I wonder if RMS knows that Emacs isn't an OS? Maybe *that's* why the Hurd kernel took so long to develop...
However, come on, with XEmacs, you only have one app to support! It's a development platform, a text editor, a news reader, a web browser...;)
In related news, I'm glad Borland is porting their compiler, now gcc/g++ will have some decent competition, and everyone will get to port their Borland apps more easily. Of course, it'd be nicer if people could just use Wine to port their Windows apps, but Wine isn't really there yet. Maybe by the time they release this, it will be.:)
Chemistry has always been, like physics, based around creating a model that generally gives the correct result within a couple of decimal places, but isn't strict enough to approximate real behavior without breaking down.
And now, like physics (and relativity) someone has the means and the technology to find out the truth, and force those lazy professors to rewrite the books and think again.
Man, I'm glad I'm in computer science, and can contribute to the 'means and technology' side without having to think too much.;)
Sounds like a possible platform for Slashdot in a few years...
(actually, although I know something like this could have many far-reaching useful applications, I'd be happy with web sites that aren't susceptible to the slashdot effect.:)
If more vendors did this, there would be no legitimate reason to crack anymore. All of us hackers could make sure our stuff works cross-platform, and explore and learn about different systems, and law enforcement can stop bugging us, and hunt down the crackers and the script kiddies.:)
This might be more appropriate for people using one particular distribution that don't want to know the details. (i.e. most newbies / Windows users / journalists:) The *Using* Device Drivers section is pretty simplistic, and the search facility is neat, but nothing you wouldn't see by running 'make menuconfig' or something.
So... read this if (a) you don't know what a kernel is (b) the idea of recompiling it scares you (c) you just want to use your distribution, and not know where it came from. Anyone else, just ignore it.
I don't know who would be a good choice for a national ISP, but if I wanted an international ISP, I'd go with IBM. (check out www.ibm.net -- they have access numbers everywhere!) I'm sure they fairly well blanket the US as well.
For *some* problems, Cray is not the answer. For others, it is the *only* answer. Any *big* problem using lots of "vector operations" (see Bruce's post, it's kind of like the extra instructions that are just now getting added to the PC-style computers for multimedia, but *much* better) and lots of RAM at once and stuff is made for a Supercomputer. Oh, and anything that scales well to multiple processors, they have techniques of doing this too.
Supercomputer != Beowulf! Network latency sucks in comparison, for tasks like this. Only readily paralellizable tasks that *don't* need lots and lots of RAM at once, and *don't* benefit greatly from the vector operations are better for Beowulf. In fact, some cryptography problems have been mostly solved on regular computers and then finished on a Cray, *because* the Cray did that stage of the problem so much better.
Of course, it won't be Cray without Seymour.:|
It must have been nice to build a supercomputing couch, though, back in the day.:)
I wish there was a law about having to present facts in court, because FOLDOC does a better job than your average lawyer on the Microsoft payroll. Incidentally, I used Netscape 1.1 back then, and it was the best browser around.:)
Netscape Communications Corporation
(Formlerly "Mosaic Communications Corporation") A company set up in April 1994 by Dr. James H. Clark and Marc Andreessen (creator of the NCSA Mosaic program) to market their version of Mosaic, known as Netscape or Mozilla.
People don't like to be categorized. Therefore, for every word for someone with dark skin who has parents from Africa that has been used in the US, there is someone objecting to it. Let's look at a few:
Negroid. Yeah, just about as fun as calling me a 'Caucasian'. No one likes the 'scientific' term for their people.
Nigger. Contraction of the former, originally *not* offensive. If you don't believe me, read Huckleberry Finn, his best friend was a 'nigger'. (Provided it isn't banned yet, for schools that can't teach history.:[ ) Back then, it was about as bad as calling someone 'black' is today.
Black. Some people find this offensive now. Too bad, since I'm 'White'...
African American. Pretty stupid, unless you're from there, and applied for citizenship here. They're as much from Africa as I'm from Europe, which is to say not at all. We're all Native Americans, since we were born on American soil. (Not Indians. Wait... they aren't from India! Aaaahhhhhh!)
