Re:Depends if you use GCC to compile it
on
Ogg Vorbis 1.0
·
· Score: 4, Informative
" Programs written in GCC have to be published opensource because..."
You don't work for Microsoft do you ?
There are zero, nada, none, zilch, 0 licencing restrictions on code created with gcc. There are specific statements to that effect in the code and licencing. Perhaps you should read them.
It's called a catalyst. Or an enzyme if you're feeling biological. If you did any school-level chemistry you'd know that an exothermic (gives off more heat than it uses) reaction can have an energy-of-activation that requires more input energy than you ultimately gain.
Think of it as climbing a 10 foot wall and finding an 18 foot drop (ie 10 feet + 8 feet). You had to "climb" 10 feet to get 8 feet lower than you were. This is not a good engine, since inefficencies in the procedure (yield and heat mainly) will not gain you sufficient energy out to warrant the effort.
Now use a catalyst. This is the equivalent of one of those wall-knocking-down big balls. First you smash the wall with the catalyst, then you jump down 8 feet. Much easier, and you just gained 8 feet for next to nothing. Even with your inefficiencies, you gain energy. At least, that's the plan.
The only requirement is that the reaction must be exothermic, and a suitable catalyst must exist. The cool bit is that a catalyst is not consumed in the reaction. It just helps the reaction along - it's all down to geometry:-)
You can play with the temperature and pressure to maximise the yield by changing the partial vapour pressure (I think - this was some 15 years ago now!)
[grin] as I pointed out in another post, they're up to about 40% at source at the moment, but by the time you take off the inefficiencies due to the transmission/gears/joints/whatever that drops to about 20% overall.
There is a third way - make a more efficient transmission for power from the power plant to the wheels.
Different power plants have differing characteristics. It's not just 'push a button and vary between 0->10'. Traditional car engines have a narrow range of RPM within which they function efficiently. Electric motors have a much wider range over which they operate well.
Location of the power plant as close to the power-delivery mechanism as possible is an aid to efficiency, but not possible with traditional engines. The fewer terms of (1-N, 0N1) in the equation:
Power out = (1-a)(1-b)(1-c)(1-d)(Power in)... that you can obtain, the better is your efficiency. Conventional engines are efficient at source (about 40% efficient atm, been getting steadily better, but is expected to top-out at ~50%) BUT there's a hell of a lot of turning/grinding/jointed stuff between the wheel and the engine. Each of those elements reduces the overall efficiency. The gear system (required to keep the engine within it's small peak-efficiency envelope) alone accounts for ~5%
The point is, don't dismiss their ideas until we see what they can do, there are good reasons to be innovative when the underlying technology changes, most of the time.
It's a standard Linux distribution - you can treat it as a (slow, 300MHz) MIPS machine if you want. You get gcc/g++ and everything else you might find in a modern(ish) distribution.
The gcc port understands the VU assember syntax, so you can embed asm() blocks and have the code for the VU run on the VU via the direct link, and code for the mips chip run there.
It also comes with vcl. This is a godsend - it takes your crap linear vector-unit assembly code and parellelises it onto the vector units as best it can, re-ordering etc. to get the most out of the units.
There are a couple of rather nice libraries (ps2stuff, ps2gl) which provide base-level things (ps2stuff) and an openGL-like layer (ps2gl). To the extent that I could prove a bug in ps2gl by taking the same source code and compiling on my (i386) linux pc with 'g++ stars.cpp -o stars -L/usr/X11R6/lib -LGL -lglut'. Fantastic:-)
Ps2gl allows you to code renderers in VU assembly, and associate a new primitive type that can be placed in the DMA stream, which will call your new rendered automatically. There's an example of this shipped with the kit.
The only fly in the ointment is that the gcc shipped is only 32-bit, which means all the 128-bit registers get stomped on if they're passed as function arguments. There is apparently a patch in SCEE that will help this, although it'll lead to static binaries until everything is compiled with it (I don't care!). This will finally allow the VU's to do all the matrix and quaternion algebra they're really good at, and the system will fly:-)
Well well, the Anonymous Coward strikes again. With lightning wit and dazzling erudition, (s)he strikes the devastating blow. Not.
"How dare you prattle on about how abused you are by the Irish, you simpering child."
You think I'm being coy ? Odd thing to say.
