That's false of course: 1) the deciding factor for project management is the non-commercial/commercial status of a project, not the closed/open state of the source.
2) for non-commercial projects, both developers 'goodwill' and proper management are needed to avoid bloat; whereas for a commercial project only proper management is needed (as the management decides where the money will go).
Note that the Linux kernel is a blend of non-commercial and commercial projects as many developers are paid to work on the Linux kernel and many aren't.
>Even when we haven't fully deployed it (renewable power, for instance) we've pretty much got the technology down.
Uh? You really believe that we have done the technology for renewable power?? I've got news for you: we don't! Or more precisely not at a good price.
Remember: 1) renewable power source are subsidised whereas oil is heavily taxed. 2) renewable power source are made using the cheapest energy available, which means currently *non*-renewable energy.
1 + 2 = when non-renewable energy sources run out, the price of renewable energy will increase *a lot*.
Note that TeX is an exemple of good coding ok, but not of 'good design' IMHO: the language is quite awful..
Re:ah yes, anti-perl tirades are refreshing
on
Coders At Work
·
· Score: 1
>>You might think that the obvious utility of perl, the fact that perl and perl derived languages remain tremendously popular with people writing actual code, might blunt the man's opinion that it's an "abomination".
The men is criticising perl, why are you talking about 'perl derived languages', straw man?
I use Perl when necessary (because I don't have much choice of the language I can use: my boss do otherwise I'd use Python/Ruby or Scala), so it's useful, but I consider it to be an abomination too: a language which makes writing *maintainable* code very, very difficult.
>EVERY communication channel that gets created, gets abused by people like this until the law comes down on them to stop it.
No, only the communications channel where sending messages is cheap enough, otherwise they'd be no finantial incentive. So the 'technical detail' ie the 'cost of sending a message' do matter for spam.
>- replacement of almost all talented acts that produced good music, with hyperproduced kiddie-shit "artists" whose assets are not musical talent or singing voices,
(sarcasm)Of course in 1999 (the best year for the music industry), 'hyperproduced kiddie-shit "artists"' didn't exist!(/sarcasm)
>Just you wait: in 4 years, tops, "Hannah Montana" will be pulling a Britney-style selfdestruct.
Maybe (though other hyperproduced "artists" didn't make a nervous breakdown), what is the relationship with the music sales?
>And neither of them are capable of producing "music" even remotely worth listening to.
Given that they sell a lot of record, I'd say that many people disagree: even if it's artificial the result can sounds good, so quit your elitist rant..
>The Cortex A8 has roughly P3 performance (per clock)[cut] This is without Out of Order execution, 64bit support, or any other fancy stuff.
I don't understand why you're putting OoO execution and 64bit support on the same level: one is an internal implementation optimisation of the CPU (better performance but higher power usage), the other is a change of the CPU's ISA to allow simple usage of big memory: they are totally different.
>However, users are clueless about what they really want
Of course if you start with this axiom, you can't go anywhere. But it's false actually: *some* users are clueless about what they really want, but some users know what they want.
And with Firefox, it's already easy to use users feedback to improve the software: look at the statistics of the extension used and then implement the most used extensions in the browser: -ensuring that even non-technical users get those popular improvements. -allowing better optimisation of these feature as they're done in the browser.
First as other as said, XP is still sold on new computers. Second, Unix/Linux had the root/users separation since a long, long time, so in 2001 selling an OS with such poor defaults was really a stupid idea..
>Chrome is just yet another browser which uses Webkit/KHTML. Better to use the proper names.
I'm using the proper names: I'm comparing the architecture/design of the browsers not of the rendering engines. Chrome use smartly process and sandbox to provide better resource management, responsiveness, fault isolation and security; Firefox put everything in the same process which make it fragile, doesn't tell the user which website is using all the cpu|memory when it happens and it can also freeze due to the lack of process/thread use, not very good for a total rewrite..