Therefore, there are *no* good terms for our races. If you believe the word of one slashdot-reading honkey, that is. Otherwise, ignore me, and use your free software. (or is it Open Source? Shareware? Freeware? Aaaaahhhhh!)
Personally, with the domain names, use it or lose it. Don't refer a bunch of domain names to your page, either. You'll just confuse people, and restrict free speech and easy searching of the internet, which is what America is all about. If you don't like going to 'yahhoo.com' and getting a porn site, you shouldn't like this either, it's more domain abuse, pure and simple.
Stick to the facts, entitle your article "Even better than x86 Solaris and SCO Unix"... More *BSD press is good, but better *BSD Advocacy would be much better. So I'm going to nitpick the other side for a while.
The *BSD's aren't really descended from the original anymore, all of that code that was 'officially' from the original was taken out and rewritten, giving Linux the opportunity to appear and get popular. (Just like the Hurd took a long time to even get into development) Linux filled a void, deal with it. None of these free x86 UN*X clones are really *that* different.
Linux has iBCS "too", and UN*X is fairly well source-compatible. Big deal.
I'm not sure how much of an advantage having three concurrent versions of *BSD is, it sounds much like having different distributions of Linux... hmm.
Also, are we comparing kernels or distributions here? If not, then let me mention that I've always found the GNU versions of the standard UNIX utilities to be *much* more useful, but YMMV. (I hate blocks! I love kilobytes!:)
Most of what I hate about *BSD isn't even the operating system: it's the culture, the license, the attitude, the huge 'I am 31337!' chip on many of their shoulders that stops them from helping their users, and makes them flame people and piss people off, and cause them to ban developers from discussion groups a la OpenBSD... (it isn't hard to find references to this, do research before you flame...)
Other than that, I'm sure both sides could share the few minor innovations that the other has, (barring the licensing issue, which may be moot without the advertising clause in one direction, and I'm sure some authors will contribute changes under both licenses in the other direction), and everyone would be happy from a technical perspective. This has basically already happened. From an advocacy perspective, we need more articles like "BSD really worked for me", and less like "I think BSD kicks the penguin in the @$$!"
Linux has an advocacy HOWTO. Read it, and run 'sed s/Linux/BSD/g', and try to understand.
Heh. I never met him in person, but I've heard stories, he went to my high school (years before I did). Actually, a lot of people in that class ended up working on Linux... I guess it was cheaper than AIX and SunOS and cooler than VAX/VMS, which were some of the other systems at the time...
No keywords for me. They can index my pages or censor me. Seriously, nothing that impinges upon this many peoples freedoms will pass without a huge and messy fight.
Either that, or it will be unenforceable, like UNISYS and their vague and ever-changing patent claims.
Heh, as long as Linux or UNIX don't become as fragmented as Windows, we should all be fine. The Macintosh managed to switch architectures with less trouble than Microsoft has with its (many, user level?) libraries every day.
I'm glad that Red Hat and all other linux distributions, and any good UN*X have standards on how to handle shared libraries correctly, and don't have incompatible versions of their programs for different versions of X and whatnot.
Use whatever operating system / distribution you want, no one is forcing you do do anything. I use Red Hat because (a) I go to the school where it all started, so I guess there's some local pride there.:)...and (b) I started out before I went to NCSU trying to use Debian, and I didn't like the way I had to install the packages. However, we all owe a lot to the earlier distributions, like the nifty color-text Slackware installation program with all the package descriptions! Yay! (don't you wish Windows could do that?)
Re:I fail to see how this could be useful.
on
Web: 19 Clicks Wide
·
· Score: 2
Eh. I figure we're trying to map all of the pages anyhow, so brute-force is going to be as good as anything else, but it might be a good idea to mark the dense parts for later indexing.
However, it might be good to identify growth and stagnation if we're going to be that complex about it. Hmm.
Well, I guess it's food for thought, anyhow. But I don't think this is a radically new vision of the web...
