Though this is very interesting I think that the main use will be to intergrate opto-electronics on the substrate. The problem is that
A) GaAs has a crumby native oxide
B) there isn't a very good or simple complimentary process for GaAs. This is murder for power disapation, which is really the main problem in high speed devices.
I've seen a lot of this recenlty, where people complain that the internet hasn't become the hotbed of radical ideas that everyone said it would. So because most internet traffic is "commercialized" it's useless. Or even (as I actually have seen recenlty) the internet is useless because I'm only reading commecialized content.
Yes, people are boring. Your high school science teacher isn't going to become the next Karl Marx just by sitting in front of a connected computer. The internet has revolutionized the communication between "fringe" groups. Commercial interests have benefitted as well, but where else can you find This sort of thing. TV? Radio? The New York Times? Your local library?
Take the quoted statistic, that 50% of traffic is from four companies. Compare this wih TV, movies and music and see who's doing better. I'd bet that even most fringe oriented people spend a lot of time viewing mundane, commercialized content (checking weather, buying books, reading news). I'm sure that doesn't make them bad people.
Anyone who thought about it would have realized it even back in that day. Even without commercial content, there would be lots of inane, mainstream garbage. The internet is for everyone , even capitalist, commercial oriented, boring people. Unfortunately, there are a lot of them.
The first sale doctrine codified in section 109 limits an author s distribution right so that subsequent disposition of a particular copy by its owner is not an infringement of copyright. The first sale doctrine does not guarantee the existence of a secondary market or a certain price for copies of copyrighted works. If fewer people may wish to purchase a used DVD, or if they would pay less for it due to CSS, that would not equate to interference with the operation of section 109. Many circumstances in the marketplace may affect the resale market for copies of works improvements in technology, introduction of new formats, and the quality and cultural durability of the content of the work. None of these factors can properly be said to interfere with the operation of section 109, even though they could reduce the resale market for a work or even render it nonexistent.
This argument makes no sense, and makes me believe it was written by a shill. Although circumstances can cause a piece of media to become worthless, the causes are mostly out of the distributors control. What we are talking about is equipment manufacturers and media conglomerates (who are often one and the same) _colluding_ to control the distribution of media.
Taken to the extreme,if I bought a DVD and found that I could only sell the DVD to people who lived within 5 miles of me due to the whims of the DVD consortium, this would almost certainly limit the market which I could sell it, and be an undefendible practice. The author might have tried to make the argument that since DVD regions are large, the market is not severely limted by region encoding, but they chose not to. Even this argument is not really supported by the facts, since there is clearly an nonzero demand for imported DVDs due to pricing descrepencies between the different regions.
The author of this text is presenting the view that the intent of the distributor doesn't matter, which may or may not be the case with regard to copyright law, but is not true on the face of it. Whether DVD encoding is illegally limiting first sale doctrine is something needs to be worked out by looking closely at the law and certainly isn't an argument that is "without merit"
Despite the fact that this is America's second favorite newspaper.
Despite the fact that this paper has any chance of gaining respectability, and has lost circulation because the mainstream media now covers what it's been covering for years.
Despite the fact that this guy is let anywhere near a camera, even though he is blatenly biased and seems to have fabricated data in one of his reports.
Look. If you're reading slashdot to get an unbiased opinion of the world you live in, you need to have your head examined. I read it to find out when Linus has another baby or what the latest crazy thing that ESR or RMS has said. I believe that for various reasons, a lot of tech journals have very little in the way of ethics, and that software and hardware reviews are often favorablewhen the shouldn't be.
OTOH, I challenge you to pick up Cosmopolitan and find an article taht says "Such-and-such lip moisturiser is crap" or "Most designer fashions aren't worth the extra money." Why? Partly ad revenues, and partly that plugging products sells magazines, and panning them doesn't. Do you think that car magazines would sell vey well if they had "2002: A mediocre year for cars" splashed on the front cover?
The tech magazine boom has opened up a lot of information to the average reader, but this has come at a price. We all have to evaluate the truthfulness or slant of what we read. This isn't a new problem, in fact it's a very old problem Now there's just more of it.