Now let me see if I've got this right... You're claiming that something that happened four hundred years ago (I assume you're talking about the harpers here) has such bearing on the modern British view of the world that children should be murdered to make sure people get your message.
Sorry, no actually I'm not sorry. I don't agree.
I don't hold grudges for that long - every nation would be at war with every other if that were the case, and man would degenerate to the animal from which he came.
"you guys have fucked up every country you ever laid hands on and demonstrated.. that the only way out from under your boot heel is by use of violence"
I don't recall saying that. Mao said power comes from the end of a gun, but power and actions are two different things. British actions towards Ireland in recent times (beginning with Major) do not appear to me to be British Imperialism imposed from above. The peace process is (slowly) making ground, sometimes in spite of the politicians on both sides, but gaining ground nonetheless.
"Yup, they sure did. But you were far from alone. The entire commonwealth joined with you."
A good point. I have a colleague who continually refers to what "he" did, and not what "we" did. I find it irritating.
This is why saying that Britons in general consider the Commonwealth (1.7 billion people, almost 1/3 the world's population!) to be part of "we" is not adequate unless it's said. Nonetheless, we do, well at least *I* do, 1 down, 57million to go:-)
Should a major conflict arise again, I'd expect most of the Commonwealth to be with us rather than against us, not because you should or must, but because we mostly share the same ideals and values (monarchy aside:-) about what's right and what's wrong.
"Ah, so your Commons can brute-force a bill too. I thought that was a strictly Canadian thing, oh well. Does the Queen HAVE to sign it after it's been passed, or can she veto it?"
No, the Queen is the last-ditch attempt to deny the HoC. There is no requirement for the monarch to sign any bill (and thus make it a law), but to refuse to sign would (at least) cause a constitutional crisis. It would possibly spell the end of the monarchy, unless the populace saw it as "right" to refuse to so sign. The Queen would have to do some very fast talking...
I have to say I find your comments extremely offensive.
"Why is it that there are 200 British soldiers on the ground in Afghanistan"
Look here for a more informed view, 1700 soldiers by April, and more since, including HMS Ocean (helicopter carrier), HMS Illustrious (aircraft carrier), and HMS Fearless (assault ship) as well as an auxiliary fleet presence (engineers, supply, etc,). Get your facts right.
"when you actually do something about the IRA..."
Perhaps you have ideas about what to do, given your knowledge of the religious and territorial claims which stretch back over MORE TIME THAN YOUR COUNTRY HAS EXISTED in it's current form.
Perhaps also, if you stopped funding them (50% of IRA funds are USA-sourced) it would help stop innocent children from being bombed and murdered on their way to school in Northern Ireland.
"how 'bout we start seeing some of that lend-lease paid back"
We are self-sufficent. We could park a nuclear sub off any major city in the world and reduce it to a smoking ruin in seconds. No "missile shield" could help. A pre-emptive military strike against us would (and could) not prevent this.
At the end of the day, Mao was right in one respect: power comes from the end of a gun, and the UK is one of the most militarily powerful nations in the world.
Aside: Britain is one of the best submariner nations in the world. I've worked on some of the technical systems in modern submarines, and it's quite funny how different classifications affect what is shown... When everyone watching is classified for "UK EYES ONLY", the displays get significantly more detailed and informative. With a lot more relevant info to work with, the same algorithms in the software can produce a lot more useful output:-)
Actually the original poster is correct. If the commons sends the bill to the lords for three times, they are no longer required to send it again until enactment.
A certain Thatcher used this during her term in office...
I'm actually pro-the-lords as well. It strikes me that a group of people with a say, who are NOT responsible to the populace, but can speak from their own hearts/minds is a good thing.
The only plus point is that whenever the Lords are bypassed, it makes the headlines - although obviously not sufficiently, or I'd not be writing this:-)
Well, that may be your view, but in my experience almost every time I've been upset about the stuff going through the (elected!) House Of Commons, the House Of Lords has knocked it back, or at least amended it judiciously.
As far as I'm concerned, full marks to the old fogies! There's a lot to be said for a body of people steeped in British traditions, who are NOT accountable to anyone for their decisions. So long as they have no real executive power, of course. The HoC can always push through a bill that's bounced back and forth 3 times without further recourse to the HoL, but that makes headlines and people sit up and take notice...