Just like the '6 degrees of seperation' game, I fail to see how this could be useful. Finding the shortest path between two websites is nice when you're stuck on a machine that can't go to random URLs (secured lynx, some web kiosks, browse slashdot from anywhere, yeah!), but the 19-click average sounds like a curiousity.
And, ooh, the web exhibits properties of exponential growth, with some sites that have many more links to other sites. Like I couldn't figure *that* one out. Some people post their bookmarks, and lists of links, and other people only link within their interests. A graph of this might look interesting if done correctly, but I still don't see how this would be that useful.
The graph at the top was pretty, though, it looked like an IFS fractal. They look like stuff found in nature too, so I guess that gives this article a context to exist...
MPEG II encoding for dummies. I wouldn't mind having something like that for Linux... And encryption to protect viewer privacy? These are good ideas, I just hope they're implemented correctly.
All I found on the page about the OS was 'PPC running RTOS', so that's pretty vague...
Oh, and I think the posting code still needs some work:
Yes. Open source for Windows will always be less important until Windows comes out of development, and becomes a stable platform. If we had the source, and we could fix it, maybe this wouldn't be a problem.
Heh. The difference is the *BSD crowd points you to other websites instead of answering your question first. Therefore, Linux is more popular.
No, really, think about this before replying to it. I just spent an hour trying to figure out why the hell some people call the "BSD Daemon" Beastie, and others call him Chuck, while his creator is very careful not to name him.
Apparently it's a *BSD style ego-clash, in the same tradition as forking the main source tree. Under Linux, we don't care. Some people don't even care if the mascot is a penguin, much less if he's called "Tux".
...and if you ask me to elaborate, I won't refer you to a web page.:)
(b) If you do care, try GTK themes. They can be slow, just like Windows, and can be made to look the same or better.
(c) Windows could benefit from some of the features of Motif. Tear-offs are a nifty idea, for instance, not that I use them much.:)
(d) Wouldn't it be nice if Windows gave you a *choice* of widget sets?
(e) Gosh, what do you expect from that original UNIX crowd that gave you *stable* server operating systems, and functional desktop machines with a GUI, mouse, and networking before that was cool. (is that cool yet in Windows, or are we waiting for the next release still?)
Umm... If it reads in C++ and outputs C, how could it be anything but a "preprocessor"?
I realize that all the C preprocessor does is expand macros, include files, etc., but the word "preprocessor" itself is a bit more broad. A C compiler could be considered a preprocessor for an assembler.:)
More to the point, basically all this means is anything you could write in C++ you could really be writing in C, I hope that point isn't in dispute here. (and anything you could write in C++ or C you could really be writing properly in assembler, object oriented or not, GUI or not... It just might take a bit longer.;) )
Badly designed HTML aside, here I am at http://www.networksolutions.com/, at their whois database, and I can "Search for a Web address, NIC handle, host IP, or lastname, firstname". So let's try this out.
[Network Solutions (R) the dot com people (TM)]Home | Services | Find | Help | About Us
No match for "WWW.NETWORKSOLUTIONS.COM".
Of course, if you change the query a little, you can find it, but then shouldn't they alter that whole cutesy "Search for a web address" message? Bah.
...and didn't Sun already do that whole stupid "dot com" advertising stunt?
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if RMS knows that Emacs isn't an OS? Maybe *that's* why the Hurd kernel took so long to develop...
;)
:)
However, come on, with XEmacs, you only have one app to support! It's a development platform, a text editor, a news reader, a web browser...
In related news, I'm glad Borland is porting their compiler, now gcc/g++ will have some decent competition, and everyone will get to port their Borland apps more easily. Of course, it'd be nicer if people could just use Wine to port their Windows apps, but Wine isn't really there yet. Maybe by the time they release this, it will be.
Chemistry has always been, like physics, based around creating a model that generally gives the correct result within a couple of decimal places, but isn't strict enough to approximate real behavior without breaking down.
;)
And now, like physics (and relativity) someone has the means and the technology to find out the truth, and force those lazy professors to rewrite the books and think again.
Man, I'm glad I'm in computer science, and can contribute to the 'means and technology' side without having to think too much.