It has been pointed out that the GPL won't protect your program from beiing modified in such a way that makes the program unsafe.
However, the GPL requires the author to include the source of the program when distributing his code, which makes it much easier to determine what has been done to the code if it is changed and redistributed.
The CarterCopter is using a turbocharged auto engine. Many people would like to see auto engine technology into aircraft, but so far this has never gotten past the experimental stage. Currently aicraft engines are remarkably crude designs (somewhat heavy, inefficient, low power), but exceedingly reliable. Engine failures are rare events; which is good since engine failures are almost always minor disasters.
There was one serious attempt by Porsche that was a dismal failure. It is doubtful that this powerplant will be viewed as reliable enough by the FAA for aviation use anytime soon.
Why, why why must all slashdot headlines be exaggerations? The Higgs Boson was never "discovered" in any sense of the word. There were some indications that it might have been seen, but it wasn't considered beyond statistical doubt. It is therefore incorrect to say the discovery has been questioned. "Higgs Boson evidence questioned" would be a better headline.
Can anyone out there with a good fluid dynamics model run an earthquake simulation on Loch Ness and see what happens?
What happens? I'd say that when someone uses fluid dynamic model to try to see the Loch Ness Monster, they waste an inordinate amount of time, that's what happens.
Although there is reason to be skeptical, the story isn't as implausible as it might seem.
There is a lot of evidence for failures being covered up, and it was a lot easier to keep a secret in the Soviet Union than the rest of the world.
According to the story I read, the Vladamir Ilyushun had a semi successful launch the day before Gagrin, but he crashed landed in China and languished there as an "honored guest" in a hospital for a year.
It would be an awkward situation for the Russian government to admit the Gagrin wasn't really the first man in space, so it's not totally outrageous. Besides, it's a bit increadible that the Russian space program never had any fatal accidents in its early days.
OTOH, propaganda comes from both sides, so it could all be a fabrication.
People have been talking about multicasting for a long time . I first heard about mbone in 1994 but I have yet to see it in widespread use.
Multicasting made sense when you looked at the internet, and the amount of high bandwidth content was very limited, but the user base was growing very rapidly.However, content grew at a rate that was probably not forseen. In order for multicasting to make sense, you have to assume that many people downstream of the signal are watching the exact same content exactly in sync (presumably live content) in the same format.
With a few notable exceptions (The Victoria Secret Fashion Shows come to mind) this situation doesn't come up that often. So although it's an attractive idea, neither the ISP's not the content providers have pushed very hard for it, so essentially nothing has happened.
One possible use content that is provided by one person with relativly low bandwidth that can reach many people. This comes at a cost of convienience; you can't provide information "on demand," but only in pseudo-broadcast style. Additionally, ISPs generally don't approve of "little people" providing content to many many people. They want to reserve that ability for those who are willing to pay (a lot) for it.
I'd be surprised if multicasting ever comes into very wide use; since the situations that it's useful under are limited, and the econmoic incentives to get it going don't seem that strong to me. OTOH, the trend in online advertising advertising has been to make it more like television, so maybe a shift is in the works.
What happened to the really funny Slashdot stuff, like when Rob said that he had been getting a lot of mail that Slashdot was way too narrow, and made all of the tables about 800 characters wide.
Now *that* was funny, especially all of the apoplectic responders.
I wonder how that court would have ruled if the Nuremburg files had threatened commerciall interests, rather than the lives of doctors.
Funny how a company can call all sorts of information "trade secrets" (e.g. DeCSS) and prevent people from posting the information, but abortion doctors can't consider their names and home addresses private.
It seems to me that since the protocol is called ssh in the RFC:
http://www.free.lp.se/fish/rfc.txt, which seems to predate his application for a trademark, he doesn't have a a valid claim.
In this RFC, the name of the protocol is ssh. It would be a violation of the RFC to call it anything else, and it would lead to confusion.