"I hate to break it to you, but things aren't much better here in the USA"
Hmm. My opinion, from living in the US for a while, is that Americans in general aren't as accepting as Britons. If they don't like something, they let you know, and they don't wait for someone else to make a scene. This seemingly trivial behavioural difference explains a lot about the relative politics, IMHO.
"The only real pain in the ass, as far as you're concerned, is going to be learning to drive on the right-hand side of the road"
I'm in the US at least twice a year for trade shows etc. Mostly West coast, for about 2 months a year. I worked out that I tend to drive more in the US than in the UK, because in London there's no need for a car apart from shopping, and in the US there certainly is... My yearly mileage in the UK is ~1000 miles/year. My insurance company never believe me, but 52 trips to Sainsbury's = ~52 miles, and 3 trips "oop noorth" comes to ~900 miles....
I won't mention my opinion on guns - I've been opinionated enough already for one day:-)
"everybody should live abroad for a few years at least. It opens your mind".
I've lived abroad more than I've lived in the UK. My family has a history of working for Shell, and moving a lot:-)
"You're wrong about there being nothing you can do though."
Actually, I'm not. I've tried writing to my MP - Mr Neil Gerrard, Walthamstow, London. He ignores me (doesn't even reply!) I've tried mail,fax, and email. As for going on a march, the issues are too complex: ask joe public whether liberty should be exchanged for security these days, and you'll get a resounding YES every time. Foolish but true. Gaining support for a march/demonstration is commensurately hard.
The UK "government" are cynically abusing the lack of public knowledge about the consequences of their actions, and manipulating the current perceptions of public danger (terrorism being the latest in a line of public-enemy-number-one's: the previous was child-pornography) in order to spy on the populace.
The UK "government" are proposing to open and read your mail under almost every situation. Quoth the UK prime minister's representative:
"This data can only be sought if it is judged to be necessary in the interests of national security; for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime or preventing disorder; or in the interests of the economic wellbeing of the UK; if it is in the interests of public safety, or for the purpose of protecting public health; or for the purpose of assessing or collecting any tax, duty or levy payable to a government department; or for the purpose in an emergency of preventing death or injury, any damage to a person's physical or mental health; or mitigating any injury or damage to a person's physical or mental health."
... so, just about anything then....
It just sickens me. It's not apathy that stops people from going to the polls, it's disgust with those purporting to represent them! In such cases, the "loyal majority" who unthinkingly vote for their party preserve the status quo.
Eventually you have to decide whether to spend years fighting it or just leave them to it. I'm off, hopefully at least. I have the advantage of a lot of expert skills in a growing media-industry, and I'm a partner in a valued company. Not everyone has my advantages, and that's the worst part.
"The US has it's own problems,..."
As does everywhere. It's a matter of what you can swallow, and what makes your stomach turn. Currently the UK governemnt polices make me vomit.
There is frankly little we can do. This is the direct result of democracy - the uninformed electing the uncaring. The labour government has an enormous majority within the house of commons, not because it is good or popular but simply because it's the better of two, frankly awful, choices.
The last election had almost 50% of the electorate not voting - it's not apathy, it's disgust for both major parties on the part of the educated and informed. We've been subjected to ridiculous, pathetic, bite-size policies that can make the evening news; attempts to score cheap points over rivals, and general contempt from those supposed to represent us. Those who lap this travesty up (and there are many) are sufficient to propogate the unfortunate status quo.
I have the chance to work in the USA in the near future - I'm going to jump with both feet. You may have the (spit!) DMCA et al, but the prospect of remaining in the police-state-once-called-the-UK turns my stomach.
The issue of whether source code is as-the-author-intended is an old one, and is very well catered for by signing the.bz2 or.gz archive with the authors GPG/PGP key.
If you subscribe to Redhat Network, all the.rpm's that are downloaded can be optionally (by default they are) checked against the GPG key - this prevents anyone from inserting their own version of/bin/login into the system... I'm assuming the machines doing the signing aren't the machines doing the delivery, but that would be an elementary mistake to make on Redhat's part...
Hmm. I have a 32-bit processor, an i- & d-cache, an SDRAM controller, some h/w image processing, VGA output, and an audio/video interface on a single FPGA, using about 50% of a Spartan 300E.
