Religious fundamentalists do not listen to reason. They have already made up their mind and their conclusion was not deduced via logical reasoning from facts.
BT efnet does a pretty good job of allowing those without a TiVo to view their favorite shows on demand. With a standard cable modem connection, episodes can be downloaded in roughly the time it takes to watch it... of course since bittorrent downloads the video file out of order, it cannot be streamed.
You already can download the last episode of any popular TV show. I downloaded the last Office episode in 10 minutes on my crappy cable modem connection!
You are joking, right? Nautilus is the biggest piece of crap I have ever used on Linux. It is slow, buggy, and lacking in features. Compared to Konqueror, which is faster, less buggy, and loaded with useful features.
The Linksys WRT54GS is cheaper at $75, is more powerful than the aforementioned D-link router, and the WRT54GS runs Linux, so its firmware is opensource and therefore its feature set is easily extended with the main selling points, quality of service and bandwidth shaping, of the more expensive D-link, by using the open source Sveasoft firmware.
I personally own a WRT54G, the older model with a slower CPU and less RAM, and I also bought the newer WRT54GS. The WRT54GS is the end all be all of low-cost routers/wireless access points/wireless bridges. I use my WRT54G as an ethernet to wireless bridge in my theater room so that my Xbox can stream movies wirelessly from my file server in my computer room. My computer room as a WRT54GS running as a wireless access point and as a gateway/firewall between my home LAN and the Internet.
In conclusion, it is inexpensive and easy to get your hands on a WRT54GS, installing the Sveasoft firmware is extremely easy... it is like a standard firmware upgrade which router users should already be familiar with due to security updates, and the resultant feature set and performance is to die for. If you are buying a router for your home or even (very) small business, why would you waste your money on anything else?
So the install from a booted live CD would be graphical?
The other interesting development on live CDs is to be able to run them on MS Windows without rebooting via a copy of the free QEMU PC emulator also on the CD and activated automatically via Windows CD automount. Add that and the ability to easily save desktop configuration data to hard disk or CD (yet another live CD development), along with a merged KDE/Gnome (K)Ubuntu ISO and it would be allot easier to get people to start using Linux.
I guess other interesting live CD features would be to scan an existing Windows install for configuration data, so that instant message and email clients could be automatically configured... and web browser bookmarks automatically imported. Going further, possibly have Wine setup to use the DLLs and apps on the Windows partition and automatically list Windows apps in the applications menu of the live CD. All to blur the boundary between where the user is now and where they will be once they completely convert to Linux.
I am personally writing this from the Live CD of Kubuntu 5.04, as I have Fedora Core 3 still installed on my hard disk. If I like it after a few weeks, then I will do a real install.
How could this even be considered to be an enforceable restriction? It is hard enough to catch people that break the GPL even when they distribute binaries derived from GPL code. Services do not need to advertise the code that they use in any way.
Well, I don't like how KDE is a second class citizen on Fedora. On Kubuntu it is treated like a first class citizen. I have the same gripe about apt on Fedora, which was there long before yum, yet for whatever reason they are trying to cram yum down my throat. With Kubuntu, I get first-class KDE and apt, by default.
Fedora is still pretty nice though. The boot process is nice and clean, things are pretty secure with a default install, and a sane list of apps are installed as opposed to a bunch of duplicate apps.
I think that MEPIS has a better installer because its Live CD and installer CD are one in the same. So you have a nice userfriendly graphical installer that walks you through the process, at the same exact time you can play a video game, chat, or browse the web with all of the apps on the Live CD. MEPIS is exactly how (K)Ubuntu should be doing their Live CD and installer CD. Ontop of that, they should also merge the Ubuntu and Kubuntu CDs into one. That way you would have one Live CD, that could change between Gnome or KDE and could also graphically install (K)Ubuntu.
The problem with this is that it prevents BitTorrent from sharing server load between hosting Ubuntu ISOs and Kubuntu ISOs. However, since the differences are all due to a few key packages, the core of (K)Ubuntu can be shared, which is a good thing.
Fedora and (K)Ubuntu are two free community based desktop oriented distros that actually do a good job of being desktop operating systems. Everybody is all excited about (K)Ubuntu because it is based on Debian, yet includes very recent packages, which means that you get all of the Debian goodness along with cutting edge packages, an easy install, and a userfriendly desktop.
I have been on Fedora for a few years now, but I am planning on switching to Kubuntu... mainly because Gnome has been driving me crazy. It used to be slow and buggy, but now it is just plain buggy.