>The internet can confuse even the young bright boys - just start a discussion on internet security, and see how many really smart young people get lost real fast.
Uh? So you're saying that internet discussion are more confusing than real world discussion? Well that's kind of obvious: in real world discussion you discuss with tenth of people all present and all in the same 'state' (that said real-world meetings can become very confusing fast also), if you replicate the same experience over the internet, it won't be much more confusing.
The confusion is caused by the number of people, the asynchronicity of the discussion, etc so you're comparing apples and oranges.
>This just shows that when more Windows users (or convenience-first users) move to linux, the added security wont help.
That's an exageration.. By default in a normal Linux distribution users run as a normal user not root (and some even try to discourage to run as root), but with Windows XP users by default are administrators: default *matters* as most users don't change them.
>>ALSA was a big mistake, from the same mold as the Netscape "Let's throw everything away and start again!" that Jamie Zawinski complained about all those years ago > >I agree with your sentiment, but this is a tricky example - Netscape's 'mistake' gave us Firefox after all.
Firefox is working sure, but it has an awful design compared to Chrome.. So even with a full rewrite they couldnot get the design right, I really don't think it was worth it.
>>The Atom is a wonderfully efficient chip > No, it's not. It's a wonderfully feature-less chip, with everything possible off-loaded into the northbridge.
Well this depends what you compare an Atom to, compared to many other x86 it doesn't off-load anything more in the northbridge.. Compared to an SOC or an ARM, sure.
>Rambus was chastised for their actions (like the linked article states).
Chastised??? You should read better the article: the FTC tried but *failed* to do it and Rambus got a lot of money thanks to their 'submarine patents'.
As for the rest, given their history (even recent one with OOXML), I don't understand how anybody could trust Microsoft..
Of course it's a very crude one (only a few dozens of atoms whereas ordinary object are composed of a humongous number of atoms, remember Avogadro's constant: 6*10^23 atoms for *twelve grams* of C12) but it was still done with atomic-level precision, it's also a reminder of the *huge* amount of work that is still needed to build a molecular assembler..
If I understand correctly all this software do is use several proxy which are then used to browse filtered website. The problem AFAIK is that those who filter the web could get the proxy list and track the IP address of those who connect to the proxys and then these user would have *nasty* question to answer..
So this solution isn't very anonymous, a better scheme would be to hide the traffic on encrypted connections with 'normal' website, but this would require the server to be used as a relay..
>the requirement called for two different architectures: one best served with a batch system, the other best served with a real-time system. What they need is COBOL and C
I'm curious: what do you think is easy to do in COBOL but not in Java?
As for realtime, I know that some vendors such as IBM sell Java implementation with GC which have realtime property, so it may be possible to do realtime in Java..
[ No I'm not a Java supporter, I think Scala or D are much more interesting if still immature ]
>I find it hard to believe that the US military has a policy of wilfully slaughtering Iraqi or Afghani civilians.
Uh? When you declare a war you know that you'll slaughter a big number of people: bombs do this. civilian or not.. Irack is a good example of a slaugther without real justifications, well except grabbing the oil.
You're first point is wrong technically, it's even written in the pdf of the GP: you can have a connections between the node towards several core networks so the user is still free to use the network he choose and could even use several network at the same time *if* he had a modem which suports this.
As for the rest, sure from your home to the first access node, there wouldn't be redundancy of service, but there isn't any now either: and building this redundancy is *very* expensive. I don't care much: it's not my tax dollars, but this seems to be a very illogical choice, which is quite consistent with the stupid mandatory filtering though..
Slashdot Mirror
That's false of course:
1) the deciding factor for project management is the non-commercial/commercial status of a project, not the closed/open state of the source.
2) for non-commercial projects, both developers 'goodwill' and proper management are needed to avoid bloat; whereas for a commercial project only proper management is needed (as the management decides where the money will go).
Note that the Linux kernel is a blend of non-commercial and commercial projects as many developers are paid to work on the Linux kernel and many aren't.