I'm currently working on adding a JPEG enccoder and an ethernet MAC to the same, single, device. An S2300E has ~300k "marketing" gates on it, which isn't immensely larger than your own. Perhaps your design is more complex than my own.
The CPU runs at ~25MHz using just the synthesis tools PAR option set to max (takes about 10 mins to synthesize). I think I should be able to just about double that (I've had a similar CPU running at 48MHz on its own after applying a lot of RLOC's to the code).
The real advantage of this is that I don't have to have a computer - ultimately this will be a nice *small* device that will cost a lot less than even the cheapest PC + video capture + network card. An S2300E development board is only $140 from www.fpgacpu.com... I don't know how much the cjip itself is, but they must be factoring in *some* profit:-)
Thirdly, the huge costs caused by non-functioning software ("blue screens of death", malicious code such as virus, worms, and trojans, exceptions, general protection faults and other well-known problems) are reduced considerably by using more stable software; and it is well-known that one of the most notable virtues of free software is its stability.
The frequencies radiated by computer monitors are significantly different to that of TV sets. Not to mention that the van can actually reconstitute the signal, inside the van, and record to VHS with a burnt-in GPS record and estimated distance and direction.
They may be big brother (I don't care, I pay my licence fee and reckon it's well worth it) but they're not completely stupid.
The commission doesn't have to determine truth. The advertiser does. If I say, "Swallow our cyanide capsules for continued long life", and there is a complaint from (presumably someone's partner, in this case:-), it is the ASA who ask the advertiser to prove their statement.
After the "proof", the agency simply decides whether the "proof" was compelling. If it was truly a proof, the advert is let to stand. If it is decided that the advert is wrong, it is removed, and there may be a punishment for breaking the standards....
The ASA are government-funded, but have removed party-political posters from in-power governments before now. They're maybe not perfect, but they're not the shady "them", as government bodies are typically depicted.
Slashdot Mirror
" Programs written in GCC have to be published opensource because ..."
You don't work for Microsoft do you ?
There are zero, nada, none, zilch, 0 licencing restrictions on code created with gcc. There are specific statements to that effect in the code and licencing. Perhaps you should read them.
Simon
It's called a catalyst. Or an enzyme if you're feeling biological. If you did any school-level chemistry you'd know that an exothermic (gives off more heat than it uses) reaction can have an energy-of-activation that requires more input energy than you ultimately gain.
:-)
Think of it as climbing a 10 foot wall and finding an 18 foot drop (ie 10 feet + 8 feet). You had to "climb" 10 feet to get 8 feet lower than you were. This is not a good engine, since inefficencies in the procedure (yield and heat mainly) will not gain you sufficient energy out to warrant the effort.
Now use a catalyst. This is the equivalent of one of those wall-knocking-down big balls. First you smash the wall with the catalyst, then you jump down 8 feet. Much easier, and you just gained 8 feet for next to nothing. Even with your inefficiencies, you gain energy. At least, that's the plan.
The only requirement is that the reaction must be exothermic, and a suitable catalyst must exist. The cool bit is that a catalyst is not consumed in the reaction. It just helps the reaction along - it's all down to geometry
You can play with the temperature and pressure to maximise the yield by changing the partial vapour pressure (I think - this was some 15 years ago now!)
Simon.
[grin] as I pointed out in another post, they're up to about 40% at source at the moment, but by the time you take off the inefficiencies due to the transmission/gears/joints/whatever that drops to about 20% overall.
Simon
There is a third way - make a more efficient transmission for power from the power plant to the wheels.
... that you can obtain, the better is your efficiency. Conventional engines are efficient at source (about 40% efficient atm, been getting steadily better, but is expected to top-out at ~50%) BUT there's a hell of a lot of turning /grinding/jointed stuff between the wheel and the engine. Each of those elements reduces the overall efficiency. The gear system (required to keep the engine within it's small peak-efficiency envelope) alone accounts for ~5%
Different power plants have differing characteristics. It's not just 'push a button and vary between 0->10'. Traditional car engines have a narrow range of RPM within which they function efficiently. Electric motors have a much wider range over which they operate well.
