What are we going to do when we suddenly find out that genetic engineering can't change our intelligence the way we want it to? We'll be able to design children to have the right sex and the right hair color and height, and maybe even make sure they're intellectually capable. But we'll find that intelligence is a socially formed phenomenon that no amount of rearranged DNA will revolutionize and that personality is beyond hope of genetic changing. Emotionally deficient people? Heh. Will we riot against the biologists for not finding what we wanted them to?
Oh, and BTW, that bit about supercomputing curing blindness and cancer was really...cute. Go Katz go!
Hiawatha Bray is the Boston Globe's answer to ZDNet's Jesse Berst and Slashdot's Jon Katz. I know this; I'm from the Boston area and get to read the Globe articles even when/. doesn't link them. Hiawatha Bray is a FUDMaster 2000 with neither the technical knowledge the job requires nor the ability to write coherantly and logically.
I don't mean this as a flame - I'm just saying Bray articles should be approached with the same warning and preparedness-for-bullshit as you'd have on a JonKatz or ZDNet/Jesse Berst article.
First of all I'd like to say I haven't noticed much a problem with trolls...but then again I only read the comments on maybe 5-10% of the articles that get posted on/. I have, however, seen moderator abuse (i.e. people moderating comments down because they disagree, rather than based on content), and that REALLY annoys me, because it's a failure of the system, not a failure of the masses.
Secondly I don't really like the idea of karma working in an upwards manner. Sometimes I post comments which try to be insightful, other times I post comments which aren't are just blah, whatever, which don't especially deserve a rating > 1. This could result in a LOT of wasted points spent downgrading or "overrated"-ing comments which are high merely due to karma. Maybe the system would be okay if people got positive karma to +1 only if their average post was >= +2.
I had this idea... What if people are limited to 3 comments per article per thread-hierarchy? How many times does a person need to respond to an article, if they're genuinely responding and not spamming/trolling? Maybe be should be allowed to delete/append to their previous comments in such instances. This allows further and infinite discussion by an individual so long as they respond to a different comment beyond 3 comments in the same place. This also makes it significantly more difficult to spam. [Perhaps people shouldn't be allowed to respond to their own comments, or only once.] Obviously this idea does not help anonymous trolls, but it's an idea.
Anyone who's afraid their Blue & White G3 Mac won't be upgradeable to a G4 is simply a victim of FUD.
What apple did was release a firmware patch which makes the computer check to see if its using a G3 cpu before allowing startup (it's not a patch to the normal ROM - if it had been, any idiot would have been able to reverse the patch, as the MacOS ROM is a file on the disk on recent Macs).
It was known before this batch of G3s even shipped that they'd be G4 upgradeable, but apple released a software patch which seems to prevent g4 upgrades. OH NO!! Not a software patch! The treachery! They'll never get around THAT! Apple knows the futility of this.
Apple has not (in recent history) even marketed CPU upgrades for their computers. They've always been third party. XLR8 was quoted on MacInTouch on September 1: "A special fix will be needed to run G4 with the 1.1 firmware in a Blue and White. Users get 5 tones, like the emergency weather warning. We have a fix in hand, using DayStar magic." XLR8's press release on August 31 (the SAME DAY apple announced G4 products) says: "Additional AltiVec(TM) performance software with blue & white compatibility is being readied in our labs now." -Gary Dailey, Director of Marketing for XLR8.
Lets look at what Apple actually has done for their customers, upgrade-wise. The long lived family of PCI powermacs, the [789][356]00 series, all have processor daughterboards, which are replaceable, all the way up to G3 or even potentially G4 CPUs. Earlier powermacs can be upgraded to G3s with "L2-cache" upgrades (a CPU on a card fits in where the L2 cache normally goes, and overrides the existing CPU). Apple's G3 desktops all have zif sockets for easy and cheap upgradability. Apple's entire line of desktops uses one type of socket. I think that's pretty good. How many different sockets do you get across the pentium/ppro/p2/p3/celeron/k6/k7-athlon? How many such cpus can be used as an upgrade for one of the other cpus?
I own one of the first PowerMac G3/400s (Blue & White). I remain quite confident that by the time I want to upgrade it, G4 upgrades from third party companies like XLR8, newertech, and powerlogix will be waiting for me.
They'll just move to LinuxAlpha or LinuxPPC. Why should the ubergeek be constrained to 32bit Intel?
To ramble a little bit, why do you think the dominant platform for linux is so clearly intel x86? I think it's because the majority of current linux users are DOS/windoze weenies who figured out sometime about when windows95 was released "hey, this really really sucks, and it isn't getting better, time to look at something else" and started to migrate to linux (as opposed to the people who realized DOS was crap from the start). And I bet a lot of current linux users still dual boot with windows.
