Number one can't be addressed within kernel community in any way. No point to even try. It should be addressed within our whole culture, by revising our notion of gender roles. Linus works with adults. He can do nothing to counteract gender imbalance that was created via indoctrination that starts at early childhood.
No, Linux kernel doesn't work as OS framework. It's a kernel. Linux OSes never had a proper OS framework, many things can't be done in distro-agnostic way currently. systemd can fix it. kernel can't. Do not suggest bloating the kernel further by dumping this functionality on it, Linus will have none of it! Dealing with Kay Sievers and Lennart Poettering is lesser evil for him:P
systemd is modular too, if you consider it to be an OS framework. For example, it can either use its native network management capabilities, which are useful in containers, or use something like connman, network-manager or arch's netctl.
Once again it's irrelevant because there's a lot of useless software running already, some even more useless than journald too. I see no need to single out journald like that. And you failed to show that it's in any way different than coreutils. Such criticism of systemd is bullshit, period. You can prove that anything does too many things and does them poorly by changing your definition of 'things' and 'poorly'.
When I dropped openrc parallel booting was disabled there by default and not recommended to use due to bugs, no idea whether it changed now. I had trouble figuring out how to improve parallelism, like to ensure that dhcp isn't waited by some unrelated boot step. With systemd I used their way to generate svgs graphs of boot process that show what runs in parallel with what and when.
Binary logging is irrelevant because you can still use standard logging daemon. Otherwise systemd violates Unix philosophy no more than GNU coreutils or busybox.
It's a lot better than openrc, which is needlessly slow due to being written in bash and fails at running tasks that don't depend on each other in parallel. I've converted both my desktop and laptop and now more concerned with keeping openrc away from Gentoo.
Only their fear prevents them from deeply understanding it. They already decided that it's beyond them so they'll unconsciously sabotage their efforts to understand it. Yet proper understanding of underlying logic and proofs is more efficient than mechanical memorization, thus people with deep understanding have an easier time getting the job done.
Any sort of drawing on the screen requires math. Even such simple task as drawing a circle is daunting without knowledge of trigonometry and algebra. In general, any sort of useful software is a mathematical model of some process.
Some people fear math too much. Yes, it requires work to master, but it can be done by anyone. I don't believe that there is such thing as 'brilliance'. People just have different priorities and learn different things. As far as things like programming are concerned learning underlying theory(in this case mathematics) will save you time, because without it you'll end up reinventing things that were already discovered in middle ages.
No they aren't. Using word 'property' in this case is misnomer. Patent a temporary state granted monopoly. You can't steal a monopoly. Only encroach on it.
MIDI encodes music in terms of instruments. All other mainstream sound formats encode sound waves, but there's no good way to detect instruments in sound waves. Only MIDI can be actually practical if you want something instrument-aware.
Let's just say extension of type system is the only aspect of OOP I took as something significant and rejected everything else as either individual style preferences or intellectual masturbation.
Design patterns themselves transcend language features. That was my only point here. Mixing those two is a mistake. Using a language feature doesn't automatically make you proficient in using design pattern it's associated with. It's merely a syntactic sugar. And many language features serve different design patterns. And those patterns are implemented with different features in different languages.
There's no such thing as 'OOP-oriented design'. Just some common design (anti-)patterns that people associate with object-oriented language features. Object-orientation is nothing more and nothing less than the capability to extend the type system. Looking for deeper philosophy in it is a waste of time.
Btw, in reality procedural and object oriented are just two different views and controls on the exact same datastructures and process-flows.
'Object oriented' just means that you can extend the type system of the language which is completely orthogonal to procedural programming. It doesn't matter if you use only base types in your sub-routines, or add some custom types made with oop. So those approaches aren't even mutually exclusive. Just some common language constructs, which some languages implement and some don't.
Just do another Great Schism then. The more warring religious factions are around the sooner all people will realize that religions are just childish wishful thinking and abandon them fully.
Notice how proportion of men grows with target age category. I'd say it reflects some widespread notion of gender roles. Like only women should educate kiddies. I bet kindergarten/high school teacher doesn't get paid as well as college professor either..
But purely theoretic discipline shouldn't include word 'computer' since it's actual physical device. Design of actual physical devices is domain of engineering. That's why I think it's awkward. Theoretical part is covered by disciplines like informatics, cybernetics and algorithmic complexity theory. I'm not sure if we even need an umbrella term for them. Many other disciplines are used in design of computing devices, those that I named appeared in response to demands of design of computing devices historically, there's nothing else special about them.
Entire field is a bit young and I always thought that 'computer science' is a bit awkward term. But IME everyone agrees that it's study of algorithms and their implementation in computing devices. It's basically applied math.
Among those you named only chess can be considered a proper mind only game. And if even Chess is only under occasional consideration, computer games are right out. None of them is even close to matching Chess as a proper sport. Will need centuries for this to happen.
Since Sony isn't a part of the government, it can't really demand destruction of those documents. It can merely request, which is basically the same as 'politely ask to'. It can also note that disseminating parties may be liable for any damages to Sony that could arise. They need to prove damages though, and there's a lot of news sources involved. Will they do a reverse class-action suit or something?:P
Slashdot Mirror
Number one can't be addressed within kernel community in any way. No point to even try. It should be addressed within our whole culture, by revising our notion of gender roles. Linus works with adults. He can do nothing to counteract gender imbalance that was created via indoctrination that starts at early childhood.
