C'mon. I use KDE and I find certain things beter than in gnome, konsole, kmail,... well... maybe KDE even is the "most" popular by certain standards, but why do they have to shove it in my face everytime????
It goes on in the article: "radical changes"... boy... having a nerw icon set and a mail client that is somehow integrated to a half-finished kalendar ist not a "radical" change...
That is really anoying... especially you also read this from "official" KDE PR people, not only from KDE fan boys posting to/.
I completely agree. I would hope you are american to strengthen my believe in the future of that country (maybe your spelling suggests otherwise). Each of your points is very true.
Maybe I can add that this apparent conflict is not a conflict between religion and science. I am catholic and also have a PhD in particle physics. There is no contradictions what so ever. The only conflict is between creationalist which are (from my european perspective anyway) a very twisted minority inside christianity.
Thanks for the great posting I just whish not only the slashdot wourd read it.
I replace my CPU and one small case fan by two large case fans and a Thermaltake Fanless 103. Noise goes from loud to nothearable. Temperature from an average 35 to 39 degrees while pov-rendering (P4 3.2GHz)
That was the best investment I made (noise wise). If only the DVD-Rom was more silent (yes, I made it spin as slow as possible when whatching DVDs, still, I can hear it.)
I thought this discussion is long over. Everybode knows that there are two possible solutions to theis problem.
A) Either use a passsentence instead of just a word, most modern systems allow for rather long passwords. Since the sentence makes sense it is easy to remember. Since the sentence has many characters, it is pretty hard to crack with current tools. Dictionary tools may change this, put place a few strange names or made-up words in the sentence and you are much saver as any 8 char password today.
B) If stuck with old systems, I usually recommend the secretaries to write their passwords down. YES! Comparing the risk that one of the ~250 daily stupid attemps to guess passwords from random idiots succeeds is MUCH larger if people are told to remember their passwords. They'll automatically choose simple ones. I guess about two or three passwords in our own system per week. If they choose a very complicated passwd and write it down, then an attacker needs to be physically in the office to steel it. If the guy is physically in the secretaries office, he has no problem getting everywehere anyway and we have much bigger problems.
I just upgraded two boxen, one via search+replace 1 by 2 in my/etc/apt/sources.list and an "apt0get update; apt-get dist-upgrade", the other via booting from the DVD and picking 'enter'. Both updates were very smooth, even tho I expected troubles with my proprietary NVIDIA drivers and Xorg. However, both boxes had FC1 installed before.
Your example with peace of cloth does not hold water because it is clearly embedded into out 3D world.
No it is not. it stays completely in two dimensions. the complete chain of arguments holds in absence of a third dimension. Thus it can be genralized to curved three-dimensonal spaces in absence of a >=four dimensional 'surrounding'
What you fail to realize is, that "curvature" in a mathematical and thus physical/cosmological sense does NOT mean something is "bent". It exclusively means, that the sum of angles in a triangle is tno 180. This and (almost) only that.
Then how do you explain that the universe is expanding?
imagine you are an ant standing on an infinite rubber plane. every 2 meter there is a pole. now someone streches the rubber plane. the poles will be farther appart from each other. The plane didn't expand or bend in any other dimension as the two dimensions it already occupies.
Now you are asking "How do you stretch a plane that is already infinite"... errr well...;-) After a couple of semester in math your brain is so fried that you don't try to think about that;-)
this is an artificial concept brought from mathematics
from math, yes. artificial, no.
I have yet to see an actual demonstration of something been bended without been embedded into space of large dimensions
you can see it everywhere. I'll try to explain something that would be easy to show in a classroom.
Imagine a piece of cloth lying on a table. the threads from which the cloth was woven define 'straight'. they form rectangular shapes. Now, draw a triangle on the cloth. if you add up all the angles, you will get 180 (if you did draw correctly). Now, let's say the cloth is a little elastic so that you can strech it with your hands while it is lying on the table. With two hands you will stretch the cloth more at some points and less at others. Now measure and add the angles in your triangle again. The result will in general be different from 180. if it is higher than 180 you have created positive curvature, if less, negative. All that while the cloth is still lying flat on the table.
could anyone please present any evidence that there is nothing outside of Universe
I hope you realize yourself, that this is a preposterous demand.
Even if our four known dimensions would be embedded in, say, 11 dimensions and we just see a brane in this space. The 11-dimensional space would be what we call universe.
I don't think the universe being discussed is "everything that exists".
Oh yes, that's what they talk about indeed.
..some "space filling" and some not..
No, there is no "space outside the universe" that migt get filled. It is a question of space-time "curvature". A manifold does not need to be embeded in a higher dimensional space to have a curvature.