I have been using X.org on Fedora for what seems like half a year now. I haven't noticed any difference in performance. The only thing that i have noticed is that it is less buggy, has a few more features, and the names of various configuration files and directories are different, though the formats of these files and directories are the same.
Considering that it started out as a simple fork of XFree86, you shouldn't expect a big difference between the two.
Betamax/VHS, USB/Firewire are bad analogies because they are open standards that can be hacked to heaven and back without legal ramifications. Hacking Apple's DRM on the other hand, for sake of interoperability, has ramifications due to the DMCA.
Even if the DMCA technically allows exceptions for circumventing copy-protection for the sake of interoperability, a developer can still bet that they will end up in court if they tried because the DMCA places an extra burden on developers that does not exist with regards to hacking Betamax, VHS, USB, or Firewire. With hacking Apple's DRM, the developer must prove (most likely in court) that the application is only for interoperability, yet does not defeat copy protection... while hacking, say USB to interop with firewire, requires no such proof.
DeCSS is case in point. It is required to play DVDs with an open source player, yet it can be used for movie piracy.
Many applications of NNs have been used to show that increasing the size of the NN doesn't improve the effectiveness of the NN and in fact causes it to have less success.
Yes you are grossly incorrect. Most neural networks do not scale, and in fact perform best when they are smaller in size. Furthermore, they are such a gross approximation of a human's neurons that they don't really model them at all. Finally, neural networks do a very simple and basic operation, typically they associate a numerical value with another numerical value. There is allot more to intelligence than that!
Anybody involved in computers needs to learn this one important fact: AI fanatics time and again over promise and over sell their trade. Every few years, you get another AI snake oil salesman trying to claim that the turning point is just around the corner. But people that are actually educated in the problems at hand, those who have actually seen what AI has promised and can do, realize that it is all hype!
Proof generation can only be partially automated. It still requires massive human intervention, from choosing what to prove and then how to go about proving it. When you have computers automatically generating a proof of, say, Godel's Incompleteness theorem, it is actually a computer that was fed an intricately encoded version of of the theorem, along with some form of hint as to how to go about proving the theorem.
Not to mention that there is little use in a computer re-proving something that has already definitively been proven.
The difficulty arrises from the fact that there are absolute limitations to what computers can do. These limitations have been proven many decades ago... BEFORE THE CREATION OF ELECTRONIC COMPUTERS! But to the ignorant, these theoretical limitations do not matter... simply because they do not understand how absolute they are.
So again, learn this, you will time and again hear AI snake oil salesman spouting off crap about automating mathematical research and automating programming, etc. (Both are in a sense equally difficult as proofs can be seen as programs and visa versa.) In reality, at best, automated theorem proving is actually a tool that can be used to help mathematicians and computer scientists to do what they have been doing already. The level of automation varies, but in general is very low.
A human still has to drive the entire process, similar to how a car automates walking, but doesn't automate where to go and how to get there.
How, exactly, are buffer over runs now a fault of the programming? You do realize that you can have the same problems in C# and Java? The effect isn't as bad because of runtime checks, but it can still crash your program and therefore be a source of an easy denial-of-service attack, i.e. a teenager on a 56k dialup could take down Ebay, if it had such a flaw. Buffer over runs are always due to bad programming. Yes some languages provide features for minimizing the bad things that can happen when such a bug exists, and even better yet, some languages have static type systems that can help catch such bugs... but regardless it is still a programmer bug, whether or not the compiler tries to help find the bug or the runtime environment tries to minimize the effects of the bug.
Give me a break! She is the same "expert" that was claiming, last year, that much of the Linux source code was stolen from SCO. She speaks lies all the damn time. While I agree that the cost of Linux versus Windows is an apple's and oranges comparison in many regards, there are many other cases where this "expert" has flat out lied!
Everybody calls them "electrical" computers. So once we move on to light, will people change the name? I always thought it was a stupid distinction, personally. I mean, you would call mechanical engineering "metal engineering".
Are you using Windows or an OS that makes it easy to maintain installed software such as an apt based Linux distro? If its Windows, you are SOL, just manually uninstall the old and reinstall the new. If it is Linux, it will be done automatically for you during your next system upgrade.
Slashdot Mirror
Religious fundamentalists do not listen to reason. They have already made up their mind and their conclusion was not deduced via logical reasoning from facts.