Sounds like a possible platform for Slashdot in a few years...
:)
(actually, although I know something like this could have many far-reaching useful applications, I'd be happy with web sites that aren't susceptible to the slashdot effect.
heh. Leave it to the internet to have a high "net worth".
:)
Anyhow, from definition 2, "I" would be the capital of "internet".
(and, therefore, TI would be the capitals of "the internet". Texas Instruments? What?)
If more vendors did this, there would be no legitimate reason to crack anymore. All of us hackers could make sure our stuff works cross-platform, and explore and learn about different systems, and law enforcement can stop bugging us, and hunt down the crackers and the script kiddies. :)
This might be more appropriate for people using one particular distribution that don't want to know the details. (i.e. most newbies / Windows users / journalists :) The *Using* Device Drivers section is pretty simplistic, and the search facility is neat, but nothing you wouldn't see by running 'make menuconfig' or something.
So... read this if (a) you don't know what a kernel is (b) the idea of recompiling it scares you (c) you just want to use your distribution, and not know where it came from. Anyone else, just ignore it.
I don't know who would be a good choice for a national ISP, but if I wanted an international ISP, I'd go with IBM. (check out www.ibm.net -- they have access numbers everywhere!) I'm sure they fairly well blanket the US as well.
For *some* problems, Cray is not the answer. For others, it is the *only* answer. Any *big* problem using lots of "vector operations" (see Bruce's post, it's kind of like the extra instructions that are just now getting added to the PC-style computers for multimedia, but *much* better) and lots of RAM at once and stuff is made for a Supercomputer. Oh, and anything that scales well to multiple processors, they have techniques of doing this too.
:|
:)
Supercomputer != Beowulf! Network latency sucks in comparison, for tasks like this. Only readily paralellizable tasks that *don't* need lots and lots of RAM at once, and *don't* benefit greatly from the vector operations are better for Beowulf. In fact, some cryptography problems have been mostly solved on regular computers and then finished on a Cray, *because* the Cray did that stage of the problem so much better.
Of course, it won't be Cray without Seymour.
It must have been nice to build a supercomputing couch, though, back in the day.
I wish there was a law about having to present facts in court, because FOLDOC does a better job than your average lawyer on the Microsoft payroll. Incidentally, I used Netscape 1.1 back then, and it was the best browser around. :)
Netscape Communications Corporation
(Formlerly "Mosaic Communications Corporation") A company set up in April 1994 by Dr. James H. Clark and Marc Andreessen (creator
of the NCSA Mosaic program) to market their version of Mosaic, known as Netscape or Mozilla.
People don't like to be categorized. Therefore, for every word for someone with dark skin who has parents from Africa that has been used in the US, there is someone objecting to it. Let's look at a few:
:[ ) Back then, it was about as bad as calling someone 'black' is today.
Negroid. Yeah, just about as fun as calling me a 'Caucasian'. No one likes the 'scientific' term for their people.
Nigger. Contraction of the former, originally *not* offensive. If you don't believe me, read Huckleberry Finn, his best friend was a 'nigger'. (Provided it isn't banned yet, for schools that can't teach history.
Black. Some people find this offensive now. Too bad, since I'm 'White'...
African American. Pretty stupid, unless you're from there, and applied for citizenship here. They're as much from Africa as I'm from Europe, which is to say not at all. We're all Native Americans, since we were born on American soil. (Not Indians. Wait... they aren't from India! Aaaahhhhhh!)
Therefore, there are *no* good terms for our races. If you believe the word of one slashdot-reading honkey, that is. Otherwise, ignore me, and use your free software. (or is it Open Source? Shareware? Freeware? Aaaaahhhhh!)
Personally, with the domain names, use it or lose it. Don't refer a bunch of domain names to your page, either. You'll just confuse people, and restrict free speech and easy searching of the internet, which is what America is all about. If you don't like going to 'yahhoo.com' and getting a porn site, you shouldn't like this either, it's more domain abuse, pure and simple.
Click on the 1999 Reader's Choice thingy.
/dev/audio
:)
Favorites:
Distribution: tomsrtbt!