The question of shape does not address what's in the gaps if it's not space-filling.
there are no "gaps"
The article is discussing the simplest kind of negative curvature
...which is still possible in the light of WMAP measurements. The simplest form of negative curvature is the "pringle" (or more common: "saddle")
The trumpet shape being discussed is a two-dimensional analog of the actual case in our universe, and is clearly not space-filling.
because it is a two-dimensional shape embeded in a three-dimensional space. The universe, i.e. space-time is (most likely) not embeded in a higher dimensional space. (That is even true if your name is Witten and your space-time has 11 dimensions, still, it is not embeded somewhere)
I don't understand their counting. Not that I am happy with it, but we (BaBar) have certainly a much larger database than all of these companies. And, since we also have severl computing farm summing up to several thousand CPUs which process the data constantly, I doubt that they have higher load.
The measurements of very low coefficients in the angular power spectrum is very difficult since we unfortunately only have one universe. At larger values you can compare measurements in different reagons of the sky, but for the lower coefficients you need large angles and thus only very few if not only a single (statistically independent) measurement is possible. They probably get the statistic right, but it's very hard to study systematic effects and assign correct systematic uncertainties.
We will need more experiments with independent systematics before this will actually get acepted
And it is true that 40% of my 3.5'' floppy discs are not readable anymore, but I have copied them to CD years ago. And I will copy my CD-Rs to blue-ray, or whatever comes next. In reality, who the fuck cares is the CD-Rs are still readable in a few years. This is true for my private stuff as well as the CD jukebox we use at work.
And BTW, two years is just rediculous. I have CD-Rs older than that and they still install debian. When it comes to audio or even DivX video, it's not even a serious problem if there are a few unrecoverable read errors.
Cheers.
Re:They only forgot one thing - power
on
Spray-On Computers
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
A friend of mine is working in a bio/med-tech company. They develop energy sources for cardiac pacemakers which feed on the sugar in your blood. They can in principle also produce energy from body-fat. The device is not particularly smal, thou. a little more than a square inch, and... errr.. it's not yet working.
Then again, the RFID tags in the supermarket don't even need any direct power source.
I wonder which universities/institutes have larger and maybe cheaper clusters, but just don't bother with running benchmarks. I for one are sitting next next to a tiny cluster with 40 dual-cpu nodes, which is connected (GRID like) to a 340 dual-node cluster in a nearby town. Non of us high ernergy physicists bothers with running any benchmarks on our clusters, other than our own applications. I wonder how many "linux-cluster-supercomputers" are out there which would easyly make it into the top 500, but noone has ever heard of....
You have not understood how open source developement works. There is not a fixed amount of development power that can be distributed among the number of existing projects. A fork can ultimatively tab new sources of creativity and also the pure stimulus of competition can mean a boost for both projects. I strongly believe that this is e.g. true for gcc/egcs but also for KDE/GNOME. None of the projects would be where they are without the competition of the couterpart.
Instead of being able to cram graphics at the local AGP bus at the maximum speed, the software has to jump through hoops to check if the data is actually destined for another computer.
Wrong. In principle the X-Server (_server_) can make full usage of any bandwidth avaiable. The quastion is how does the data get from the client to the server. If you look more carefully, in the end there is not much difference between MSWindows and an XWindows environment where both client and server are on the same mashine. Please show me some evidence that this does not slow down the GUI refresh rates?
Since this sentence doesn't make sense, I don't know how to answer. Also tell me why the Windows GUI is so much more responsive than X?
Because the X protocoll sucks, didn't I mention that? It was designed in a different age for different hardware and different needs. In X you can see the menus and windows being drawn. In Windows you can't
This is completely true (e.g. on my laptop when running GNOME or KDE) Again: THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRINCIPLE OF NETWORK TRANSPARANCY! The reasons is the ancient/complicated/bloated protocoll. Complicated is especially bad, because the GUI toolkits have todo a lot of work at the wrong place. rendering verything from antialiased font, alphachannels down to the simplest GUI elements on the client side and then pumping it thru the protocoll layer is just insane. That is why X is slow. Network transparency adds a negligible amount of overhead on the desktop and buys you an enourmous advantage in a complex environment.
Slashdot Mirror
C'mon. I use KDE and I find certain things beter than in gnome, konsole, kmail, ... well ... maybe KDE even is the "most" popular by certain standards, but why do they have to shove it in my face everytime????
/.
It goes on in the article: "radical changes"... boy... having a nerw icon set and a mail client that is somehow integrated to a half-finished kalendar ist not a "radical" change...
That is really anoying... especially you also read this from "official" KDE PR people, not only from KDE fan boys posting to
-p
I completely agree. I would hope you are american to strengthen my believe in the future of that country (maybe your spelling suggests otherwise). Each of your points is very true.