Here I am, typing into a < TEXTAREA > , a widget so abhominably broken, it only understands the barest rudiments of text editing (hit key, print letter), and they're worried about broken or
missing < A > tags.
How the textarea works is really nothing the w3c can have anything to say about, as long as text can get entered. According to the abstract: This document explains some common mistakes in user agents due to incorrect or incomplete implementation of specifications, and suggests remedies. If it's not in the spec, they didn't address it, because it's not their business.
Labor unions are not usually considered a trust ( in the anti-trust sense), so if they are legal, I don't see why they shouldn't exist. However, the "closed shop," where only union workers are allowed at a particular company is something I object to, at least in my line of work. I want to be able to negotiate my terms of work, without anyone else having anything to say about it.
What pathetic MTA were they using?
2 million messages brings 8 mail servers to their knees?
When BUGTRAQ was on netspace we had it running through zmailer, and we once got out 1.2 million mail messages in one day with a P133 with 128 megs of RAM.
When did everyone start thinking that comp sci was all about object orient programing? Object oriented programing has more to do with software engineering and really not much to do with computer science.
I suppose it's futile to make this argument nowadays; hardly anyone recognises the difference anymore.
Binaries are nice to see what stage some sort of alpha software is at. However, the biggest obstacle for me to download and look at source code is all of the additional libraries you need.
It's happen at least 4 times to me where I've downloaded CVS source to play around and spent hours trying to get the thing to work because it requires the CVS versions of libraries, and often this isn't documented.What's even more frustrating is that most of these programs don't really need the new features that badly.
I think that most of the people who would be able to make a useful contribution to a project will have very little trouble downloading and installing source. However, a lot of these people won't have the latest CVS version of gnome-foobar.
I can very well pass judgement on what I saw, and I saw that however good the story was, the visual qualities of the movie were distracting. I'll probably give it another chance, but so far, I think it stinks, and I'll probably just go read the book.
I only saw a bit of the middle (some banquet scene).
I was not impressed with what I saw. Bad costumes, bush-league acting, banal dialog, and amaturish cinematography.
Maybe it was just a poor scene, but I didn't stick around and wait to see if it got worse.
Are sci-fi junkies really so un discerning? Ealier that evening I saw some of a really terrible Voyager episode about renegade holograms. I realize that Voyager isn't the best thing to come out of the Star Trek genre, but the plot of the episode was so idiotic it was insulting. It's a shame. There's a lot of sci-fi material out there, and so little of it is worth watching.
Slashdot Mirror
Where's the verb in this sentence?
A) GaAs has a crumby native oxide
B) there isn't a very good or simple complimentary process for GaAs. This is murder for power disapation, which is really the main problem in high speed devices.
Yes, people are boring. Your high school science teacher isn't going to become the next Karl Marx just by sitting in front of a connected computer. The internet has revolutionized the communication between "fringe" groups. Commercial interests have benefitted as well, but where else can you find This sort of thing. TV? Radio? The New York Times? Your local library?
Take the quoted statistic, that 50% of traffic is from four companies. Compare this wih TV, movies and music and see who's doing better. I'd bet that even most fringe oriented people spend a lot of time viewing mundane, commercialized content (checking weather, buying books, reading news). I'm sure that doesn't make them bad people.
Anyone who thought about it would have realized it even back in that day. Even without commercial content, there would be lots of inane, mainstream garbage. The internet is for everyone , even capitalist, commercial oriented, boring people. Unfortunately, there are a lot of them.
This argument makes no sense, and makes me believe it was written by a shill. Although circumstances can cause a piece of media to become worthless, the causes are mostly out of the distributors control. What we are talking about is equipment manufacturers and media conglomerates (who are often one and the same) _colluding_ to control the distribution of media.
Taken to the extreme ,if I bought a DVD and found that I could only sell the DVD to people who lived within 5 miles of me due to the whims of the DVD consortium, this would almost certainly limit the market which I could sell it, and be an undefendible practice. The author might have tried to make the argument that since DVD regions are large, the market is not severely limted by region encoding, but they chose not to. Even this argument is not really supported by the facts, since there is clearly an nonzero demand for imported DVDs due to pricing descrepencies between the different regions.
