Yes, that's what I've learned in brief with regard to multi-threading in classes I've taken this year (yes I'm still an under-grad). One way around this maybe to look toward OSes handling the CPU resources as one logical processor, but that may not work out so well in the end (in my opinion). In the end, it's just best to figure out which kinds of applications best use multi-processors, and figure out the algorithms that can execute in parallel, and which that cannot. But all this thinking that every algorithm can be made to magically execute in parallel doesn't seem to fit reality, at least for me and my programs.
Then sharing a form of collectivism! (dang short subject lines...)
Anyways, I find this amusing because this stance that FOSS == Communism is wrong for a number of reasons.
1) Use *and* development of FOSS licensed software is *consensual*
That's right, you don't have to use it or make it yourself, if you don't want. Although, it's fun to see how your initial ideas, even if they're crappy, can take off, you find that others have been mulling over the same problem with a similar take on it. FOSS, in this context, brings like minds together to work on problems in software without using the stick all the time (or even providing a carrot).
2) FOSS licenses *promote* private property, not impede it.
If you write program X, and license it under a FOSS based license, it's your damn right! Yes, if we acknowledge that the fruit of our labor is our property, even our source code, it's yours to distribute how you like, but like point one not everyone may take it (some software is just junk...). And this is a great thing, it means some folks will take and keep their code private, we don't have to worry about them except when we use their software. But when we use FOSS licensed software, we can enjoy more rights on our own property, reshaping the code to our needs and constraints, making more use of property rights in our ventures.
3) FOSS licenses *promote* competition.
Yep, this one is pretty obvious when you take a list of all the different kinds of FOSS'd DB backends, office suites, 3d rendering engines, game engines, encryption schemes, *programming languages*, compilers, IDEs, *games*, and so on. They're all competing, may not for immediate dollar investment or purchase, but for users. And that competition is more clear when one piece of software becomes adopted more so over another, when its feature set is lean (in a good way), its overhead not too high, and its results useful. If a piece of software that started out good becomes trash, more users stop using it, and go for another replacement, or fork off where the program was good for use and continue on from there. This level of competition isn't often seen in the world, and we've all seen better pieces of code written this way, not worse code.
In closing, maybe I'm just a libertard, but I'd like to state that I don't see why people get all uppity over FOSS, other than they never read the licenses related to FOSS. Maybe it's because people think guys with beards want to be Lenin clones, who knows.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, that's what I've learned in brief with regard to multi-threading in classes I've taken this year (yes I'm still an under-grad). One way around this maybe to look toward OSes handling the CPU resources as one logical processor, but that may not work out so well in the end (in my opinion). In the end, it's just best to figure out which kinds of applications best use multi-processors, and figure out the algorithms that can execute in parallel, and which that cannot. But all this thinking that every algorithm can be made to magically execute in parallel doesn't seem to fit reality, at least for me and my programs.
Then sharing a form of collectivism! (dang short subject lines...)
Anyways, I find this amusing because this stance that FOSS == Communism is wrong for a number of reasons.
1) Use *and* development of FOSS licensed software is *consensual*
That's right, you don't have to use it or make it yourself, if you don't want. Although, it's fun to see how your initial ideas, even if they're crappy, can take off, you find that others have been mulling over the same problem with a similar take on it. FOSS, in this context, brings like minds together to work on problems in software without using the stick all the time (or even providing a carrot).
2) FOSS licenses *promote* private property, not impede it.
If you write program X, and license it under a FOSS based license, it's your damn right! Yes, if we acknowledge that the fruit of our labor is our property, even our source code, it's yours to distribute how you like, but like point one not everyone may take it (some software is just junk...). And this is a great thing, it means some folks will take and keep their code private, we don't have to worry about them except when we use their software. But when we use FOSS licensed software, we can enjoy more rights on our own property, reshaping the code to our needs and constraints, making more use of property rights in our ventures.
3) FOSS licenses *promote* competition.
Yep, this one is pretty obvious when you take a list of all the different kinds of FOSS'd DB backends, office suites, 3d rendering engines, game engines, encryption schemes, *programming languages*, compilers, IDEs, *games*, and so on. They're all competing, may not for immediate dollar investment or purchase, but for users. And that competition is more clear when one piece of software becomes adopted more so over another, when its feature set is lean (in a good way), its overhead not too high, and its results useful. If a piece of software that started out good becomes trash, more users stop using it, and go for another replacement, or fork off where the program was good for use and continue on from there. This level of competition isn't often seen in the world, and we've all seen better pieces of code written this way, not worse code.
In closing, maybe I'm just a libertard, but I'd like to state that I don't see why people get all uppity over FOSS, other than they never read the licenses related to FOSS. Maybe it's because people think guys with beards want to be Lenin clones, who knows.