I should have added that non-renewable energy sources are numerous: oil, coil, nuclear. So I don't know at all when those resources will end.
>Even when we haven't fully deployed it (renewable power, for instance) we've pretty much got the technology down.
Uh? You really believe that we have done the technology for renewable power??
I've got news for you: we don't! Or more precisely not at a good price.
Remember:
1) renewable power source are subsidised whereas oil is heavily taxed.
2) renewable power source are made using the cheapest energy available, which means currently *non*-renewable energy.
1 + 2 = when non-renewable energy sources run out, the price of renewable energy will increase *a lot*.
>Have you ever used TeX
Note that TeX is an exemple of good coding ok, but not of 'good design' IMHO: the language is quite awful..
>>You might think that the obvious utility of perl, the fact that perl and perl derived languages remain tremendously popular with people writing actual code, might blunt the man's opinion that it's an "abomination".
The men is criticising perl, why are you talking about 'perl derived languages', straw man?
I use Perl when necessary (because I don't have much choice of the language I can use: my boss do otherwise I'd use Python/Ruby or Scala), so it's useful, but I consider it to be an abomination too: a language which makes writing *maintainable* code very, very difficult.
>What precisely allows you to doubt that claims, except maybe the fact that deadlines are often missed?
I remember seing Intel's roadmap with P4 at frequency which were never produced..
>EVERY communication channel that gets created, gets abused by people like this until the law comes down on them to stop it.
No, only the communications channel where sending messages is cheap enough, otherwise they'd be no finantial incentive.
So the 'technical detail' ie the 'cost of sending a message' do matter for spam.
>- replacement of almost all talented acts that produced good music, with hyperproduced kiddie-shit "artists" whose assets are not musical talent or singing voices,
(sarcasm)Of course in 1999 (the best year for the music industry), 'hyperproduced kiddie-shit "artists"' didn't exist!(/sarcasm)
>Just you wait: in 4 years, tops, "Hannah Montana" will be pulling a Britney-style selfdestruct.
Maybe (though other hyperproduced "artists" didn't make a nervous breakdown), what is the relationship with the music sales?
>And neither of them are capable of producing "music" even remotely worth listening to.
Given that they sell a lot of record, I'd say that many people disagree: even if it's artificial the result can sounds good, so quit your elitist rant..
>The Cortex A8 has roughly P3 performance (per clock)[cut] This is without Out of Order execution, 64bit support, or any other fancy stuff.
I don't understand why you're putting OoO execution and 64bit support on the same level: one is an internal implementation optimisation of the CPU (better performance but higher power usage), the other is a change of the CPU's ISA to allow simple usage of big memory: they are totally different.
>However, users are clueless about what they really want
Of course if you start with this axiom, you can't go anywhere.
But it's false actually: *some* users are clueless about what they really want, but some users know what they want.
And with Firefox, it's already easy to use users feedback to improve the software: look at the statistics of the extension used and then implement the most used extensions in the browser:
-ensuring that even non-technical users get those popular improvements.
-allowing better optimisation of these feature as they're done in the browser.
I don't know: fuel is sold per volume not per mass..
I'm not that convinced that Microsoft takes security seriously:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/18/windows7_security_hole/
About UAC: see this http://www.osnews.com/story/21653/Microsoft_Won_t_Fix_Windows_7_s_UAC
Apparently Win7's UAC isn't better: it's worse from a security POV..
First as other as said, XP is still sold on new computers.
Second, Unix/Linux had the root/users separation since a long, long time, so in 2001 selling an OS with such poor defaults was really a stupid idea..
>Chrome is just yet another browser which uses Webkit/KHTML. Better to use the proper names.
I'm using the proper names: I'm comparing the architecture/design of the browsers not of the rendering engines.
Chrome use smartly process and sandbox to provide better resource management, responsiveness, fault isolation and security; Firefox put everything in the same process which make it fragile, doesn't tell the user which website is using all the cpu|memory when it happens and it can also freeze due to the lack of process/thread use, not very good for a total rewrite..