Maybe I can add that this apparent conflict is not a conflict between religion and science. I am catholic and also have a PhD in particle physics. There is no contradictions what so ever. The only conflict is between creationalist which are (from my european perspective anyway) a very twisted minority inside christianity.
Thanks for the great posting I just whish not only the slashdot wourd read it.
Cheers
And he went on:
And don't get me wrong - I follow slashdot too, exactly because it's fun
to see people argue. I'm not complaining
He is so right.
And this is moderated 5,Insightfull... oh my good old /. what have you become!?!?!
I replace my CPU and one small case fan by two large case fans and a Thermaltake Fanless 103.
Noise goes from loud to nothearable. Temperature from an average 35 to 39 degrees while pov-rendering (P4 3.2GHz)
That was the best investment I made (noise wise). If only the DVD-Rom was more silent (yes, I made it spin as slow as possible when whatching DVDs, still, I can hear it.)
-P
I thought this discussion is long over. Everybode knows that there are two possible solutions to theis problem.
A) Either use a passsentence instead of just a word, most modern systems allow for rather long passwords. Since the sentence makes sense it is easy to remember. Since the sentence has many characters, it is pretty hard to crack with current tools. Dictionary tools may change this, put place a few strange names or made-up words in the sentence and you are much saver as any 8 char password today.
B) If stuck with old systems, I usually recommend the secretaries to write their passwords down. YES! Comparing the risk that one of the ~250 daily stupid attemps to guess passwords from random idiots succeeds is MUCH larger if people are told to remember their passwords. They'll automatically choose simple ones. I guess about two or three passwords in our own system per week. If they choose a very complicated passwd and write it down, then an attacker needs to be physically in the office to steel it. If the guy is physically in the secretaries office, he has no problem getting everywehere anyway and we have much bigger problems.
Cheers
Do female monkeys pay orange juice to see male mokeys?
-ss
I just upgraded two boxen, one via search+replace 1 by 2 in my /etc/apt/sources.list and an "apt0get update; apt-get dist-upgrade", the other via booting from the DVD and picking 'enter'. Both updates were very smooth, even tho I expected troubles with my proprietary NVIDIA drivers and Xorg. However, both boxes had FC1 installed before.
Cheers.
Your example with peace of cloth does not hold water because it is clearly embedded into out 3D world.
No it is not. it stays completely in two dimensions. the complete chain of arguments holds in absence of a third dimension. Thus it can be genralized to curved three-dimensonal spaces in absence of a >=four dimensional 'surrounding'
What you fail to realize is, that "curvature" in a mathematical and thus physical/cosmological sense does NOT mean something is "bent". It exclusively means, that the sum of angles in a triangle is tno 180. This and (almost) only that.
Cheers
Then how do you explain that the universe is expanding?
;-) ;-)
imagine you are an ant standing on an infinite rubber plane. every 2 meter there is a pole. now someone streches the rubber plane. the poles will be farther appart from each other. The plane didn't expand or bend in any other dimension as the two dimensions it already occupies.
Now you are asking "How do you stretch a plane that is already infinite"... errr well...
After a couple of semester in math your brain is so fried that you don't try to think about that
Cheers
from math, yes. artificial, no.
I have yet to see an actual demonstration of something been bended without been embedded into space of large dimensions
you can see it everywhere. I'll try to explain
something that would be easy to show in a classroom.
Imagine a piece of cloth lying on a table. the threads from which the cloth was woven define 'straight'. they form rectangular shapes.
Now, draw a triangle on the cloth. if you
add up all the angles, you will get 180 (if you
did draw correctly). Now, let's say the cloth
is a little elastic so that you can strech it
with your hands while it is lying on the table.
With two hands you will stretch the cloth more at
some points and less at others. Now measure and add the angles in your triangle again. The result
will in general be different from 180. if it is
higher than 180 you have created positive curvature, if less, negative. All that while the cloth is still lying flat on the table.
could anyone please present any evidence that there is nothing outside of Universe
I hope you realize yourself, that this is a preposterous demand.
Even if our four known dimensions would be embedded in, say, 11 dimensions
and we just see a brane in this space. The 11-dimensional space would be what we call universe.
Cheers
Oh yes, that's what they talk about indeed.
No, there is no "space outside the universe" that
migt get filled. It is a question of space-time
"curvature". A manifold does not need to be embeded
in a higher dimensional space to have a curvature.
The question of shape does not address what's in the gaps if it's not space-filling.
there are no "gaps"
The article is discussing the simplest kind of negative curvature
measurements. The simplest form of negative
curvature is the "pringle" (or more common: "saddle")
The trumpet shape being discussed is a two-dimensional analog of the actual case in our universe, and is clearly not space-filling.
because it is a two-dimensional shape embeded in
a three-dimensional space. The universe, i.e. space-time is (most likely) not embeded in a higher dimensional space. (That is even true if
your name is Witten and your space-time has 11 dimensions, still, it is not embeded somewhere)
Cheers
L. Chiariglione
Open source in MPEG
Linux Journal, 2001/03
I wonder what he would say today.