The author of this text is presenting the view that the intent of the distributor doesn't matter, which may or may not be the case with regard to copyright law, but is not true on the face of it. Whether DVD encoding is illegally limiting first sale doctrine is something needs to be worked out by looking closely at the law and certainly isn't an argument that is "without merit"
Those nasty tech journals have dragged the precious name of journalism through the mud.
Despite the fact that that inane sock puppets get segments on morning news shows.
Despite the fact that this is America's second favorite newspaper.
Despite the fact that this paper has any chance of gaining respectability, and has lost circulation because the mainstream media now covers what it's been covering for years.
Despite the fact that this guy is let anywhere near a camera, even though he is blatenly biased and seems to have fabricated data in one of his reports.
Look. If you're reading slashdot to get an unbiased opinion of the world you live in, you need to have your head examined. I read it to find out when Linus has another baby or what the latest crazy thing that ESR or RMS has said. I believe that for various reasons, a lot of tech journals have very little in the way of ethics, and that software and hardware reviews are often favorablewhen the shouldn't be.
OTOH, I challenge you to pick up Cosmopolitan and find an article taht says "Such-and-such lip moisturiser is crap" or "Most designer fashions aren't worth the extra money." Why? Partly ad revenues, and partly that plugging products sells magazines, and panning them doesn't. Do you think that car magazines would sell vey well if they had "2002: A mediocre year for cars" splashed on the front cover?
The tech magazine boom has opened up a lot of information to the average reader, but this has come at a price. We all have to evaluate the truthfulness or slant of what we read. This isn't a new problem, in fact it's a very old problem Now there's just more of it.
It has been pointed out that the GPL won't protect your program from beiing modified in such a way that makes the program unsafe.
However, the GPL requires the author to include the source of the program when distributing his code, which makes it much easier to determine what has been done to the code if it is changed and redistributed.
The CarterCopter is using a turbocharged auto engine. Many people would like to see auto engine technology into aircraft, but so far this has never gotten past the experimental stage. Currently aicraft engines are remarkably crude designs (somewhat heavy, inefficient, low power), but exceedingly reliable. Engine failures are rare events; which is good since engine failures are almost always minor disasters.
There was one serious attempt by Porsche that was a dismal failure. It is doubtful that this powerplant will be viewed as reliable enough by the FAA for aviation use anytime soon.
Why, why why must all slashdot headlines be exaggerations? The Higgs Boson was never "discovered" in any sense of the word. There were some indications that it might have been seen, but it wasn't considered beyond statistical doubt. It is therefore incorrect to say the discovery has been questioned. "Higgs Boson evidence questioned" would be a better headline.
What happens? I'd say that when someone uses fluid dynamic model to try to see the Loch Ness Monster, they waste an inordinate amount of time, that's what happens.
Although there is reason to be skeptical, the story isn't as implausible as it might seem.
There is a lot of evidence for failures being covered up, and it was a lot easier to keep a secret in the Soviet Union than the rest of the world.
According to the story I read, the Vladamir Ilyushun had a semi successful launch the day before Gagrin, but he crashed landed in China and languished there as an "honored guest" in a hospital for a year.
It would be an awkward situation for the Russian government to admit the Gagrin wasn't really the first man in space, so it's not totally outrageous. Besides, it's a bit increadible that the Russian space program never had any fatal accidents in its early days.
OTOH, propaganda comes from both sides, so it could all be a fabrication.
People have been talking about multicasting for a long time . I first heard about mbone in 1994 but I have yet to see it in widespread use.
Multicasting made sense when you looked at the internet, and the amount of high bandwidth content was very limited, but the user base was growing very rapidly.However, content grew at a rate that was probably not forseen. In order for multicasting to make sense, you have to assume that many people downstream of the signal are watching the exact same content exactly in sync (presumably live content) in the same format.
With a few notable exceptions (The Victoria Secret Fashion Shows come to mind) this situation doesn't come up that often. So although it's an attractive idea, neither the ISP's not the content providers have pushed very hard for it, so essentially nothing has happened.