BT efnet does a pretty good job of allowing those without a TiVo to view their favorite shows on demand. With a standard cable modem connection, episodes can be downloaded in roughly the time it takes to watch it... of course since bittorrent downloads the video file out of order, it cannot be streamed.
You already can download the last episode of any popular TV show. I downloaded the last Office episode in 10 minutes on my crappy cable modem connection!
You are joking, right? Nautilus is the biggest piece of crap I have ever used on Linux. It is slow, buggy, and lacking in features. Compared to Konqueror, which is faster, less buggy, and loaded with useful features.
The Linksys WRT54GS is cheaper at $75, is more powerful than the aforementioned D-link router, and the WRT54GS runs Linux, so its firmware is opensource and therefore its feature set is easily extended with the main selling points, quality of service and bandwidth shaping, of the more expensive D-link, by using the open source Sveasoft firmware.
I personally own a WRT54G, the older model with a slower CPU and less RAM, and I also bought the newer WRT54GS. The WRT54GS is the end all be all of low-cost routers/wireless access points/wireless bridges. I use my WRT54G as an ethernet to wireless bridge in my theater room so that my Xbox can stream movies wirelessly from my file server in my computer room. My computer room as a WRT54GS running as a wireless access point and as a gateway/firewall between my home LAN and the Internet.
In conclusion, it is inexpensive and easy to get your hands on a WRT54GS, installing the Sveasoft firmware is extremely easy... it is like a standard firmware upgrade which router users should already be familiar with due to security updates, and the resultant feature set and performance is to die for. If you are buying a router for your home or even (very) small business, why would you waste your money on anything else?
The new Dr Who series has been available via high-quality TV rips on the best BitTorrent TV site, BTefnet.
So the install from a booted live CD would be graphical?
The other interesting development on live CDs is to be able to run them on MS Windows without rebooting via a copy of the free QEMU PC emulator also on the CD and activated automatically via Windows CD automount. Add that and the ability to easily save desktop configuration data to hard disk or CD (yet another live CD development), along with a merged KDE/Gnome (K)Ubuntu ISO and it would be allot easier to get people to start using Linux.
I guess other interesting live CD features would be to scan an existing Windows install for configuration data, so that instant message and email clients could be automatically configured... and web browser bookmarks automatically imported. Going further, possibly have Wine setup to use the DLLs and apps on the Windows partition and automatically list Windows apps in the applications menu of the live CD. All to blur the boundary between where the user is now and where they will be once they completely convert to Linux.
I am personally writing this from the Live CD of Kubuntu 5.04, as I have Fedora Core 3 still installed on my hard disk. If I like it after a few weeks, then I will do a real install.
How could this even be considered to be an enforceable restriction? It is hard enough to catch people that break the GPL even when they distribute binaries derived from GPL code. Services do not need to advertise the code that they use in any way.
Well, I don't like how KDE is a second class citizen on Fedora. On Kubuntu it is treated like a first class citizen. I have the same gripe about apt on Fedora, which was there long before yum, yet for whatever reason they are trying to cram yum down my throat. With Kubuntu, I get first-class KDE and apt, by default.
Fedora is still pretty nice though. The boot process is nice and clean, things are pretty secure with a default install, and a sane list of apps are installed as opposed to a bunch of duplicate apps.
I think that MEPIS has a better installer because its Live CD and installer CD are one in the same. So you have a nice userfriendly graphical installer that walks you through the process, at the same exact time you can play a video game, chat, or browse the web with all of the apps on the Live CD. MEPIS is exactly how (K)Ubuntu should be doing their Live CD and installer CD. Ontop of that, they should also merge the Ubuntu and Kubuntu CDs into one. That way you would have one Live CD, that could change between Gnome or KDE and could also graphically install (K)Ubuntu.
In other words, unify the CDs!
The problem with this is that it prevents BitTorrent from sharing server load between hosting Ubuntu ISOs and Kubuntu ISOs. However, since the differences are all due to a few key packages, the core of (K)Ubuntu can be shared, which is a good thing.
Fedora and (K)Ubuntu are two free community based desktop oriented distros that actually do a good job of being desktop operating systems. Everybody is all excited about (K)Ubuntu because it is based on Debian, yet includes very recent packages, which means that you get all of the Debian goodness along with cutting edge packages, an easy install, and a userfriendly desktop.
I have been on Fedora for a few years now, but I am planning on switching to Kubuntu... mainly because Gnome has been driving me crazy. It used to be slow and buggy, but now it is just plain buggy.
