Not this again. Let's try to stay on topic. Writing and say what you believe is not at all similar to yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. With the former, you are expressing yourself; with the latter, you're just being a dick and potentially causing harm to people.
The far left gives us tyranny in one way, while the far right gives us tyranny in a different way...
And the balance has usually been good for us. I'm getting more concerned every day since the Republicans lost their voices, spines, or whatever. A two-party system has been good to us, and I guess I'm not prepared for everything the Democrats hope to accomplish.
... otherwise they prefer the BSD license model as it means they can keep things close to their vest or even stay completely proprietary and not share it at all.
Do you have any examples of open source software Apple has taken and subsequently kept closed, or are you just assuming that Apple does this because they are teh evilz and you've bought into the propaganda?
Love them or hate them, you can't say that Apple is a significantly unfriendly player in the world of open source. Yes, they often use open source to promote technologies that will benefit them (i.e. gcc, webkit, bonjour, cups), but who cares what their motive is as long as others are also benefiting from the resources they put into developing these projects? Corporations are corporations after all, and Apple is far from the worst open source contributor.
Actually, it's simpler than that. A child process whose parent dies will be adopted by init immediately (not re-parented up the chain). If the process is a zombie (because of a bad-behaving parent process), removing the zombie is as simple as killing the parent, at which point init will adopt and reap the zombie because init always waits on its children. Running "telinit u" might make init reap the zombie quicker, but it will happen eventually anyway so that command is very much optional (and not recommended since zombies are harmless anyway).
If we want to be technical, there are some apps that implement their own web server so users can navigate to some address to configure some features or whatever. Obviously you can't use such implementations for anything besides that which they are designed to do, but a web server it still is.
I'm not seeing this as an ethical issue. I may wish that Apple's terms of use for the iPhone were more accepting of a particular type of application, but all developers know the terms before they even start coding. This case is different from Sega because this one interprets arbitrary code while Sega's apps run hard-coded ROMs. The term arbitrary is important, and it clearly means that this app is indeed against Apple's terms of inclusion into their store.
Does it suck? Yeah. Unethical? That's a stretch...
...because I am tired of reports of apps not working on iPhone and other ways Apple limits it. If people care so much about freedom, why don't they stop using it?
Hint: They don't [care so much], otherwise they would stop using it. The only ones who really do care are 0.00001% of iPhone users (who also happen to read slashdot, by the way).
In the early days, more RAM meant that you could cache some frequently used information in memory instead of recomputing it or loading it on demand.
But there's a diminishing return. Nowadays, it's usually faster to recompute than read it all back from RAM...
That's not quite right. There is a trade-off between speed and memory usage in many cases, but nowadays we have what we consider to be slow and"bloated" software not because the software is storing in memory what it should compute each time, but rather because of the large number of abstractions used in some modern software. Each level of abstraction increases overhead (essentially wasted CPU cycles) as well as overall memory use. Thus we see that new features and required resources increase at some above-linear rate.
But, hey, at least the US doesn't have socialist health care! Those socialist fire fighters do such a terrible job putting out our houses when they're on fire, and don't get me started on those socialist training camps called public (US sense) schools.
This is a fallacy. Presumably there are some things that shouldn't be socialized or that work better in the free market, otherwise everything would be socialized and we would wait on the government to give us everything. Given this fact, we can't say that socialized healthcare is better than free market healthcare based merely on the fact that fire-fighting works well as a socialized service.
But you have to take that information with a grain of salt though. There is no Opera for iPhone, so all iPhone devices along with iPod touch devices are effectively excluded and I don't see Apple approving Opera for the iPhone anytime soon.
Why not? There are a lot of other browsers in the app store.
It may be time to put this old lie to rest: There are more browsers available on the iPhone than just Safari. There are several browsers in the app store, none of which happen to be Opera. Yes, Safari is bundled, but there are probably more browsers available for the iPhone than any other mobile device.
What people don't seem to realize is that you don't need to switch completely to SSD. You can see amazing performance benefits by putting your operating system and application binaries/data on a small SSD while keeping your HDDs around for all your data. My root filesystem fits easily on a 30G SSD, and that's really not a lot of money for a big performance increase. On the other hand, buying enough capacity in SSD for ALL your data could easily cost more than the rest of your computer and is totally unnecessary.