Maybe it makes some sense that x86 was the primary linux platform 4-5 years ago, but why now? Does anyone actually think intel is doing a great job putting out powerful, fast chips? The time to move to powerpc / alpha / sparc / insert_new_speedy_chip_here could have been a while ago if the linux community wanted it to be.
And on another note, if linux does become dominant and people decide it's too commercial and trendy to use anymore, I hope it isn't an OS like OpenBSD or any UNIX-derived or UNIX-like OS which replaces it. I would really like it to be something far more innovative and well thought out than anything we currently have.
Is it just me or is this whole idea absolutely stupid?
A monitor is the one part of a system which should really last a while (2-3 times the lifetime of your cpu), even longer than disk storage. The last thing i want in a "simple" non-upgradable box is a built in monitor.
A low-powered cheap computer targeted at entry level users means a computer which is looking to be replaced in 3 years. Why replace the monitor if it's not inadequate?
At least in an iMac, along with its PCI-less and fixed-CPU design is a cheap 15" CRT, which probably contributes about $150 (15%) of the price. In these models, like the NEC one, they're using a monitor I would actually want to use on my next computer, and it takes up a much more significant part of the price. Wasted.
You can't tell me that plugging a monitor into a case is just too complicated for newbies.
Isn't supporting imacs and G3s a little redundant?
=)
This is nice, how about something useful?
on
Flat Panel Speakers
·
· Score: 1
Neat. They'll look nice when I have a flat panel display. But like the flat panel display, what I really want is to eliminate the analog connection to the device from my computer. I have a big problem with interference on my speakers, especially when I'm at home. A few companies are already making USB speakers (Microsoft comes to mind...), but I don't think any serious high-end speaker companies are. Of course, drivers for a non-windoze OS is a must, too.
This is the first time I've ever responded to a JonKatz article. I've always thought his work has just been really really week, although, until now, I've thought his stuff has been getting better. I guess I've been content to read his lame articles laugh at them with my friends.
But this just made me want to kick JonKatz in the JonNutz. Saying Contact was a disaster, except maybe in a financial sense (which he obviously didn't mean) is just pathetic. It's one of the best movies I've seen. For someone who likes the word 'geek' and 'geek cinema' so much, I really think Katz needs to get himself bonked until he understands what he's talking about if he thinks Contact sucked.
Yeah, yeah, I'm sure the book was better, but the movie was long enough as it was without making it more true to the book.
I haven't seen Amistad, but after reading Katz's review I think I'll have to rent it.
Slashdot Mirror
What are we going to do when we suddenly find out that genetic engineering can't change our intelligence the way we want it to? We'll be able to design children to have the right sex and the right hair color and height, and maybe even make sure they're intellectually capable. But we'll find that intelligence is a socially formed phenomenon that no amount of rearranged DNA will revolutionize and that personality is beyond hope of genetic changing. Emotionally deficient people? Heh. Will we riot against the biologists for not finding what we wanted them to?
Oh, and BTW, that bit about supercomputing curing blindness and cancer was really...cute. Go Katz go!
I always thought slashdot was a news and dicussion site. Reading what the BBC is looking for, I guess slashdot is a MUD. Could've fooled me!
Hiawatha Bray is the Boston Globe's answer to ZDNet's Jesse Berst and Slashdot's Jon Katz. I know this; I'm from the Boston area and get to read the Globe articles even when /. doesn't link them. Hiawatha Bray is a FUDMaster 2000 with neither the technical knowledge the job requires nor the ability to write coherantly and logically.
I don't mean this as a flame - I'm just saying Bray articles should be approached with the same warning and preparedness-for-bullshit as you'd have on a JonKatz or ZDNet/Jesse Berst article.
First of all I'd like to say I haven't noticed much a problem with trolls...but then again I only read the comments on maybe 5-10% of the articles that get posted on /. I have, however, seen moderator abuse (i.e. people moderating comments down because they disagree, rather than based on content), and that REALLY annoys me, because it's a failure of the system, not a failure of the masses.
Secondly I don't really like the idea of karma working in an upwards manner. Sometimes I post comments which try to be insightful, other times I post comments which aren't are just blah, whatever, which don't especially deserve a rating > 1. This could result in a LOT of wasted points spent downgrading or "overrated"-ing comments which are high merely due to karma. Maybe the system would be okay if people got positive karma to +1 only if their average post was >= +2.
I had this idea... What if people are limited to 3 comments per article per thread-hierarchy? How many times does a person need to respond to an article, if they're genuinely responding and not spamming/trolling? Maybe be should be allowed to delete/append to their previous comments in such instances. This allows further and infinite discussion by an individual so long as they respond to a different comment beyond 3 comments in the same place. This also makes it significantly more difficult to spam. [Perhaps people shouldn't be allowed to respond to their own comments, or only once.] Obviously this idea does not help anonymous trolls, but it's an idea.
What apple did was release a firmware patch which makes the computer check to see if its using a G3 cpu before allowing startup (it's not a patch to the normal ROM - if it had been, any idiot would have been able to reverse the patch, as the MacOS ROM is a file on the disk on recent Macs).
