The person who, coincidentally, if you look at his body of work, every single thing he writes is pro-SCO, pro-Microsoft, anti-Open-Source, anti-Linux, anti-iPod, or just basically arguing whatever line is good for Microsoft's PR interests and bad for Microsoft's competitor's PR interests.
So basically all this article is is that a pro-Microsoft shill is complaining that pro-Linux shills are meeting with more public sympathy than he is.
Expect this to continue. That is, as the world of the Microsoft astroturf "analysts" continues to ever so slowly shrink as slowly one by one media publishers catch on to what they're doing, expect those "analysts" to get more and more shrill about interpreting this as if they're being oppressed by the Linux extremists. O'Gara started it; Enderle is continuing it; and whoever else is working along these lines is going to keep going with it in desperate hopes that a mainstream media source will assume, if only briefly, that since it keeps being repeated over and over it must be true. And every single time it gets repeated, Slashdot will have a story about it.
Headline should read: "Professional Troll Submits Poorly Thought Out, Misinformed Paper To Conference, Gets ZDNet's Attention, Gets Picked Up On Slashdot, And Thus Nets Publicity For Himself And Ad Impressions For ZDNet?"
Maybe it's just me. But I can't stand LCDs for general computer use. They're harsher and grittier on the eyes, and they still-- even after all these years of development-- tend to suffer from ghosting.
Well, the adoption issues in general are very real-- although 802.16, if it can be seen as a successor to 802.11, may be able to an extent to actually ride 802.11's coattails. There are combination 802.11/802.16 chips being worked on now.
However, for this specific case saturation is a little bit irrelivant. One of the interesting properties of a public project such as muni wifi is that they get to dictate their own standards. If the muni wifi project decides to go with 802.16, then well, essentially, the citizens of the muni will more or less have to go along.
Sometimes I wonder if these companies aren't actually so stupid to think these schemes will work, but instead maybe are just doing it with full knowlege it's meaningless, just for public appearances...
So I don't follow these things too closely, but the way I heard it, the ATI card that the XBox 360 and Nintendo Revolution will be using derivatives of started its life as a PC card, but got the axe when it proved to be cost-inefficient, and wouldn't be hitting market at all at this point if it weren't for the consoles; and the NVidia chippy thing that the PS3 GPU is based off of actually IS outright coming to PCs as a retail product and will apparently be shown at Computex or whatever it's called this week.
How any time you actually have an honest choice of software in the consumer software world, it's such a strange and upsetting event we have to describe it by the word "wars".
Wouldn't it be nice if competition between multiple partners were the rule, rather than an exception so bizarre that when it occurs we widely describe it by a word normally associated with mass death and destruction?
Kind of a small thing, but y'know, just a thought...
The thing we really need to be asking here is, how can the general public be made aware of this? And moreover, be made aware of it in a way that they understand, something like new computers with these specific Intel chips are set up so that software companies, like Microsoft, can take control of your computer and stop you from doing things they don't like."
A bunch of slashdotters doing a boycott won't really have any impact. But a few tens of thousands of average consumers walking into Best Buy with furrowed brows and saying they want to buy some kind of new computer, but they don't want it if they have this new "Intel D-Ram" thing (if this can be made to happen), is eventually going to hit corporate consciousness, maybe make Intel think about the issue, and maybe even convince AMD that this for once is not a buzzword it's best not to bet on.
Unfortunately consumers probably won't realize why DRM support in hardware is a bad thing for them until the DRM hardware becomes commonplace, and viruses and malware start taking advantage of the DRM hardware to do really, really nasty things. And eventually, they will. DRM hardware exists, once you strip away the PR, to give software vendors control of the hardware in place of the actual hardware owner; in the long run this is a proposition which is going to be as attractive to Gator as it will be to Real.
After this lawsuit, no matter who wins, you'll be able to get anybody you don't like kicked off of Yahoo by claiming that their profile contains your personal information, because Yahoo's "react to no emails concerning fraudulent use of private information" policy will quickly turn to a "react to any and all emails concerning fraudulent use of private information, to avoid another lawsuit" policy quite promptly.
I am not really so interested in a personal MP3 player. I think I must be the only person in my market demographic who is not.
But... a combination portable hard drive and satellite radio player? That sounds much more interesting. Include some kind of PVR-like ability to record satellite radio shows to iPod and dump them into iTunes later, and holy crap, I'm there.
