Clearly this system is in no way "ultimate" in terms of price/performance, reliability, or open-ness of software and hardware.
It would be educational to see what system LinuxHardware could come up with with a $1000 spending cap, and a requirement that it reach a 60-day uptime under constant use.
Companies will continue to develop products that nobody needs nor wants. They'll all go behind schedule and over budget. Most of the projects will be mercy-killed before they even start to work. The few that make it to the store shelves will be ultra-niche items that cost 4x more than anyone would even dream of paying for them.
The companies that lose millions on these products will just scratch their heads, blame the economy, and start designing all over again.
We have a problem. The nature of business is to be competitive. Once a company gets a certain size it is expected to be socialistic instead of capitalistic?
No. Once a company gets to be anti-competitive, they are no longer serving the public good (which is in theory why we the people allow companies to exist to begin with). No one is talking about being capitalistic or socialistic. The Microsoft case (and other antitrust cases) is about a company going beyond the point where its existance is a benefit to the people.
I've been looking for a NEC LaVie MX for what seems like forever. I've seen one of these in action, and they're really cool. Underpowered by a power-user's standpoint, but it makes up for it in weight (1.39kg), battery life (11 hours claimed!!), and size (1.16 in thick).
The only place it seems I can order one from is dynamism, but they are SOOOO expensive there $2500!
So my point is, I'd love an answer to this "Ask Slashdot"!
What's this crap about sound not working? I've had sound working on my box since... jeez... '97 or '98.. I've never touched ALSA (and indeed am skeptical of what good it is).
Any ALSA people here who can explain what it buys you over the standard kernel tree?
Before the Internet, most people were dumb, passive consumers. Let me just buy things and watch TV, and let others produces things, let others make decisions, let others tell me what my opinions are.
The Internet hasn't changed this. It's turned into Just Another Medium through which we dummies can be told what to wear, what soft drink is cool, who to vote for, who to fuck, and consume, consume, consume!
Today, like years ago, we are told that the masses are meant to be all-consuming pac-men, and the few are meant to produce, lead, and make decisions.
The Internet is not going to bring about a global outpouring of creativity and information sharing, simply because most people can't be bothered to come up with an original thought, much less published writing or software. How many people post to/. as opposed to how many who read it? I bet I can take a pretty accurate stab at the ratio, and I bet it's about the same with most "open forums" on the net. I bet it's the about same with USENET too.
You know, I've never looked at ICANN's rules until I browsed that link you just posted. The case seems pretty straightforward to me. A cyber-squatter got squashed.
Paragraph 4(c), which the "respondant" can use to defend the domain name, seems pretty easy to satisfy:
(i) before any notice to you of the dispute, your use of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or
(ii) you (as an individual, business or other organization) have been commonly known by the domain name, even if you have acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or
(iii) you are making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue.
Note that this is a logical-OR. If you can claim any of the above you get to keep your domain. This guy didn't fall under any of the categories.
I must admit though, I don't like the terms "bona fide" or "legitimate" in the rules. It would be nice if they could define what a "bona fide offering of goods" is or what "legitimate noncommercial use" means. Maybe they do in another portion of the rules--I didn't read that far:-)
It is not inconceivable that in the future, the academia may come under the control of rich corporations manipulating research for their own selfish ends.
It already has! In fact, I graduated from Pepsi University several years ago. Sure, it wasn't actually called "Pepsi University" but I challenge anyone to find a Coke vending machine anywhere on campus.
Why do professors use different books for each semester of classes? Does the field of calculus really go through revolutionary changes every six months, enough to warrant selecting a whole new book to teach from? Of course not, but if you used the same book year after year, the publishers (who apparently own the professors) wouldn't be able to continuously rake students over the coals for new $100 textbooks.
I have found that autoconf has problems when you are cross-compiling. If you are or plan to cross-compile your project, stay far away from autoconf.
A few macros (particularly AC_TRY_RUN, and anything that calls it) compile and run a program on the host to test for functionality. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell autoconf that you aren't going to be able to run the compiled program, because it's for your target platform.
Many of the AC_FUNC_ macros simply DIE when running in a cross-compiling environment. For example, let's cross-compile the ncftp package. The configure.in uses the AC_FUNC_SETPGRP macro. Running autoconf results in:
configure.in:146: warning: AC_TRY_RUN called without default to allow cross compiling
That's right. This macro (defined elsewhere in the autoconf package) uses AC_TRY_RUN without a default clause. So instead of recovering nicely, the configure script dies when it tries to do this test. The only way to get around this is to modify/usr/share/autoconf/acspecific.m4 or not do the test!
Actually, I kind of like the idea of having a simpler, SMALLER subset of OpenGL.