I have been using X.org on Fedora for what seems like half a year now. I haven't noticed any difference in performance. The only thing that i have noticed is that it is less buggy, has a few more features, and the names of various configuration files and directories are different, though the formats of these files and directories are the same.
Considering that it started out as a simple fork of XFree86, you shouldn't expect a big difference between the two.
Betamax/VHS, USB/Firewire are bad analogies because they are open standards that can be hacked to heaven and back without legal ramifications. Hacking Apple's DRM on the other hand, for sake of interoperability, has ramifications due to the DMCA.
Even if the DMCA technically allows exceptions for circumventing copy-protection for the sake of interoperability, a developer can still bet that they will end up in court if they tried because the DMCA places an extra burden on developers that does not exist with regards to hacking Betamax, VHS, USB, or Firewire. With hacking Apple's DRM, the developer must prove (most likely in court) that the application is only for interoperability, yet does not defeat copy protection... while hacking, say USB to interop with firewire, requires no such proof.
DeCSS is case in point. It is required to play DVDs with an open source player, yet it can be used for movie piracy.
Many applications of NNs have been used to show that increasing the size of the NN doesn't improve the effectiveness of the NN and in fact causes it to have less success.
Yes you are grossly incorrect. Most neural networks do not scale, and in fact perform best when they are smaller in size. Furthermore, they are such a gross approximation of a human's neurons that they don't really model them at all. Finally, neural networks do a very simple and basic operation, typically they associate a numerical value with another numerical value. There is allot more to intelligence than that!
Anybody involved in computers needs to learn this one important fact: AI fanatics time and again over promise and over sell their trade. Every few years, you get another AI snake oil salesman trying to claim that the turning point is just around the corner. But people that are actually educated in the problems at hand, those who have actually seen what AI has promised and can do, realize that it is all hype!
Proof generation can only be partially automated. It still requires massive human intervention, from choosing what to prove and then how to go about proving it. When you have computers automatically generating a proof of, say, Godel's Incompleteness theorem, it is actually a computer that was fed an intricately encoded version of of the theorem, along with some form of hint as to how to go about proving the theorem.
Not to mention that there is little use in a computer re-proving something that has already definitively been proven.
The difficulty arrises from the fact that there are absolute limitations to what computers can do. These limitations have been proven many decades ago... BEFORE THE CREATION OF ELECTRONIC COMPUTERS! But to the ignorant, these theoretical limitations do not matter... simply because they do not understand how absolute they are.
So again, learn this, you will time and again hear AI snake oil salesman spouting off crap about automating mathematical research and automating programming, etc. (Both are in a sense equally difficult as proofs can be seen as programs and visa versa.) In reality, at best, automated theorem proving is actually a tool that can be used to help mathematicians and computer scientists to do what they have been doing already. The level of automation varies, but in general is very low.
A human still has to drive the entire process, similar to how a car automates walking, but doesn't automate where to go and how to get there.
How, exactly, are buffer over runs now a fault of the programming? You do realize that you can have the same problems in C# and Java? The effect isn't as bad because of runtime checks, but it can still crash your program and therefore be a source of an easy denial-of-service attack, i.e. a teenager on a 56k dialup could take down Ebay, if it had such a flaw. Buffer over runs are always due to bad programming. Yes some languages provide features for minimizing the bad things that can happen when such a bug exists, and even better yet, some languages have static type systems that can help catch such bugs... but regardless it is still a programmer bug, whether or not the compiler tries to help find the bug or the runtime environment tries to minimize the effects of the bug.
Give me a break! She is the same "expert" that was claiming, last year, that much of the Linux source code was stolen from SCO. She speaks lies all the damn time. While I agree that the cost of Linux versus Windows is an apple's and oranges comparison in many regards, there are many other cases where this "expert" has flat out lied!
For those who do not know, the best site for TV torrents is BT EFNet. You can download many popular shows that have recently aired.
Everybody calls them "electrical" computers. So once we move on to light, will people change the name? I always thought it was a stupid distinction, personally. I mean, you would call mechanical engineering "metal engineering".
I noticed this too. My TiVo's reaction to user input is far slower than before. I am not happy with this at all!
Netflix also has international and obscure movies.
There are fan made patches for Fallout 2 that fix allot of the bugs.
Are you using Windows or an OS that makes it easy to maintain installed software such as an apt based Linux distro? If its Windows, you are SOL, just manually uninstall the old and reinstall the new. If it is Linux, it will be done automatically for you during your next system upgrade.