Location of the power plant as close to the power-delivery mechanism as possible is an aid to efficiency, but not possible with traditional engines. The fewer terms of (1-N, 0N1) in the equation:
Power out = (1-a)(1-b)(1-c)(1-d)(Power in)
The point is, don't dismiss their ideas until we see what they can do, there are good reasons to be innovative when the underlying technology changes, most of the time.
Simon
It's a standard Linux distribution - you can treat it as a (slow, 300MHz) MIPS machine if you want. You get gcc/g++ and everything else you might find in a modern(ish) distribution.
:-)
:-)
The gcc port understands the VU assember syntax, so you can embed asm() blocks and have the code for the VU run on the VU via the direct link, and code for the mips chip run there.
It also comes with vcl. This is a godsend - it takes your crap linear vector-unit assembly code and parellelises it onto the vector units as best it can, re-ordering etc. to get the most out of the units.
There are a couple of rather nice libraries (ps2stuff, ps2gl) which provide base-level things (ps2stuff) and an openGL-like layer (ps2gl). To the extent that I could prove a bug in ps2gl by taking the same source code and compiling on my (i386) linux pc with 'g++ stars.cpp -o stars -L/usr/X11R6/lib -LGL -lglut'. Fantastic
Ps2gl allows you to code renderers in VU assembly, and associate a new primitive type that can be placed in the DMA stream, which will call your new rendered automatically. There's an example of this shipped with the kit.
The only fly in the ointment is that the gcc shipped is only 32-bit, which means all the 128-bit registers get stomped on if they're passed as function arguments. There is apparently a patch in SCEE that will help this, although it'll lead to static binaries until everything is compiled with it (I don't care!). This will finally allow the VU's to do all the matrix and quaternion algebra they're really good at, and the system will fly
Simon
Seconded. I gave him an SGI Indy a while back so he could port to Irix, and within a few weeks the Irix port was up and running :-)
:-)
I don't think Irix is one of the targets now, but I don't care - I don't use it any more either
Simon
Well well, the Anonymous Coward strikes again. With lightning wit and dazzling erudition, (s)he strikes the devastating blow. Not.
.. that the only way out from under your boot heel is by use of violence"
"How dare you prattle on about how abused you are by the Irish, you simpering child."
You think I'm being coy ? Odd thing to say.
Now let me see if I've got this right... You're claiming that something that happened four hundred years ago (I assume you're talking about the harpers here) has such bearing on the modern British view of the world that children should be murdered to make sure people get your message.
Sorry, no actually I'm not sorry. I don't agree.
I don't hold grudges for that long - every nation would be at war with every other if that were the case, and man would degenerate to the animal from which he came.
"you guys have fucked up every country you ever laid hands on and demonstrated
I don't recall saying that. Mao said power comes from the end of a gun, but power and actions are two different things. British actions towards Ireland in recent times (beginning with Major) do not appear to me to be British Imperialism imposed from above. The peace process is (slowly) making ground, sometimes in spite of the politicians on both sides, but gaining ground nonetheless.
Simon
"Yup, they sure did. But you were far from alone. The entire commonwealth joined with you."
:-)
:-) about what's right and what's wrong.
A good point. I have a colleague who continually refers to what "he" did, and not what "we" did. I find it irritating.
This is why saying that Britons in general consider the Commonwealth (1.7 billion people, almost 1/3 the world's population!) to be part of "we" is not adequate unless it's said. Nonetheless, we do, well at least *I* do, 1 down, 57million to go
Should a major conflict arise again, I'd expect most of the Commonwealth to be with us rather than against us, not because you should or must, but because we mostly share the same ideals and values (monarchy aside
Simon
"Ah, so your Commons can brute-force a bill too. I thought that was a strictly Canadian thing, oh well. Does the Queen HAVE to sign it after it's been passed, or can she veto it?"
...
No, the Queen is the last-ditch attempt to deny the HoC. There is no requirement for the monarch to sign any bill (and thus make it a law), but to refuse to sign would (at least) cause a constitutional crisis. It would possibly spell the end of the monarchy, unless the populace saw it as "right" to refuse to so sign. The Queen would have to do some very fast talking
Simon
Look here for a more informed view, 1700 soldiers by April, and more since, including HMS Ocean (helicopter carrier), HMS Illustrious (aircraft carrier), and HMS Fearless (assault ship) as well as an auxiliary fleet presence (engineers, supply, etc,). Get your facts right.