1. Implementors would be cutting their own throats by dropping legacy support. Not to mention they would fail conformance.
2. Implementors can now point to a small subset of the API and say "this must be done the best/fastest" because future applications will be migrating toward it. Currently, implementors have to look and see what parts of OpenGL various applications are using, and pick and choose which subsets of the API to optimize.
3. Legacy OpenGL has a lot of CRAP in it. Crap that is useful from an academic perspective, but not heavily used in many real apps. (Selection and TexGen come to mind).
4. Immediate-mode/display lists/vertex arrays. Do you need three different ways to specify your scene? Chop out everything but vertex arrays and call it OpenGL Pure. Fewer code paths mean there are fewer ways implementors can screw up their drivers.
API's can't be faster or slower. They're just interfaces. The "speed" of your graphics depends on the driver implementation and bus speed (for tris/sec) and the graphics hardware underneath (for texels/sec).
As for how easy one is to program, well, at this point anyone who knows one API and has a good grasp on 3D fundamentals can probably pick up another API in under a week. Immediate-mode 3D APIs aren't really that different anymore.
I believe it is at least customary in civilized parts of the world to give someone a fair trial and convict them, before punishing them for a crime. Or does this not apply for "people you really really really don't like"?
From reading the first bunch of posts here, one would get the impression that leading an Open-Source project is miserable work. In case anyone cares, I'd like to submit a success story:-)
A while back I posted a little code on the net. It was a tiny driver for my Matrox Marvel video capture card. I figured there might be SOMEONE out there who'd find it useful. Well, people grabbed it, started working with it (I only have one video capture card, so there were apparently problems on other people's sysems) and improving it. We set up a CVS server and a mailing list and more people got involved.
After a while, I got kind of tired of the project. The driver has worked for me since day one, and I really didn't have much motivation to do any more coding or "lead" the project. Besides, several people that joined the project knew more about the code than me, so I figured I might as well quietly step away. The project's been going great and continues to grow. I still read the mailing list, but I haven't committed code in months.
I guess the moral of the story is: There may come a time where you are tired of heading up a project, and the best thing to do is to let go of it, and leave it to the more capable (and more enthusiastic) people on the mailing list.
It's EASY to brainwash people. Marketers know this and stick to the established formulas. Top-40 is an established format. A large demographic has been told they like this kind of music, so that's what sells! A large enough demographic has been told they like "classic rock", rap, or country, and these markets sell, too. It's easy because the conditioning is already in place.
Marketers aren't stupid, just not very creative or adventurous. I'd be willing to bet if you had a large enough marketing and advertising campain, you could get people to like (and buy) anything.
It still doesn't mean these people have any taste, which I believe was the point of the parent of this thread. No one can really quantify taste.
It's nice to see that a new buzzword has emerged to allow people to gloss-over topics they don't get, or aren't willing to desribe in detail. The uses are infinite:
WSJ: Microsoft's new product uses genetic algorithms to make Windows XP easy to use!
Programmer: Well, we actually used several perl and php scripts to talk to MySQL to sort and manage user data.
Marketing document: Our product uses genetic algorithms to sort and manage user data.
Boss: So how does this program work?
Me: Well, I take input from the user, run it through a genetic algorithm and the output is what is expected.
What is this "C/C++" language I keep hearing about? I've never worked with it. Is it similar to C or is it like C++? Where is the specification for "C/C++"? Where can I find more information about this unknown language?
For long battery life, you might do a Google search for the NEC LaVie. NEC claims 11 hours battery life, which is the longest battery life I've seen in a Laptop.
Kinda low on the performance side, but the battery life more than makes up for it!
I just don't know where to get one in the USA!! It seems they are only sold in Japan, and importing them is EXPENSIVE!
I suppose if you can afford this, you can afford the massive amount of paint it will spray. I'm not sure how effective it would be in a game that is won with stealth.
Unless the thing is quieter than a golf cart and doesn't cruss twigs under its tires, even a beginner would be able to snipe the drivers pretty easily.
As for actually getting to the field, it's more efficient to just pile everyone and all the equipment into a few station wagons for the roads, and then walk onto the field.
On a side note, it was a pleasant surprise to see a story about PAINTBALL of all things appear on slashdot. I thought I was the only geek into the game!:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Clearly this system is in no way "ultimate" in terms of price/performance, reliability, or open-ness of software and hardware.
It would be educational to see what system LinuxHardware could come up with with a $1000 spending cap, and a requirement that it reach a 60-day uptime under constant use.
Anyone care to tell us what LDAP is and who uses it? Or at least what does the acronym stand for?
Companies will continue to develop products that nobody needs nor wants. They'll all go behind schedule and over budget. Most of the projects will be mercy-killed before they even start to work. The few that make it to the store shelves will be ultra-niche items that cost 4x more than anyone would even dream of paying for them.