No, Linux kernel doesn't work as OS framework. It's a kernel. Linux OSes never had a proper OS framework, many things can't be done in distro-agnostic way currently. systemd can fix it. kernel can't. Do not suggest bloating the kernel further by dumping this functionality on it, Linus will have none of it! Dealing with Kay Sievers and Lennart Poettering is lesser evil for him :P
systemd is modular too, if you consider it to be an OS framework. For example, it can either use its native network management capabilities, which are useful in containers, or use something like connman, network-manager or arch's netctl.
Once again it's irrelevant because there's a lot of useless software running already, some even more useless than journald too. I see no need to single out journald like that. And you failed to show that it's in any way different than coreutils. Such criticism of systemd is bullshit, period. You can prove that anything does too many things and does them poorly by changing your definition of 'things' and 'poorly'.
When I dropped openrc parallel booting was disabled there by default and not recommended to use due to bugs, no idea whether it changed now. I had trouble figuring out how to improve parallelism, like to ensure that dhcp isn't waited by some unrelated boot step. With systemd I used their way to generate svgs graphs of boot process that show what runs in parallel with what and when.
Binary logging is irrelevant because you can still use standard logging daemon. Otherwise systemd violates Unix philosophy no more than GNU coreutils or busybox.
It's a lot better than openrc, which is needlessly slow due to being written in bash and fails at running tasks that don't depend on each other in parallel. I've converted both my desktop and laptop and now more concerned with keeping openrc away from Gentoo.
Only their fear prevents them from deeply understanding it. They already decided that it's beyond them so they'll unconsciously sabotage their efforts to understand it. Yet proper understanding of underlying logic and proofs is more efficient than mechanical memorization, thus people with deep understanding have an easier time getting the job done.
Any sort of drawing on the screen requires math. Even such simple task as drawing a circle is daunting without knowledge of trigonometry and algebra. In general, any sort of useful software is a mathematical model of some process.
Some people fear math too much. Yes, it requires work to master, but it can be done by anyone. I don't believe that there is such thing as 'brilliance'. People just have different priorities and learn different things. As far as things like programming are concerned learning underlying theory(in this case mathematics) will save you time, because without it you'll end up reinventing things that were already discovered in middle ages.
No they aren't. Using word 'property' in this case is misnomer. Patent a temporary state granted monopoly. You can't steal a monopoly. Only encroach on it.
Like chrony.
I wouldn't recommend openntpd because it isn't an implementation of ntp
MIDI encodes music in terms of instruments. All other mainstream sound formats encode sound waves, but there's no good way to detect instruments in sound waves. Only MIDI can be actually practical if you want something instrument-aware.
Let's just say extension of type system is the only aspect of OOP I took as something significant and rejected everything else as either individual style preferences or intellectual masturbation.
Design patterns themselves transcend language features. That was my only point here. Mixing those two is a mistake. Using a language feature doesn't automatically make you proficient in using design pattern it's associated with. It's merely a syntactic sugar. And many language features serve different design patterns. And those patterns are implemented with different features in different languages.
There's no such thing as 'OOP-oriented design'. Just some common design (anti-)patterns that people associate with object-oriented language features. Object-orientation is nothing more and nothing less than the capability to extend the type system. Looking for deeper philosophy in it is a waste of time.
Don't forget C# too. Just try to write a self-contained program in it that doesn't involve at least 1 class :P
Btw, in reality procedural and object oriented are just two different views and controls on the exact same datastructures and process-flows.
'Object oriented' just means that you can extend the type system of the language which is completely orthogonal to procedural programming. It doesn't matter if you use only base types in your sub-routines, or add some custom types made with oop. So those approaches aren't even mutually exclusive. Just some common language constructs, which some languages implement and some don't.
Just do another Great Schism then. The more warring religious factions are around the sooner all people will realize that religions are just childish wishful thinking and abandon them fully.
Notice how proportion of men grows with target age category. I'd say it reflects some widespread notion of gender roles. Like only women should educate kiddies. I bet kindergarten/high school teacher doesn't get paid as well as college professor either..
But purely theoretic discipline shouldn't include word 'computer' since it's actual physical device. Design of actual physical devices is domain of engineering. That's why I think it's awkward. Theoretical part is covered by disciplines like informatics, cybernetics and algorithmic complexity theory. I'm not sure if we even need an umbrella term for them. Many other disciplines are used in design of computing devices, those that I named appeared in response to demands of design of computing devices historically, there's nothing else special about them.
Entire field is a bit young and I always thought that 'computer science' is a bit awkward term. But IME everyone agrees that it's study of algorithms and their implementation in computing devices. It's basically applied math.
Not essential anymore. All major game engines tend to have opengl codepaths and even full linux ports.
Among those you named only chess can be considered a proper mind only game. And if even Chess is only under occasional consideration, computer games are right out. None of them is even close to matching Chess as a proper sport. Will need centuries for this to happen.
Since Sony isn't a part of the government, it can't really demand destruction of those documents. It can merely request, which is basically the same as 'politely ask to'. It can also note that disseminating parties may be liable for any damages to Sony that could arise. They need to prove damages though, and there's a lot of news sources involved. Will they do a reverse class-action suit or something? :P