develop for so they can make lots of profit. Three, its what the company itself uses so they know there is a market. Linux faces many problems because its not the marketshare leader and its not what the company uses either. It can easily slip under the non-technical management radar even though the techs all use it at home. All things being equal Linux is probably easier to develop for, but a company may not have many/any professional linux programmers, so all things may not be equal.
BTW you have no "right" to overclock. So while AMD may be hurting its enthusiast market, its also going to make more money because many of those enthusiasts are going to have to buy more expensive chips now.
I want Starblazers on DVD dadgummit! The real problem is I would love to have the Japanese versions of vintage anime on DVD (Starblazers/Space Cruiser Yamato or G-Force/Gatchaman) but I'm not sure if the studios or distributors are willing to go to the trouble. Please release my american favorites in their unbastardized original forms! I beg of you!
Am I the only one who liked the original cut of Blade Runner better? I found the Directors Cut hard to follow and I really appreciated the expository voice overs in the original theatrical release. You don't find good voice over like that anymore. Granted the studio's happy ending was a lot weaker than the directors cut, but I still prefer the original version of the movie in the end. It sucks because all you can buy is the directors cut these days.
Dunno, I have been slowly losing respect for Ridley Scott. Gladiator's ending was just sooo contrived. I guess everyone's entitled to some mistakes.
The articles misses the big driving factor for Open Source development. He states that there is none because OS is not driven by the monetary economy. While I think OS may actually be more monetarily efficient in the long run, he missed the driving factor behind Open Source.
Open Source developers are driven by pride. If you create or maintain an OS project, this is something you can take pride in. This is important because while you can make lots of money from producing a crappy product, you cannot take much pride in it when everyone can see how crappy it really is. This pride aspect actually drive OS creators to make better software more than money ever could.
He also states that OS programmers tend to write small efficient codes that do exactly what they need very well. Somehow he sees this as a disadvantage. When does bloated code become a selling point?
I'm wondering how long it will take for this idea to be incorporated into that DARPA powered armor project. These are definitely better than the kangaroo suit for increasing infantry movement.
All ESR says is "trusted clients make for bad security". Big deal we all knew that. However untrusted clients make for inefficiency because the centralized servers have to do almost everything. In gaming using a trusted client would be great because you could run a distributed client-side AI. In other words using a trusted client would be nice because it would allow you create more elegant solutions to common gaming problems.
Basically what you are saying is that there is no such thing as a trustworthy client. While true, I didn't have any trouble with massive amounts of multiplayer Quake cheating until the source was released. I also haven't seen any versions of quake that get rid of the cheating problem either. I submit to you that a CS trusted client doesn't seem to be as easy to break as you suggest.
I went to a Behe lecture at U of Delaware a while back. Very interesting.
For those of you interested Behe is a biochemist who examined basic cellular functions. His belief and book on intelligent design (called Darwin's Black Box) was derived from his research.
The basic idea is that while macroscopic evolution works, biochemical evolution is a lot sketchier. This is a problem since you need biochemical evolution before you can even get to the standard evolution we've all grow up with. I.e. for the eye to evolve you need a cell sensitive to light which is not an easy thing biochemically.
Basically his conclusion is that many biochemical functions require a lot of unique biochemical parts (lets say more than ten different complex molecules). If one part is removed (which is done in lab rats by playing with their genes) the process stops working completely. This means that these functions cannot gradually evolve from a less functional form (as Darwin postulated but did not prove) but have to simply appear at much higher improbability.
He then compares biology to a mouse trap. A mouse trap needs all its parts to work and was made not evolved. Likewise blood clotting needs all its biochemical parts to work, so it was most likely made not evolved.
Anyway thats the gist of his work. I hope this is on topic an not treated like flame bait.