Sounds fun! Just like Sega's Crazy Taxi. A car game with a twist and lots of meyhem.
For those who haven't heard of Crazy Taxi, well, you're a taxi driver of an indistructible taxi. You pick up fares and take them to where they want to go. The faster you get them there, the more money you get. This leads to just driving like mad, weaving through traffic, and pulling off stunts. You get points for dangerous driving without crashing, which just slows you down.
One of my all time favorite games. Too bad it's hard to find good arcade machines for it, due to the abuse they get because of certain techniques used in the game (putting the card in Drive, and then slam on the gas a split second later gives a speed boost).
Almost 'nuff said. But I guess for the number crunching work that it's designed to do, FORTRAN must be the way to go. Not to mention that it was probably build by engineers. Nya! ^_^
While yes, the openness of Linux prevents back doors and such to be put into the source code, it's still possible to have a compiler written that will put in back doors. I believe Ken Thompson demonstrated that in a talk once. And since you can't do anything without a complier (unless you're up for writting assembly by hand.) then there's always a way to get a hole in.
Maybe it's time to have a trust model for compilers?
Communication has always been the key to the scientific endevour. Science is only productive if people share their findings. Better communication leads to larger groups of people collaborating. More people collaborating leads to faster and better science, since there is less reduancy. Faster science pushs technology, which of coures feeds back into science.
I haven't really looked too, too closely at the various licences mentioned here, but what is to prevent someone from taking an open source text and putting all sorts of garbage and wrong information on it, and then publishing it under the authors name? With source code, it's not that big a deal, since the program will either not compile, or something bad happens to your computer. But with information, it will just be like spreading a rumour. Believable but wrong information. Of coures with more people looking at the text, hopefully most of the mistakes will be caught, but there is no garuntee(sp?).
Those are my thoughts from trying to think of a licence for a open-source Computer Science web textbook. Haven't written much of it, but the outline is kinda on my website.
Sure, the computer cases are neat, and less boring than the beige ones, but why do all(qualified) computer cases have to be a box?
A friend and I were thinking along the lines of the wall mounted computer, but with a case. A metal covering. Curving, organic looking, with the wires coming out of it. The cards could not be connected directly onto the motherboard due to depth, so an alternative would have to be used. I was thinking of wireing the cards just like how you wire the drives.
I guess the reason that cases are boxes is because everything inside in at right angles. But you don't have to have it that way. Not as efficient, but it could work.
Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.
(Can't really imitate Frank Oz's voice on line.)
Anyways, we've suffered log enough under MS's rule. But thanks to Linux, and GNU, and others, we now have a choice. And since this is what the GPL is built on, we will always have a choice. So worry not, and do something important, like code.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds fun! Just like Sega's Crazy Taxi. A car game with a twist and lots of meyhem.
For those who haven't heard of Crazy Taxi, well, you're a taxi driver of an indistructible taxi. You pick up fares and take them to where they want to go. The faster you get them there, the more money you get. This leads to just driving like mad, weaving through traffic, and pulling off stunts. You get points for dangerous driving without crashing, which just slows you down.
One of my all time favorite games. Too bad it's hard to find good arcade machines for it, due to the abuse they get because of certain techniques used in the game (putting the card in Drive, and then slam on the gas a split second later gives a speed boost).
Almost 'nuff said. But I guess for the number crunching work that it's designed to do, FORTRAN must be the way to go. Not to mention that it was probably build by engineers. Nya! ^_^
While yes, the openness of Linux prevents back doors and such to be put into the source code, it's still possible to have a compiler written that will put in back doors. I believe Ken Thompson demonstrated that in a talk once. And since you can't do anything without a complier (unless you're up for writting assembly by hand.) then there's always a way to get a hole in. Maybe it's time to have a trust model for compilers?
There is www.textfiles.com which has some of the more purely digital text from BBSing days. Probably not nearly as comprehensive as wiretap, though.
Communication has always been the key to the scientific endevour. Science is only productive if people share their findings. Better communication leads to larger groups of people collaborating. More people collaborating leads to faster and better science, since there is less reduancy. Faster science pushs technology, which of coures feeds back into science.
I wonder what James Burke would say?
My 2,
I haven't really looked too, too closely at the various licences mentioned here, but what is to prevent someone from taking an open source text and putting all sorts of garbage and wrong information on it, and then publishing it under the authors name? With source code, it's not that big a deal, since the program will either not compile, or something bad happens to your computer. But with information, it will just be like spreading a rumour. Believable but wrong information. Of coures with more people looking at the text, hopefully most of the mistakes will be caught, but there is no garuntee(sp?).
Those are my thoughts from trying to think of a licence for a open-source Computer Science web textbook. Haven't written much of it, but the outline is kinda on my website.
Sure, the computer cases are neat, and less boring than the beige ones, but why do all(qualified) computer cases have to be a box?
A friend and I were thinking along the lines of the wall mounted computer, but with a case. A metal covering. Curving, organic looking, with the wires coming out of it. The cards could not be connected directly onto the motherboard due to depth, so an alternative would have to be used. I was thinking of wireing the cards just like how you wire the drives.
I guess the reason that cases are boxes is because everything inside in at right angles. But you don't have to have it that way. Not as efficient, but it could work.
Fear leads to anger.
Anger leads to hate.
Hate leads to suffering.
(Can't really imitate Frank Oz's voice on line.)
Anyways, we've suffered log enough under MS's rule. But thanks to Linux, and GNU, and others, we now have a choice. And since this is what the GPL is built on, we will always have a choice. So worry not, and do something important, like code.