I've got ext4 on my SSD. It performs very well, but nilfs is a better fit for an SSD. I'll reformat to nilfs sometime within the next few kernel release cycles. Nevertheless, ext4 is just fine--I even have journaling and all the other bells and whistles. I'm not afraid of the additional wear as I suspect the drive will fail by some other technical malfunction long before the flash cells wear out.
By the way, it's true what they say: An SSD is the one component that will provide you with the most noticeable performance boost your computer has ever had, and it's one of the cheapest, too. I just got a 30G for ~$120 and my root filesystem fits comfortably on it (obviously my data is on a spinning disk). Now I boot in seconds and applications (yes, even Firefox) load instantly--makes "bloat" virtually irrelevant. Seriously, I still like platter drives for their capacity, but you don't need a lot of space to store your root filesystem and you can't beat the performance improvement for just over a hundred bucks spent.
In my opinion, an SSD need no longer be considered a toy for early adopters. I certainly don't consider myself an early adopter. It just makes sense. Obviously SSD drives aren't as "mature" as our beloved platter drives, but they're not exactly brand new technology either.
The term "unlimited" doesn't mean anything in advertising anyway, and savvy consumers will know this and not expect that anything will be unlimited. I'm all for passing a law banning the word "unlimited" from all commercial advertisement, but the fact is you need to read the terms of any contract you sign up for. May the company with the best contract terms conquer. Hopefully the people who are buying Pres and iPhones are reading their contracts so they don't get any false expectation of "unlimited" data or the possibility of tethering. Buyer beware.
if they intended to patent it "to stop others blocking it" they could just as easily have made it into prior art and it would have been cheaper to do.
You're assuming the legal fees associated with a bogus lawsuit brought on by a patent troll somewhere down the line is cheaper than just getting the patent in the first place. Wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
After falling in love with Python, it is let me see if python can handle this with speed, if not, I'll write a class in C and...
You have some serious C skillz.
Not this again. Let's try to stay on topic. Writing and say what you believe is not at all similar to yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. With the former, you are expressing yourself; with the latter, you're just being a dick and potentially causing harm to people.
The far left gives us tyranny in one way, while the far right gives us tyranny in a different way...
And the balance has usually been good for us. I'm getting more concerned every day since the Republicans lost their voices, spines, or whatever. A two-party system has been good to us, and I guess I'm not prepared for everything the Democrats hope to accomplish.
Historically, a dream which ends up inspiring millions, although dreamed by a single man, will not die with that man.
... otherwise they prefer the BSD license model as it means they can keep things close to their vest or even stay completely proprietary and not share it at all.
Do you have any examples of open source software Apple has taken and subsequently kept closed, or are you just assuming that Apple does this because they are teh evilz and you've bought into the propaganda?
Love them or hate them, you can't say that Apple is a significantly unfriendly player in the world of open source. Yes, they often use open source to promote technologies that will benefit them (i.e. gcc, webkit, bonjour, cups), but who cares what their motive is as long as others are also benefiting from the resources they put into developing these projects? Corporations are corporations after all, and Apple is far from the worst open source contributor.
Actually, it's simpler than that. A child process whose parent dies will be adopted by init immediately (not re-parented up the chain). If the process is a zombie (because of a bad-behaving parent process), removing the zombie is as simple as killing the parent, at which point init will adopt and reap the zombie because init always waits on its children. Running "telinit u" might make init reap the zombie quicker, but it will happen eventually anyway so that command is very much optional (and not recommended since zombies are harmless anyway).
Oh, but this is slashdot. Anything Microsoft = bloat, crashes, unsecure. Get out of the 90's.
I don't have to be stuck in the 90's to remember Vista. It's still all too fresh on my mind. I'm... damaged.
Why can't the comments just be converted along with the rest of the code?
It looks like you're trying to draw a contrast here. However, the developer tools for the iPhone are also free.
If we want to be technical, there are some apps that implement their own web server so users can navigate to some address to configure some features or whatever. Obviously you can't use such implementations for anything besides that which they are designed to do, but a web server it still is.
So... can we more accurately say that it was a copyleft violation?
I'm not seeing this as an ethical issue. I may wish that Apple's terms of use for the iPhone were more accepting of a particular type of application, but all developers know the terms before they even start coding. This case is different from Sega because this one interprets arbitrary code while Sega's apps run hard-coded ROMs. The term arbitrary is important, and it clearly means that this app is indeed against Apple's terms of inclusion into their store.