If the 302 page is just a redirect, why do they apply the redirectee's pagerank to the 302er's page, and not the other way around (apply the 302er's pagerank to the ridirected page)?
I'm asking about how this is implemented. And unless IBM has some kind of insane dynamic recompilation thing going on, the main CPU could not just "divide up the work", since that would entail parallelizing running code across eight processors at once. If the work is already in some way divided I could see the main CPU assigning those divided units to different processors, but even in that case I'd want to know how they implement and make decisions concerning that assignment, and I'm still curious what the SPEs do during a main-cpu context switch.
They have to present the divisions between these SPE processors, or some abstraction which becomes the divisions between them by the time the program is run, visible to the programmer-- since the programmer is the one parallelizing the code. What do these divisions look like to the programmer? Threads? Processes? "Cells"?
Re:(regarding your sig) ninja death club?
on
Tinfoil Hat House
·
· Score: 1
Mr. Anonymous Coward:
The person you want to contact is "themathletes at yahoo dot com".
Exactly what do the SPEs *do* in a timesharing OS such as Linux? Are the SPEs all parcelled out to processes on an individual basis, like normal processors would be? Are the SPEs attached to the same process as their corresponding normal-CPU PPC core, and the SPE's onboard memories just gets copied to main memory and then overwritten on every single context switch? Or what?
Re:(regarding your sig) ninja death club?
on
Tinfoil Hat House
·
· Score: 1
Hi,
I'm not the Ninja Death Club guy, just his webmaster. The Ninja Death Club subscription materials really are still being mailed out, just slowly-- the last time I talked to Joe he was readying another release. What I would do is email Joe (mention your name/address so he knows which subscriber he's talking to) and he can give you a better idea of when the next release will be sent. Unfortunately I'm not sure which email he's using at the moment and I have to go to work now, so if you could please check back here later today I'll figure out his current email address and post it here.
Slashdot Mirror
The person who, coincidentally, if you look at his body of work, every single thing he writes is pro-SCO, pro-Microsoft, anti-Open-Source, anti-Linux, anti-iPod, or just basically arguing whatever line is good for Microsoft's PR interests and bad for Microsoft's competitor's PR interests.
So basically all this article is is that a pro-Microsoft shill is complaining that pro-Linux shills are meeting with more public sympathy than he is.
Expect this to continue. That is, as the world of the Microsoft astroturf "analysts" continues to ever so slowly shrink as slowly one by one media publishers catch on to what they're doing, expect those "analysts" to get more and more shrill about interpreting this as if they're being oppressed by the Linux extremists. O'Gara started it; Enderle is continuing it; and whoever else is working along these lines is going to keep going with it in desperate hopes that a mainstream media source will assume, if only briefly, that since it keeps being repeated over and over it must be true. And every single time it gets repeated, Slashdot will have a story about it.
Headline should read: "Professional Troll Submits Poorly Thought Out, Misinformed Paper To Conference, Gets ZDNet's Attention, Gets Picked Up On Slashdot, And Thus Nets Publicity For Himself And Ad Impressions For ZDNet?"
Gesundheit.
Maybe it's just me. But I can't stand LCDs for general computer use. They're harsher and grittier on the eyes, and they still-- even after all these years of development-- tend to suffer from ghosting.
Am I the only one?
Well, the adoption issues in general are very real-- although 802.16, if it can be seen as a successor to 802.11, may be able to an extent to actually ride 802.11's coattails. There are combination 802.11/802.16 chips being worked on now.
However, for this specific case saturation is a little bit irrelivant. One of the interesting properties of a public project such as muni wifi is that they get to dictate their own standards. If the muni wifi project decides to go with 802.16, then well, essentially, the citizens of the muni will more or less have to go along.
Is Sony even *trying* to outsmart anyone?
Sometimes I wonder if these companies aren't actually so stupid to think these schemes will work, but instead maybe are just doing it with full knowlege it's meaningless, just for public appearances...
Does Mr. Schneier own a refrigerator?
So I don't follow these things too closely, but the way I heard it, the ATI card that the XBox 360 and Nintendo Revolution will be using derivatives of started its life as a PC card, but got the axe when it proved to be cost-inefficient, and wouldn't be hitting market at all at this point if it weren't for the consoles; and the NVidia chippy thing that the PS3 GPU is based off of actually IS outright coming to PCs as a retail product and will apparently be shown at Computex or whatever it's called this week.