Perhaps you have ideas about what to do, given your knowledge of the religious and territorial claims which stretch back over MORE TIME THAN YOUR COUNTRY HAS EXISTED in it's current form.
Perhaps also, if you stopped funding them (50% of IRA funds are USA-sourced) it would help stop innocent children from being bombed and murdered on their way to school in Northern Ireland.
We are self-sufficent. We could park a nuclear sub off any major city in the world and reduce it to a smoking ruin in seconds. No "missile shield" could help. A pre-emptive military strike against us would (and could) not prevent this.
At the end of the day, Mao was right in one respect: power comes from the end of a gun, and the UK is one of the most militarily powerful nations in the world.
Aside: Britain is one of the best submariner nations in the world. I've worked on some of the technical systems in modern submarines, and it's quite funny how different classifications affect what is shown... When everyone watching is classified for "UK EYES ONLY", the displays get significantly more detailed and informative. With a lot more relevant info to work with, the same
algorithms in the software can produce a lot more useful output
Simon
Yes but they're not important. You do know we rule the world? :-)
Simon
Actually the original poster is correct. If the commons sends the bill to the lords for three times, they are no longer required to send it again until enactment.
:-)
A certain Thatcher used this during her term in office...
I'm actually pro-the-lords as well. It strikes me that a group of people with a say, who are NOT responsible to the populace, but can speak from their own hearts/minds is a good thing.
The only plus point is that whenever the Lords are bypassed, it makes the headlines - although obviously not sufficiently, or I'd not be writing this
Simon
Well, that may be your view, but in my experience almost every time I've been upset about the stuff going through the (elected!) House Of Commons, the House Of Lords has knocked it back, or at least amended it judiciously.
As far as I'm concerned, full marks to the old fogies! There's a lot to be said for a body of people steeped in British traditions, who are NOT accountable to anyone for their decisions. So long as they have no real executive power, of course. The HoC can always push through a bill that's bounced back and forth 3 times without further recourse to the HoL, but that makes headlines and people sit up and take notice...
Simon.
"I hate to break it to you, but things aren't much better here in the USA"
:-)
Hmm. My opinion, from living in the US for a while, is that Americans in general aren't as accepting as Britons. If they don't like something, they let you know, and they don't wait for someone else to make a scene. This seemingly trivial behavioural difference explains a lot about the relative politics, IMHO.
"The only real pain in the ass, as far as you're concerned, is going to be learning to drive on the right-hand side of the road"
I'm in the US at least twice a year for trade shows etc. Mostly West coast, for about 2 months a year. I worked out that I tend to drive more in the US than in the UK, because in London there's no need for a car apart from shopping, and in the US there certainly is... My yearly mileage in the UK is ~1000 miles/year. My insurance company never believe me, but 52 trips to Sainsbury's = ~52 miles, and 3 trips "oop noorth" comes to ~900 miles....
I won't mention my opinion on guns - I've been opinionated enough already for one day
Simon
"everybody should live abroad for a few years at least. It opens your mind".
:-)
I've lived abroad more than I've lived in the UK. My family has a history of working for Shell, and moving a lot
"You're wrong about there being nothing you can do though."
Actually, I'm not. I've tried writing to my MP - Mr Neil Gerrard, Walthamstow, London. He ignores me (doesn't even reply!) I've tried mail,fax, and email. As for going on a march, the issues are too complex: ask joe public whether liberty should be exchanged for security these days, and you'll get a resounding YES every time. Foolish but true. Gaining support for a march/demonstration is commensurately hard.
The UK "government" are cynically abusing the lack of public knowledge about the consequences of their actions, and manipulating the current perceptions of public danger (terrorism being the latest in a line of public-enemy-number-one's: the previous was child-pornography) in order to spy on the populace.
The UK "government" are proposing to open and read your mail under almost every situation. Quoth the UK prime minister's representative:
"This data can only be sought if it is judged to be necessary in the interests of national security; for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime or preventing disorder; or in the interests of the economic wellbeing of the UK; if it is in the interests of public safety, or for the purpose of protecting public health; or for the purpose of assessing or collecting any tax, duty or levy payable to a government department; or for the purpose in an emergency of preventing death or injury, any damage to a person's physical or mental health; or mitigating any injury or damage to a person's physical or mental health."