Does it suck? Yeah. Unethical? That's a stretch...
...because I am tired of reports of apps not working on iPhone and other ways Apple limits it. If people care so much about freedom, why don't they stop using it?
Hint: They don't [care so much], otherwise they would stop using it. The only ones who really do care are 0.00001% of iPhone users (who also happen to read slashdot, by the way).
In the early days, more RAM meant that you could cache some frequently used information in memory instead of recomputing it or loading it on demand. But there's a diminishing return. Nowadays, it's usually faster to recompute than read it all back from RAM...
That's not quite right. There is a trade-off between speed and memory usage in many cases, but nowadays we have what we consider to be slow and"bloated" software not because the software is storing in memory what it should compute each time, but rather because of the large number of abstractions used in some modern software. Each level of abstraction increases overhead (essentially wasted CPU cycles) as well as overall memory use. Thus we see that new features and required resources increase at some above-linear rate.
But, hey, at least the US doesn't have socialist health care! Those socialist fire fighters do such a terrible job putting out our houses when they're on fire, and don't get me started on those socialist training camps called public (US sense) schools.
This is a fallacy. Presumably there are some things that shouldn't be socialized or that work better in the free market, otherwise everything would be socialized and we would wait on the government to give us everything. Given this fact, we can't say that socialized healthcare is better than free market healthcare based merely on the fact that fire-fighting works well as a socialized service.
All true. Sad, but true. OMG slashdot's CSS sucks now.
The OP seems to think that the Opera browser is developed by Apple. Moving on...
But you have to take that information with a grain of salt though. There is no Opera for iPhone, so all iPhone devices along with iPod touch devices are effectively excluded and I don't see Apple approving Opera for the iPhone anytime soon.
Why not? There are a lot of other browsers in the app store.
It may be time to put this old lie to rest: There are more browsers available on the iPhone than just Safari. There are several browsers in the app store, none of which happen to be Opera. Yes, Safari is bundled, but there are probably more browsers available for the iPhone than any other mobile device.
What people don't seem to realize is that you don't need to switch completely to SSD. You can see amazing performance benefits by putting your operating system and application binaries/data on a small SSD while keeping your HDDs around for all your data. My root filesystem fits easily on a 30G SSD, and that's really not a lot of money for a big performance increase. On the other hand, buying enough capacity in SSD for ALL your data could easily cost more than the rest of your computer and is totally unnecessary.
I've got ext4 on my SSD. It performs very well, but nilfs is a better fit for an SSD. I'll reformat to nilfs sometime within the next few kernel release cycles. Nevertheless, ext4 is just fine--I even have journaling and all the other bells and whistles. I'm not afraid of the additional wear as I suspect the drive will fail by some other technical malfunction long before the flash cells wear out.
By the way, it's true what they say: An SSD is the one component that will provide you with the most noticeable performance boost your computer has ever had, and it's one of the cheapest, too. I just got a 30G for ~$120 and my root filesystem fits comfortably on it (obviously my data is on a spinning disk). Now I boot in seconds and applications (yes, even Firefox) load instantly--makes "bloat" virtually irrelevant. Seriously, I still like platter drives for their capacity, but you don't need a lot of space to store your root filesystem and you can't beat the performance improvement for just over a hundred bucks spent.
In my opinion, an SSD need no longer be considered a toy for early adopters. I certainly don't consider myself an early adopter. It just makes sense. Obviously SSD drives aren't as "mature" as our beloved platter drives, but they're not exactly brand new technology either.
The term "unlimited" doesn't mean anything in advertising anyway, and savvy consumers will know this and not expect that anything will be unlimited. I'm all for passing a law banning the word "unlimited" from all commercial advertisement, but the fact is you need to read the terms of any contract you sign up for. May the company with the best contract terms conquer. Hopefully the people who are buying Pres and iPhones are reading their contracts so they don't get any false expectation of "unlimited" data or the possibility of tethering. Buyer beware.
Woosh.
I think that if you could just use a car analogy as a claim to prior art, nothing would be patentable.
if they intended to patent it "to stop others blocking it" they could just as easily have made it into prior art and it would have been cheaper to do.
You're assuming the legal fees associated with a bogus lawsuit brought on by a patent troll somewhere down the line is cheaper than just getting the patent in the first place. Wrong.