The companies that lose millions on these products will just scratch their heads, blame the economy, and start designing all over again.
The lucky ones will go out of business.
Nice troll... one of the most convincing ones I've read for a while. Keep it up!
We have a problem. The nature of business is to be competitive. Once a company gets a certain size it is expected to be socialistic instead of capitalistic?
No. Once a company gets to be anti-competitive, they are no longer serving the public good (which is in theory why we the people allow companies to exist to begin with). No one is talking about being capitalistic or socialistic. The Microsoft case (and other antitrust cases) is about a company going beyond the point where its existance is a benefit to the people.
Ooops... looks like I was off by a little, they're actually $3000! Damn...
I've been looking for a NEC LaVie MX for what seems like forever. I've seen one of these in action, and they're really cool. Underpowered by a power-user's standpoint, but it makes up for it in weight (1.39kg), battery life (11 hours claimed!!), and size (1.16 in thick).
The only place it seems I can order one from is dynamism, but they are SOOOO expensive there $2500!
So my point is, I'd love an answer to this "Ask Slashdot"!
What's this crap about sound not working? I've had sound working on my box since... jeez... '97 or '98.. I've never touched ALSA (and indeed am skeptical of what good it is).
Any ALSA people here who can explain what it buys you over the standard kernel tree?
Before the Internet, most people were dumb, passive consumers. Let me just buy things and watch TV, and let others produces things, let others make decisions, let others tell me what my opinions are.
The Internet hasn't changed this. It's turned into Just Another Medium through which we dummies can be told what to wear, what soft drink is cool, who to vote for, who to fuck, and consume, consume, consume!
Today, like years ago, we are told that the masses are meant to be all-consuming pac-men, and the few are meant to produce, lead, and make decisions.
The Internet is not going to bring about a global outpouring of creativity and information sharing, simply because most people can't be bothered to come up with an original thought, much less published writing or software. How many people post to
You know, I've never looked at ICANN's rules until I browsed that link you just posted. The case seems pretty straightforward to me. A cyber-squatter got squashed.
Paragraph 4(c), which the "respondant" can use to defend the domain name, seems pretty easy to satisfy:
(i) before any notice to you of the dispute, your use of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or
(ii) you (as an individual, business or other organization) have been commonly known by the domain name, even if you have acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or
(iii) you are making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue.
Note that this is a logical-OR. If you can claim any of the above you get to keep your domain. This guy didn't fall under any of the categories.
I must admit though, I don't like the terms "bona fide" or "legitimate" in the rules. It would be nice if they could define what a "bona fide offering of goods" is or what "legitimate noncommercial use" means. Maybe they do in another portion of the rules--I didn't read that far
That Sony TV is ridiculous. Who would pay over a grand for a TUBE? Oh wait, it's flat, and it's Sony, so it must be good.
Compare it side-by-side with a similarly priced rear-projection and you'll be able to pretty easily make the decision.
This would be perfect without the hard drive. If the box has network access, why do you need it? It's just an extra component that could fail.
It is not inconceivable that in the future, the academia may come under the control of rich corporations manipulating research for their own selfish ends.
It already has! In fact, I graduated from Pepsi University several years ago. Sure, it wasn't actually called "Pepsi University" but I challenge anyone to find a Coke vending machine anywhere on campus.
Why do professors use different books for each semester of classes? Does the field of calculus really go through revolutionary changes every six months, enough to warrant selecting a whole new book to teach from? Of course not, but if you used the same book year after year, the publishers (who apparently own the professors) wouldn't be able to continuously rake students over the coals for new $100 textbooks.
Ahh I admit my ignorance!
That's what I get for spouting off like that. You're right--config.site is the answer for many of these situations.
I have found that autoconf has problems when you are cross-compiling. If you are or plan to cross-compile your project, stay far away from autoconf.
/usr/share/autoconf/acspecific.m4 or not do the test!
A few macros (particularly AC_TRY_RUN, and anything that calls it) compile and run a program on the host to test for functionality. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell autoconf that you aren't going to be able to run the compiled program, because it's for your target platform.
Many of the AC_FUNC_ macros simply DIE when running in a cross-compiling environment. For example, let's cross-compile the ncftp package. The configure.in uses the AC_FUNC_SETPGRP macro. Running autoconf results in:
configure.in:146: warning: AC_TRY_RUN called without default to allow cross compiling
That's right. This macro (defined elsewhere in the autoconf package) uses AC_TRY_RUN without a default clause. So instead of recovering nicely, the configure script dies when it tries to do this test. The only way to get around this is to modify
Actually, I kind of like the idea of having a simpler, SMALLER subset of OpenGL.