... so, just about anything then....
It just sickens me. It's not apathy that stops people from going to the polls, it's disgust with those purporting to represent them! In such cases, the "loyal majority" who unthinkingly vote for their party preserve the status quo.
Eventually you have to decide whether to spend years fighting it or just leave them to it. I'm off, hopefully at least. I have the advantage of a lot of expert skills in a growing media-industry, and I'm a partner in a valued company. Not everyone has my advantages, and that's the worst part.
"The US has it's own problems,..."
As does everywhere. It's a matter of what you can swallow, and what makes your stomach turn. Currently the UK governemnt polices make me vomit.
Simon.
There is frankly little we can do. This is the direct result of democracy - the uninformed electing the uncaring. The labour government has an enormous majority within the house of commons, not because it is good or popular but simply because it's the better of two, frankly awful, choices.
The last election had almost 50% of the electorate not voting - it's not apathy, it's disgust for both major parties on the part of the educated and informed. We've been subjected to ridiculous, pathetic, bite-size policies that can make the evening news; attempts to score cheap points over rivals, and general contempt from those supposed to represent us. Those who lap this travesty up (and there are many) are sufficient to propogate the unfortunate status quo.
I have the chance to work in the USA in the near future - I'm going to jump with both feet. You may have the (spit!) DMCA et al, but the prospect of remaining in the police-state-once-called-the-UK turns my stomach.
Simon
The issue of whether source code is as-the-author-intended is an old one, and is very well catered for by signing the .bz2 or .gz archive with the authors GPG/PGP key.
.rpm's that are downloaded can be optionally (by default they are) checked against the GPG key - this prevents anyone from inserting their own version of /bin/login into the system... I'm assuming the machines doing the signing aren't the machines doing the delivery, but that would be an elementary mistake to make on Redhat's part...
If you subscribe to Redhat Network, all the
In short - this is not an issue.
Simon
>
> Sony did not yet sue any vendor over modchips
>
They have in the UK...
Your initials?
The point was that it was hard to tell what you were saying - a couple of blank lines before the ad would probably help...
Simon
Funny, I was about to moderate you down for just posting a blatant advert as a "response" when I remembered 'sc' was a spreadsheet program...
Simon
Hmm. I have a 32-bit processor, an i- & d-cache, an SDRAM controller, some h/w image processing, VGA output, and an audio/video interface on a single FPGA, using about 50% of a Spartan 300E.
:-)
I'm currently working on adding a JPEG enccoder and an ethernet MAC to the same, single, device. An S2300E has ~300k "marketing" gates on it, which isn't immensely larger than your own. Perhaps your design is more complex than my own.
The CPU runs at ~25MHz using just the synthesis tools PAR option set to max (takes about 10 mins to synthesize). I think I should be able to just about double that (I've had a similar CPU running at 48MHz on its own after applying a lot of RLOC's to the code).
The real advantage of this is that I don't have to have a computer - ultimately this will be a nice *small* device that will cost a lot less than even the cheapest PC + video capture + network card. An S2300E development board is only $140 from www.fpgacpu.com... I don't know how much the cjip itself is, but they must be factoring in *some* profit
Simon
You gottalovetha "blue screens of death"
Simon
The frequencies radiated by computer monitors are significantly different to that of TV sets. Not to mention that the van can actually reconstitute the signal, inside the van, and record to VHS with a burnt-in GPS record and estimated distance and direction.
They may be big brother (I don't care, I pay my licence fee and reckon it's well worth it) but they're not completely stupid.
Simon
The commission doesn't have to determine truth. The advertiser does. If I say, "Swallow our cyanide capsules for continued long life", and there is a complaint from (presumably someone's partner, in this case :-), it is the ASA who ask the advertiser to prove their statement.
After the "proof", the agency simply decides whether the "proof" was compelling. If it was truly a proof, the advert is let to stand. If it is decided that the advert is wrong, it is removed, and there may be a punishment for breaking the standards....
The ASA are government-funded, but have removed party-political posters from in-power governments before now. They're maybe not perfect, but they're not the shady "them", as government bodies are typically depicted.
Simon
Apple showed a technology demo of the OS-X port at NAB (Las Vegas, 100k visitors) in April. It seemed pretty stable to me.
Simon.