One possible use content that is provided by one person with relativly low bandwidth that can reach many people. This comes at a cost of convienience; you can't provide information "on demand," but only in pseudo-broadcast style. Additionally, ISPs generally don't approve of "little people" providing content to many many people. They want to reserve that ability for those who are willing to pay (a lot) for it.
I'd be surprised if multicasting ever comes into very wide use; since the situations that it's useful under are limited, and the econmoic incentives to get it going don't seem that strong to me. OTOH, the trend in online advertising advertising has been to make it more like television, so maybe a shift is in the works.
Now that there are many geeks who had high paying jobs that are now laid off, they may have more time to work on free software projects.
What happened to the really funny Slashdot stuff, like when Rob said that he had been getting a lot of mail that Slashdot was way too narrow, and made all of the tables about 800 characters wide.
Now *that* was funny, especially all of the apoplectic responders.
How about Betamax, Dvorak and Tessla while you're at it?
I wonder how that court would have ruled if the Nuremburg files had threatened commerciall interests, rather than the lives of doctors.
Funny how a company can call all sorts of information "trade secrets" (e.g. DeCSS) and prevent people from posting the information, but abortion doctors can't consider their names and home addresses private.
It seems to me that since the protocol is called ssh in the RFC:
http://www.free.lp.se/fish/rfc.txt, which seems to predate his application for a trademark, he doesn't have a a valid claim.
In this RFC, the name of the protocol is ssh. It would be a violation of the RFC to call it anything else, and it would lead to confusion.
How the textarea works is really nothing the w3c can have anything to say about, as long as text can get entered. According to the abstract:
This document explains some common mistakes in user agents due to incorrect or incomplete implementation of specifications, and suggests remedies.
If it's not in the spec, they didn't address it, because it's not their business.
Usually 757s are not considered "jumbo jets".
This is a title reserved usually for 747s.
Labor unions are not usually considered a trust ( in the anti-trust sense), so if they are legal, I don't see why they shouldn't exist. However, the "closed shop," where only union workers are allowed at a particular company is something I object to, at least in my line of work. I want to be able to negotiate my terms of work, without anyone else having anything to say about it.
What pathetic MTA were they using? 2 million messages brings 8 mail servers to their knees? When BUGTRAQ was on netspace we had it running through zmailer, and we once got out 1.2 million mail messages in one day with a P133 with 128 megs of RAM.
When did everyone start thinking that comp sci was all about object orient programing? Object oriented programing has more to do with software engineering and really not much to do with computer science.
I suppose it's futile to make this argument nowadays; hardly anyone recognises the difference anymore.
Binaries are nice to see what stage some sort of alpha software is at. However, the biggest obstacle for me to download and look at source code is all of the additional libraries you need.
It's happen at least 4 times to me where I've downloaded CVS source to play around and spent hours trying to get the thing to work because it requires the CVS versions of libraries, and often this isn't documented.What's even more frustrating is that most of these programs don't really need the new features that badly.
I think that most of the people who would be able to make a useful contribution to a project will have very little trouble downloading and installing source. However, a lot of these people won't have the latest CVS version of gnome-foobar.
I always liked stret cars, but there are a lot of people who don't. Here's an anti light rail page that I found amusing:
http://www.railroadingamerica.com/
I can very well pass judgement on what I saw, and I saw that however good the story was, the visual qualities of the movie were distracting. I'll probably give it another chance, but so far, I think it stinks, and I'll probably just go read the book.
I was not impressed with what I saw. Bad costumes, bush-league acting, banal dialog, and amaturish cinematography. Maybe it was just a poor scene, but I didn't stick around and wait to see if it got worse.
Are sci-fi junkies really so un discerning? Ealier that evening I saw some of a really terrible Voyager episode about renegade holograms. I realize that Voyager isn't the best thing to come out of the Star Trek genre, but the plot of the episode was so idiotic it was insulting. It's a shame. There's a lot of sci-fi material out there, and so little of it is worth watching.