Cheers
Papero has quite some features. Especially cute is the "Patting Sensor" in his forehead. I wonder if it has also a "Kicking Sensor" in his butt....
Cheers
I am very soory that the parent cannot be modded above 5.
Cheers
Fact is, that they provide binary packages or at least links to binary packages for some distros and not for others.
;-)
Fact is, that debian, SUsE, etc... binary packages are available at the very same day that 3.2 is announced.
Fact is, that I will probably have to compile myself (which is a no-brainer with 'konstruct') or wait for a day or maybe even _several_ days
Cheers
KDE 3.2 is a real step forward. Well worth installing. If they only could provide easy access (apt/yum) to binary packages for RH9 or Fedora C1...
Cheers
I don't understand their counting. Not that I am happy with it, but we (BaBar) have certainly a much larger database than all of these companies. And, since we also have severl computing farm summing up to several thousand CPUs which process the data constantly, I doubt that they have higher load.
0 20 412/database.html
Press release:
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/slac/media-info/20
Cheers
Citation from here:
"The LHC itself is expected to run for 15-20 years, giving rise to a total data volume of between 75-100PB"
Everybody expects these numbers to be underestimated by at least a factor of 2.
Cheers, Rolf
The measurements of very low coefficients in the angular power spectrum is very difficult since we unfortunately only have one universe. At larger values you can compare measurements in different reagons of the sky, but for the lower coefficients you need large angles and thus only very few if not only a single (statistically independent) measurement is possible. They probably get the statistic right, but it's very hard to study systematic effects and assign correct systematic uncertainties.
We will need more experiments with independent systematics before this will actually get acepted
Cheers
And it is true that 40% of my 3.5'' floppy discs are not readable anymore, but I have copied them to CD years ago. And I will copy my CD-Rs to blue-ray, or whatever comes next. In reality, who the fuck cares is the CD-Rs are still readable in a few years. This is true for my private stuff as well as the CD jukebox we use at work.
And BTW, two years is just rediculous. I have CD-Rs older than that and they still install debian. When it comes to audio or even DivX video, it's not even a serious problem if there are a few unrecoverable read errors.
Cheers.
A friend of mine is working in a bio/med-tech company. They develop energy sources for cardiac pacemakers which feed on the sugar in your blood. They can in principle also produce energy from body-fat. The device is not particularly smal, thou. a little more than a square inch, and ... errr.. it's not yet working.
Then again, the RFID tags in the supermarket don't even need any direct power source.
Cheers.
I wonder which universities/institutes have larger and maybe cheaper clusters, but just don't bother with running benchmarks. I for one are sitting next next to a tiny cluster with 40 dual-cpu nodes, which is connected (GRID like) to a 340 dual-node cluster in a nearby town. Non of us high ernergy physicists bothers with running any benchmarks on our clusters, other than our own applications. I wonder how many "linux-cluster-supercomputers" are out there which would easyly make it into the top 500, but noone has ever heard of....
Cheers.
You have not understood how open source developement works. There is not a fixed amount of development power that can be distributed among the number of existing projects. A fork can ultimatively tab new sources of creativity and also the pure stimulus of competition can mean a boost for both projects.
I strongly believe that this is e.g. true for gcc/egcs but also for KDE/GNOME. None of the projects would be where they are without the competition of the couterpart.
Cheers
Instead of being able to cram graphics at the local AGP bus at the maximum speed, the software has to jump through hoops to check if the data is actually destined for another computer.
Wrong. In principle the X-Server (_server_) can make full usage of any bandwidth avaiable. The quastion is how does the data get from the client to the server. If you look more carefully, in the end there is not much difference between MSWindows and an XWindows environment where both client and server are on the same mashine.
Please show me some evidence that this does not slow down the GUI refresh rates?
Since this sentence doesn't make sense, I don't know how to answer.
Also tell me why the Windows GUI is so much more responsive than X?
Because the X protocoll sucks, didn't I mention that? It was designed in a different age for different hardware and different needs.
In X you can see the menus and windows being drawn. In Windows you can't
This is completely true (e.g. on my laptop when running GNOME or KDE) Again: THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRINCIPLE OF NETWORK TRANSPARANCY! The reasons is the ancient/complicated/bloated protocoll. Complicated is especially bad, because the GUI toolkits have todo a lot of work at the wrong place. rendering verything from antialiased font, alphachannels down to the simplest GUI elements on the client side and then pumping it thru the protocoll layer is just insane. That is why X is slow. Network transparency adds a negligible amount of overhead on the desktop and buys you an enourmous advantage in a complex environment.