1. Implementors would be cutting their own throats by dropping legacy support. Not to mention they would fail conformance.
2. Implementors can now point to a small subset of the API and say "this must be done the best/fastest" because future applications will be migrating toward it. Currently, implementors have to look and see what parts of OpenGL various applications are using, and pick and choose which subsets of the API to optimize.
3. Legacy OpenGL has a lot of CRAP in it. Crap that is useful from an academic perspective, but not heavily used in many real apps. (Selection and TexGen come to mind).
4. Immediate-mode/display lists/vertex arrays. Do you need three different ways to specify your scene? Chop out everything but vertex arrays and call it OpenGL Pure. Fewer code paths mean there are fewer ways implementors can screw up their drivers.
API's can't be faster or slower. They're just interfaces. The "speed" of your graphics depends on the driver implementation and bus speed (for tris/sec) and the graphics hardware underneath (for texels/sec).
As for how easy one is to program, well, at this point anyone who knows one API and has a good grasp on 3D fundamentals can probably pick up another API in under a week. Immediate-mode 3D APIs aren't really that different anymore.
Yea you go, tough guy. Let's "kill the bastard".
I believe it is at least customary in civilized parts of the world to give someone a fair trial and convict them, before punishing them for a crime. Or does this not apply for "people you really really really don't like"?
From reading the first bunch of posts here, one would get the impression that leading an Open-Source project is miserable work. In case anyone cares, I'd like to submit a success story
A while back I posted a little code on the net. It was a tiny driver for my Matrox Marvel video capture card. I figured there might be SOMEONE out there who'd find it useful. Well, people grabbed it, started working with it (I only have one video capture card, so there were apparently problems on other people's sysems) and improving it. We set up a CVS server and a mailing list and more people got involved.
After a while, I got kind of tired of the project. The driver has worked for me since day one, and I really didn't have much motivation to do any more coding or "lead" the project. Besides, several people that joined the project knew more about the code than me, so I figured I might as well quietly step away. The project's been going great and continues to grow. I still read the mailing list, but I haven't committed code in months.
I guess the moral of the story is: There may come a time where you are tired of heading up a project, and the best thing to do is to let go of it, and leave it to the more capable (and more enthusiastic) people on the mailing list.
Exactly.
It's EASY to brainwash people. Marketers know this and stick to the established formulas. Top-40 is an established format. A large demographic has been told they like this kind of music, so that's what sells! A large enough demographic has been told they like "classic rock", rap, or country, and these markets sell, too. It's easy because the conditioning is already in place.
Marketers aren't stupid, just not very creative or adventurous. I'd be willing to bet if you had a large enough marketing and advertising campain, you could get people to like (and buy) anything.
It still doesn't mean these people have any taste, which I believe was the point of the parent of this thread. No one can really quantify taste.
It's nice to see that a new buzzword has emerged to allow people to gloss-over topics they don't get, or aren't willing to desribe in detail. The uses are infinite:
WSJ: Microsoft's new product uses genetic algorithms to make Windows XP easy to use!
Programmer: Well, we actually used several perl and php scripts to talk to MySQL to sort and manage user data.
Marketing document: Our product uses genetic algorithms to sort and manage user data.
Boss: So how does this program work?
Me: Well, I take input from the user, run it through a genetic algorithm and the output is what is expected.
Boss: Great! Ship it!
It will be written in C/C++.
What is this "C/C++" language I keep hearing about? I've never worked with it. Is it similar to C or is it like C++? Where is the specification for "C/C++"? Where can I find more information about this unknown language?
For long battery life, you might do a Google search for the NEC LaVie. NEC claims 11 hours battery life, which is the longest battery life I've seen in a Laptop.
Kinda low on the performance side, but the battery life more than makes up for it!
I just don't know where to get one in the USA!! It seems they are only sold in Japan, and importing them is EXPENSIVE!
I think the parent poster was objecting to the way the story read more like an advertisement for nvidia than an unbiased news story.
Then again, Slashdot's never claimed to be an un-biased source of information.
But really, he has a point--if I wanted biased hardware news I'd go to Tom's Hardware Guide. Let's keep Slashdot as objective as possible!
I suppose if you can afford this, you can afford the massive amount of paint it will spray. I'm not sure how effective it would be in a game that is won with stealth.
Unless the thing is quieter than a golf cart and doesn't cruss twigs under its tires, even a beginner would be able to snipe the drivers pretty easily.
As for actually getting to the field, it's more efficient to just pile everyone and all the equipment into a few station wagons for the roads, and then walk onto the field.
On a side note, it was a pleasant surprise to see a story about PAINTBALL of all things appear on slashdot. I thought I was the only geek into the game!