Human's nature is certainly not "never enough money, never enough power", that's just the nature of economists (Is that the right english word for those non-technicians who handles large amounts of mony and doesn't care about the great ideas they destroys?)!
I often write HTML when I have to communicate with Windoze users. If not, I write LaTeX. LaTeX is small, portable to all (to me known) U*N*X clones and VMS. Anyway, how do you write a swedish text in ASCII? Nearly every sentence in swedish contains a word containing one of the characters å, ä or ö (Don't know if you are able to view them correctly, anyway, its an a witha rng over, an a with two dots over and finnaly, an o with two dots over).
Animals mostly behaves more logical than humans; at least from a darwinistist's view... And "humanity" is what we call a behavoir which is not the standard human egoism...
You may, with any Turing machine, implement any other Turing machine less complex in space and time than the first one. The human brain may not be a Turing machine, however, I think that any modell of the brain may not be implemented using the same brain, for the same reason... So, why can't two brains understund one? It is possible to understund smaller parts; We may allready understund one brain-cell; which is a part of the brain. We may however never understund the overview, since no one may ever know the hole thing and explain it to us... The only thng left is to use the Random Creator; Put a random set of nstructions together in a random order. Test if it has become intelligent. If not, repeat until intelligent...
I'm aware of that great work. But it's not what I thought of; I thought of a wrapper, which lets you use eg. QT API calls, while using GTK, and vice versa, letting you comple current QT apps under GTK, and current GTK apps under QT. What I wonder is if this is possible, or if the two architectures are too different?
I've never touched QT and/or KDE as a programmer, but have done some small things under GTK. WOuld it be possible to write a cross-library; so that QT apps would be compilable with GTK, and GTK-apps with QT? Just a simple header file and some small "conversion" functions in a library? Or are they too different? To create that, would be really cool; there are many good QT and GTK apps out there, and, at least I prefere the _choice_of_the_user_, which is the dfference between Linux and Windoze. Windows enforces us to want things like MS wants... Not as we wanted originally...
EXACT TYPE OF MS EMPLOYEE FUD WE WE WERE WARNED OF
on
KDE 1.1 is out
·
· Score: 1
Did M$ VC++, or even MASM _exist_ when Linux was created? VC++ _did not_.
Slashdot Mirror
Human's nature is certainly not "never enough money, never enough power", that's just the nature of economists (Is that the right english word for those non-technicians who handles large amounts of mony and doesn't care about the great ideas they destroys?)!
Thanks for adding my suggestion! So, you read all e-mails, but does not answer them?
I think I recognize that small text :)
Just got it on my own screen, or, at least, a similar one...
I often write HTML when I have to communicate with Windoze users. If not, I write LaTeX. LaTeX is small, portable to all (to me known) U*N*X clones and VMS. Anyway, how do you write a swedish text in ASCII? Nearly every sentence in swedish contains a word containing one of the characters å, ä or ö (Don't know if you are able to view them correctly, anyway, its an a witha rng over, an a with two dots over and finnaly, an o with two dots over).
Animals mostly behaves more logical than humans; at least from a darwinistist's view... And "humanity" is what we call a behavoir which is not the standard human egoism...
You may, with any Turing machine, implement any other Turing machine less complex in space and time than the first one. The human brain may not be a Turing machine, however, I think that any modell of the brain may not be implemented using the same brain, for the same reason... So, why can't two brains understund one? It is possible to understund smaller parts; We may allready understund one brain-cell; which is a part of the brain. We may however never understund the overview, since no one may ever know the hole thing and explain it to us... The only thng left is to use the Random Creator; Put a random set of nstructions together in a random order. Test if it has become intelligent. If not, repeat until intelligent...
I'm aware of that great work. But it's not what I thought of; I thought of a wrapper, which lets you use eg. QT API calls, while using GTK, and vice versa, letting you comple current QT apps under GTK, and current GTK apps under QT. What I wonder is if this is possible, or if the two architectures are too different?
I've never touched QT and/or KDE as a programmer, but have done some small things under GTK. WOuld it be possible to write a cross-library; so that QT apps would be compilable with GTK, and GTK-apps with QT? Just a simple header file and some small "conversion" functions in a library? Or are they too different? To create that, would be really cool; there are many good QT and GTK apps out there, and, at least I prefere the _choice_of_the_user_, which is the dfference between Linux and Windoze. Windows enforces us to want things like MS wants... Not as we wanted originally...
Did M$ VC++, or even MASM _exist_ when Linux was created? VC++ _did not_.