Development Tool: where's 'as'?
Shell: where's sash, or lsh?
Text Editor: where's ed? Ed is the standard!
Web Browser: lynx! Much better than arena, lynx handles tables and frames better without crashing!
Linux Book: why don't they just all read the man pages?
Web Page: Slashdot! Note that they didn't link to us: that won't save them from The Slashdot Effect!
Linux Game: Angband! Well... just because I'm addicted.
Platform: abacus! It'd have to be a pretty big one to run my turing machine, but I bet they've ported Linux to the abacus.
Mailer: telnet xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx 25
X-server: Xvfb -- it has the best interface.
Window Manager: Who needs a window manager? (see previous)
Database: cat > new.db
Backup Utility: dump
Audio Tool: cat foo.au >
Programming Language: Machine Code! Hex? Does ed have a hex mode now?
Demo: Does it use curses? Come on, now!
Disclaimer: this survey does not necessarily reflect *anyone's* opinions. I hope.
Stick to the facts, entitle your article "Even better than x86 Solaris and SCO Unix"... More *BSD press is good, but better *BSD Advocacy would be much better. So I'm going to nitpick the other side for a while.
:)
The *BSD's aren't really descended from the original anymore, all of that code that was 'officially' from the original was taken out and rewritten, giving Linux the opportunity to appear and get popular. (Just like the Hurd took a long time to even get into development) Linux filled a void, deal with it. None of these free x86 UN*X clones are really *that* different.
Linux has iBCS "too", and UN*X is fairly well source-compatible. Big deal.
I'm not sure how much of an advantage having three concurrent versions of *BSD is, it sounds much like having different distributions of Linux... hmm.
Also, are we comparing kernels or distributions here? If not, then let me mention that I've always found the GNU versions of the standard UNIX utilities to be *much* more useful, but YMMV. (I hate blocks! I love kilobytes!
Most of what I hate about *BSD isn't even the operating system: it's the culture, the license, the attitude, the huge 'I am 31337!' chip on many of their shoulders that stops them from helping their users, and makes them flame people and piss people off, and cause them to ban developers from discussion groups a la OpenBSD... (it isn't hard to find references to this, do research before you flame...)
Other than that, I'm sure both sides could share the few minor innovations that the other has, (barring the licensing issue, which may be moot without the advertising clause in one direction, and I'm sure some authors will contribute changes under both licenses in the other direction), and everyone would be happy from a technical perspective. This has basically already happened. From an advocacy perspective, we need more articles like "BSD really worked for me", and less like "I think BSD kicks the penguin in the @$$!"
Linux has an advocacy HOWTO. Read it, and run 'sed s/Linux/BSD/g', and try to understand.
Heh. I never met him in person, but I've heard stories, he went to my high school (years before I did). Actually, a lot of people in that class ended up working on Linux... I guess it was cheaper than AIX and SunOS and cooler than VAX/VMS, which were some of the other systems at the time...
No keywords for me. They can index my pages or censor me. Seriously, nothing that impinges upon this many peoples freedoms will pass without a huge and messy fight.
Either that, or it will be unenforceable, like UNISYS and their vague and ever-changing patent claims.
Look, it's a taint-free thin-client machine!
It's interesting to note that they couldn't manage to cram a decent web browser onto Windows CE. It's a good thing we have Linux instead.
Compaq is okay in my book, provided they don't mess up the Alpha too much. It's nice to see them not completely locked into the Microsoft vendor path.
Heh, as long as Linux or UNIX don't become as fragmented as Windows, we should all be fine. The Macintosh managed to switch architectures with less trouble than Microsoft has with its (many, user level?) libraries every day.
:) ...and (b) I started out before I went to NCSU trying to use Debian, and I didn't like the way I had to install the packages. However, we all owe a lot to the earlier distributions, like the nifty color-text Slackware installation program with all the package descriptions! Yay! (don't you wish Windows could do that?)
I'm glad that Red Hat and all other linux distributions, and any good UN*X have standards on how to handle shared libraries correctly, and don't have incompatible versions of their programs for different versions of X and whatnot.