However, 802.16 is coming and if it pans out anything like the way it could, things will get very interesting.
It's a place where people can come together, separated by age, background and station but bound in common by attention deficit disorder?
Ok I understand there are several benefits to this for extension writers. However, I seriously doubt that it will be used in many other places.
Does it need to be used in any other places to have been worthwhile, from the Moz people's perspective?
How any time you actually have an honest choice of software in the consumer software world, it's such a strange and upsetting event we have to describe it by the word "wars".
Wouldn't it be nice if competition between multiple partners were the rule, rather than an exception so bizarre that when it occurs we widely describe it by a word normally associated with mass death and destruction?
Kind of a small thing, but y'know, just a thought...
Please disregard one of the instances of the word "not" in the parent post. It doesn't matter which.
Okay. So Slashdot's all upset about this.
Slashdot doesn't matter.
The thing we really need to be asking here is, how can the general public be made aware of this? And moreover, be made aware of it in a way that they understand, something like new computers with these specific Intel chips are set up so that software companies, like Microsoft, can take control of your computer and stop you from doing things they don't like."
A bunch of slashdotters doing a boycott won't really have any impact. But a few tens of thousands of average consumers walking into Best Buy with furrowed brows and saying they want to buy some kind of new computer, but they don't want it if they have this new "Intel D-Ram" thing (if this can be made to happen), is eventually going to hit corporate consciousness, maybe make Intel think about the issue, and maybe even convince AMD that this for once is not a buzzword it's best not to bet on.
Unfortunately consumers probably won't realize why DRM support in hardware is a bad thing for them until the DRM hardware becomes commonplace, and viruses and malware start taking advantage of the DRM hardware to do really, really nasty things. And eventually, they will. DRM hardware exists, once you strip away the PR, to give software vendors control of the hardware in place of the actual hardware owner; in the long run this is a proposition which is going to be as attractive to Gator as it will be to Real.
And this NYT columnist trying to address it formally is even stupider.
After this lawsuit, no matter who wins, you'll be able to get anybody you don't like kicked off of Yahoo by claiming that their profile contains your personal information, because Yahoo's "react to no emails concerning fraudulent use of private information" policy will quickly turn to a "react to any and all emails concerning fraudulent use of private information, to avoid another lawsuit" policy quite promptly.
I am not really so interested in a personal MP3 player. I think I must be the only person in my market demographic who is not.
But... a combination portable hard drive and satellite radio player? That sounds much more interesting. Include some kind of PVR-like ability to record satellite radio shows to iPod and dump them into iTunes later, and holy crap, I'm there.
If the 302 page is just a redirect, why do they apply the redirectee's pagerank to the 302er's page, and not the other way around (apply the 302er's pagerank to the ridirected page)?
I'm asking about how this is implemented. And unless IBM has some kind of insane dynamic recompilation thing going on, the main CPU could not just "divide up the work", since that would entail parallelizing running code across eight processors at once. If the work is already in some way divided I could see the main CPU assigning those divided units to different processors, but even in that case I'd want to know how they implement and make decisions concerning that assignment, and I'm still curious what the SPEs do during a main-cpu context switch.
They have to present the divisions between these SPE processors, or some abstraction which becomes the divisions between them by the time the program is run, visible to the programmer-- since the programmer is the one parallelizing the code. What do these divisions look like to the programmer? Threads? Processes? "Cells"?
Mr. Anonymous Coward:
The person you want to contact is "themathletes at yahoo dot com".
Exactly what do the SPEs *do* in a timesharing OS such as Linux? Are the SPEs all parcelled out to processes on an individual basis, like normal processors would be? Are the SPEs attached to the same process as their corresponding normal-CPU PPC core, and the SPE's onboard memories just gets copied to main memory and then overwritten on every single context switch? Or what?
Hi,
I'm not the Ninja Death Club guy, just his webmaster. The Ninja Death Club subscription materials really are still being mailed out, just slowly-- the last time I talked to Joe he was readying another release. What I would do is email Joe (mention your name/address so he knows which subscriber he's talking to) and he can give you a better idea of when the next release will be sent. Unfortunately I'm not sure which email he's using at the moment and I have to go to work now, so if you could please check back here later today I'll figure out his current email address and post it here.
Thanks for your patience.
That's irony
No no... Aluminum
One possible answer might be because if China makes potentially poor decisions, it doesn't directly effect us.
Welcome to Academia. That's how you fire people here.