It was known before this batch of G3s even shipped that they'd be G4 upgradeable, but apple released a software patch which seems to prevent g4 upgrades. OH NO!! Not a software patch! The treachery! They'll never get around THAT! Apple knows the futility of this.
Apple has not (in recent history) even marketed CPU upgrades for their computers. They've always been third party. XLR8 was quoted on MacInTouch on September 1: "A special fix will be needed to run G4 with the 1.1 firmware in a Blue and White. Users get 5 tones, like the emergency weather warning. We have a fix in hand, using DayStar magic." XLR8's press release on August 31 (the SAME DAY apple announced G4 products) says: "Additional AltiVec(TM) performance software with blue & white compatibility is being readied in our labs now." -Gary Dailey, Director of Marketing for XLR8.Lets look at what Apple actually has done for their customers, upgrade-wise. The long lived family of PCI powermacs, the [789][356]00 series, all have processor daughterboards, which are replaceable, all the way up to G3 or even potentially G4 CPUs. Earlier powermacs can be upgraded to G3s with "L2-cache" upgrades (a CPU on a card fits in where the L2 cache normally goes, and overrides the existing CPU). Apple's G3 desktops all have zif sockets for easy and cheap upgradability. Apple's entire line of desktops uses one type of socket. I think that's pretty good. How many different sockets do you get across the pentium/ppro/p2/p3/celeron/k6/k7-athlon? How many such cpus can be used as an upgrade for one of the other cpus?
I own one of the first PowerMac G3/400s (Blue & White). I remain quite confident that by the time I want to upgrade it, G4 upgrades from third party companies like XLR8, newertech, and powerlogix will be waiting for me.
"having sex with sheep" got 1,072,553, while "having sex with pigs" (which everyone knows is far dirtier) got only 971795.
They'll just move to LinuxAlpha or LinuxPPC. Why should the ubergeek be constrained to 32bit Intel?
To ramble a little bit, why do you think the dominant platform for linux is so clearly intel x86? I think it's because the majority of current linux users are DOS/windoze weenies who figured out sometime about when windows95 was released "hey, this really really sucks, and it isn't getting better, time to look at something else" and started to migrate to linux (as opposed to the people who realized DOS was crap from the start). And I bet a lot of current linux users still dual boot with windows.
Maybe it makes some sense that x86 was the primary linux platform 4-5 years ago, but why now? Does anyone actually think intel is doing a great job putting out powerful, fast chips? The time to move to powerpc / alpha / sparc / insert_new_speedy_chip_here could have been a while ago if the linux community wanted it to be.
And on another note, if linux does become dominant and people decide it's too commercial and trendy to use anymore, I hope it isn't an OS like OpenBSD or any UNIX-derived or UNIX-like OS which replaces it. I would really like it to be something far more innovative and well thought out than anything we currently have.
Maybe if you didn't use Microsoft products to generate ?Microsoft-HTML? you wouldn't be so ?stressed out?.
Is it just me or is this whole idea absolutely stupid?
A monitor is the one part of a system which should really last a while (2-3 times the lifetime of your cpu), even longer than disk storage. The last thing i want in a "simple" non-upgradable box is a built in monitor.
A low-powered cheap computer targeted at entry level users means a computer which is looking to be replaced in 3 years. Why replace the monitor if it's not inadequate?
At least in an iMac, along with its PCI-less and fixed-CPU design is a cheap 15" CRT, which probably contributes about $150 (15%) of the price. In these models, like the NEC one, they're using a monitor I would actually want to use on my next computer, and it takes up a much more significant part of the price. Wasted.
You can't tell me that plugging a monitor into a case is just too complicated for newbies.
Isn't supporting imacs and G3s a little redundant?
=)
Neat. They'll look nice when I have a flat panel display.
But like the flat panel display, what I really want is to eliminate the analog connection to the device from my computer. I have a big problem with interference on my speakers, especially when I'm at home. A few companies are already making USB speakers (Microsoft comes to mind...), but I don't think any serious high-end speaker companies are.
Of course, drivers for a non-windoze OS is a must, too.
This is the first time I've ever responded to a JonKatz article. I've always thought his work has just been really really week, although, until now, I've thought his stuff has been getting better. I guess I've been content to read his lame articles laugh at them with my friends.
But this just made me want to kick JonKatz in the JonNutz. Saying Contact was a disaster, except maybe in a financial sense (which he obviously didn't mean) is just pathetic. It's one of the best movies I've seen. For someone who likes the word 'geek' and 'geek cinema' so much, I really think Katz needs to get himself bonked until he understands what he's talking about if he thinks Contact sucked.
Yeah, yeah, I'm sure the book was better, but the movie was long enough as it was without making it more true to the book.
I haven't seen Amistad, but after reading Katz's review I think I'll have to rent it.