Use whatever operating system / distribution you want, no one is forcing you do do anything. I use Red Hat because (a) I go to the school where it all started, so I guess there's some local pride there.
Eh. I figure we're trying to map all of the pages anyhow, so brute-force is going to be as good as anything else, but it might be a good idea to mark the dense parts for later indexing.
However, it might be good to identify growth and stagnation if we're going to be that complex about it. Hmm.
Well, I guess it's food for thought, anyhow. But I don't think this is a radically new vision of the web...
Just like the '6 degrees of seperation' game, I fail to see how this could be useful. Finding the shortest path between two websites is nice when you're stuck on a machine that can't go to random URLs (secured lynx, some web kiosks, browse slashdot from anywhere, yeah!), but the 19-click average sounds like a curiousity.
And, ooh, the web exhibits properties of exponential growth, with some sites that have many more links to other sites. Like I couldn't figure *that* one out. Some people post their bookmarks, and lists of links, and other people only link within their interests. A graph of this might look interesting if done correctly, but I still don't see how this would be that useful.
The graph at the top was pretty, though, it looked like an IFS fractal. They look like stuff found in nature too, so I guess that gives this article a context to exist...
MPEG II encoding for dummies. I wouldn't mind having something like that for Linux... And encryption to protect viewer privacy? These are good ideas, I just hope they're implemented correctly.
All I found on the page about the OS was 'PPC running RTOS', so that's pretty vague...
Oh, and I think the posting code still needs some work:
'SQL Error
There was an unknown error in the submission.'
Yes. Open source for Windows will always be less important until Windows comes out of development, and becomes a stable platform. If we had the source, and we could fix it, maybe this wouldn't be a problem.
Heh. The difference is the *BSD crowd points you to other websites instead of answering your question first. Therefore, Linux is more popular.
:)
No, really, think about this before replying to it. I just spent an hour trying to figure out why the hell some people call the "BSD Daemon" Beastie, and others call him Chuck, while his creator is very careful not to name him.
Apparently it's a *BSD style ego-clash, in the same tradition as forking the main source tree. Under Linux, we don't care. Some people don't even care if the mascot is a penguin, much less if he's called "Tux".
...and if you ask me to elaborate, I won't refer you to a web page.
(a) Who cares?
:)
(b) If you do care, try GTK themes. They can be slow, just like Windows, and can be made to look the same or better.
(c) Windows could benefit from some of the features of Motif. Tear-offs are a nifty idea, for instance, not that I use them much.
(d) Wouldn't it be nice if Windows gave you a *choice* of widget sets?
(e) Gosh, what do you expect from that original UNIX crowd that gave you *stable* server operating systems, and functional desktop machines with a GUI, mouse, and networking before that was cool. (is that cool yet in Windows, or are we waiting for the next release still?)
Umm... If it reads in C++ and outputs C, how could it be anything but a "preprocessor"?
:)
;) )
I realize that all the C preprocessor does is expand macros, include files, etc., but the word "preprocessor" itself is a bit more broad. A C compiler could be considered a preprocessor for an assembler.
More to the point, basically all this means is anything you could write in C++ you could really be writing in C, I hope that point isn't in dispute here. (and anything you could write in C++ or C you could really be writing properly in assembler, object oriented or not, GUI or not... It just might take a bit longer.
Is jwz testing dadadodo again, or did someone else write their own dissociator?
...or perhaps someone was feeding zippy the pinhead and emacs doctor too many RFC's...
...and I have a feeling they never passed that Cisco exam.
Badly designed HTML aside, here I am at http://www.networksolutions.com/, at their whois database, and I can "Search for a Web address, NIC handle, host IP, or lastname, firstname". So let's try this out.
[Network Solutions (R) the dot com people (TM)]Home | Services | Find | Help | About Us
No match for "WWW.NETWORKSOLUTIONS.COM".
Of course, if you change the query a little, you can find it, but then shouldn't they alter that whole cutesy "Search for a web address" message? Bah.
...and didn't Sun already do that whole stupid "dot com" advertising stunt?