>The internet can confuse even the young bright boys - just start a discussion on internet security, and see how many really smart young people get lost real fast.
Uh? So you're saying that internet discussion are more confusing than real world discussion?
Well that's kind of obvious: in real world discussion you discuss with tenth of people all present and all in the same 'state' (that said real-world meetings can become very confusing fast also), if you replicate the same experience over the internet, it won't be much more confusing.
The confusion is caused by the number of people, the asynchronicity of the discussion, etc so you're comparing apples and oranges.
>This just shows that when more Windows users (or convenience-first users) move to linux, the added security wont help.
That's an exageration..
By default in a normal Linux distribution users run as a normal user not root (and some even try to discourage to run as root), but with Windows XP users by default are administrators: default *matters* as most users don't change them.
>>ALSA was a big mistake, from the same mold as the Netscape "Let's throw everything away and start again!" that Jamie Zawinski complained about all those years ago
>
>I agree with your sentiment, but this is a tricky example - Netscape's 'mistake' gave us Firefox after all.
Firefox is working sure, but it has an awful design compared to Chrome..
So even with a full rewrite they couldnot get the design right, I really don't think it was worth it.
>>The Atom is a wonderfully efficient chip
> No, it's not. It's a wonderfully feature-less chip, with everything possible off-loaded into the northbridge.
Well this depends what you compare an Atom to, compared to many other x86 it doesn't off-load anything more in the northbridge..
Compared to an SOC or an ARM, sure.
>Rambus was chastised for their actions (like the linked article states).
Chastised??? You should read better the article: the FTC tried but *failed* to do it and Rambus got a lot of money thanks to their 'submarine patents'.
As for the rest, given their history (even recent one with OOXML), I don't understand how anybody could trust Microsoft..
>molecular nanotechnology has not yet been acheived
I disagree with this point: the ("hand"-made) IBM logo with atoms see http://www.rso.cornell.edu/scitech/archive/95spr/atom.html is one of the first 'nanotechnology' object.
Of course it's a very crude one (only a few dozens of atoms whereas ordinary object are composed of a humongous number of atoms, remember Avogadro's constant: 6*10^23 atoms for *twelve grams* of C12) but it was still done with atomic-level precision, it's also a reminder of the *huge* amount of work that is still needed to build a molecular assembler..
If I understand correctly all this software do is use several proxy which are then used to browse filtered website.
The problem AFAIK is that those who filter the web could get the proxy list and track the IP address of those who connect to the proxys and then these user would have *nasty* question to answer..
So this solution isn't very anonymous, a better scheme would be to hide the traffic on encrypted connections with 'normal' website, but this would require the server to be used as a relay..
>the requirement called for two different architectures: one best served with a batch system, the other best served with a real-time system. What they need is COBOL and C
I'm curious: what do you think is easy to do in COBOL but not in Java?
As for realtime, I know that some vendors such as IBM sell Java implementation with GC which have realtime property, so it may be possible to do realtime in Java..
[ No I'm not a Java supporter, I think Scala or D are much more interesting if still immature ]
>I find it hard to believe that the US military has a policy of wilfully slaughtering Iraqi or Afghani civilians.
Uh? When you declare a war you know that you'll slaughter a big number of people: bombs do this.
civilian or not..
Irack is a good example of a slaugther without real justifications, well except grabbing the oil.
You're first point is wrong technically, it's even written in the pdf of the GP: you can have a connections between the node towards several core networks so the user is still free to use the network he choose and could even use several network at the same time *if* he had a modem which suports this.
As for the rest, sure from your home to the first access node, there wouldn't be redundancy of service, but there isn't any now either: and building this redundancy is *very* expensive.
I don't care much: it's not my tax dollars, but this seems to be a very illogical choice, which is quite consistent with the stupid mandatory filtering though..