'Free' software only really appeals to those people that refuse to pay for software outright... and would end up pirating pay software anyway.
No, it's the simple economic matter of supply and demand. I would pay for software if I had to, but Free software does what I want, so to pay for competing software is rationally stupid for me anyway since I can get it for free. I contribute to such Free software projects because it enhances the benefits of the product and the cost to me is a small amount of time.
Now, of course, perhaps I'm the exception, and perhaps most Free/Open Source people would be pirates if this option was not available to them. The problem with that thought is that most pirates are freeloaders. They want to take, but they don't want to give. In that scenario, there is no incentive to improve Free/Open Source software. However, that doesn't seem to be the case since we have such high quality software as FreeBSD, GNU/Linux, KDE, GNOME, etc.
Also, if most were just pirates, then what would the incentive be for companies such as IBM and SGI to release (as Open Source) such software as JFS ans XFS? These two filesystems are highly respected filesystems, and are used by some pretty large firms. If most Free/Open Source people were pirates, neither IBM nor SGI would make such a move since neither would profit on them. However, as it is, this is not the case. Open Sourcing XFS and JFS allows more developers to work on these projects without IBM and SGI having to pay for that development cost. This in turn raises the quality of such software, which in turn reflects back on the company, which in turn brings in more customers. What about the developers? Humans are quaint little things, and believe in "intrinsic" rewards. Developers are humans, and so they must obviously get an "intrinsic" reward.
The most immediate step to creating an advanced OpenGL standard will be to combine backward compatibility with OpenGL 1.3, while maintaining parity with DirectX by incorporating required features such as vertex and pixel processing,and memory management.
So developer really wouldn't be supporting three different APIs as you would suspect.
These products are about as similar to the liquid coolant used in the Cray 2 as scrambled eggs are to mayonnaise.
I like your comment and agree, but for future reference (and this is not in any way meant to be a flame or troll or inane comment), you should know that mayonnaise are made from eggs!
This is just an FYI. You probably did not even know that.
I would not say it is overkill. I have taken care of a pool before (for over half of my life, I have lived in a house with a pool.) Taking care of a pool is a tedious and repetitive task. There are a lot of things that could and should be automated.
For example, this guy could extend this to controling those self-propelled pool vacuums to clean the pool (and do the backwash as well.) There are actually pool vacuums that propel themselves and clean the floor bottom by themselves. They climb right up the wall and back down. It is a really neat sight to see. I could imagine using the computer, putting the vacuum in a small compartment with an automatic door that the computer could open and close to let the vacuum out. Also, instead of having the vacuum having to run the vacuum nearly all the time like you would normally do (the vacuum has no AI or anything, it largely just goes back and forth), the computer would know the dimensions of the pool and how it is shaped and so strategize the fastest way to vacuum the bottom.
Also, chlorine is not the only chemical that needs to be put in the pool (but is the main component.) All pools have to worry about algae and the vacuum and chlorine are not enough to handle algae, so a lot of pool owners have a stock of algaecide for that.
I could also imagine there being cameras on the pool connected to the computer so that the computer could determine if there are people in it, the cleanliness of the pool, etc.
There are so many tedious tasks to taking care of a pool that having a system that is automated would be a blessing to many pool owners.
Hemp paper is of exceptional quality and a tonne of hemp will make much more paper then a tonne of dead trees.
I'd like to see this modded up with not just +1 Funny mods, but also +1 Insightful. There is lots of evidence showing that we would all benefit more from utilizing hemp instead of dead trees. This is not some euphemism for legalizing Marijuana either. There is legitimate use to it. Also, I don't consider myself to be some left wing ultra environmentalist either. Some links:
Hemp Pulp and Paper Production Why Hemp? The Challenge of Making Hemp Paper (this is not just all pro-hemp paper, this gives a little bit more of a rounded view, with some discussion of disadvantages)
Those damn 10-10-220 commercials keep running through my head.
Now instead of those guys talking about 10-10-220, I can hear them saying, "A dollar buys you a lot at movie88. At movie88, you can watch any movie you want for just a buck!"
Unless everything boots off the HDD and all the source code is stored there as well and no DVDs/CDs are included, I can't see how they can do all that. Hiding the bootloader is easy, but hiding access to the CD/DVD-ROM drive will be difficult (without breaking the GPL, that is) unless you boot off the HDD.
I think that if they do all that they say they will, RMS and GNU are going to have a fit.
(me again) "Well, it started out for me like it did for many of you. I sat down for what I thought would be a fun session of UT2, logged into the server, and before I knew it, I was already dead. I got upset and tried again, thinking that the enemy killed me. After respawning, I saw some guy in front of me and tried to shoot him with my rocket launcher. I got so excited that I ended up shooting the wall next to me." (sob, sob )-;
(people getting up to hug me) "It's alright, we understand. Hey, I got an idea, let's all play UT2 and kick our own asses some more!"
I say that we start the Coalition of Sucky UT2 Players.
This way we could have strength in numbers...
Hmm, actually that might be a bad thing. Could you imagine a line of use coming down towards the enemy firing rockets in front of us? We would probably kill more of ourselves than then enemy would. The enemy would see people flying all over the place and (s)he would not be doing anything.
It would would be so much worse on a level with a pit in it. Could you imagine us trying to use the teleporter? We would try to look really good by using it, but we would probably end up teleporting ourselves into the pit.
Of course it could be that we would only end up proliferating our suckiness, but at least we would have a support group (and why not, there is a support group for everything these days.)
There is a group out there that has been working on unifying the packaging system across all the *BSDs out there. Open Packages has already been working on this, and much of the work has been to implement something that sort of a cross between FreeBSD's ports system and Debian's apt.
At first I thought that this was an announcement of that, but now I know that this is a seperate project with different goals.
There is a certain intuitive logic to this. In an economy that punishes freeloaders, there comes a higher opportunity cost to freeloading. Basic economics say that fewer people will do something if the opportunity costs of doing that something goes up.
That's not such a bad idea. On Gnutella for example, freeloaders are more and more becoming the bane of Gnutella. They are getting their music, but not contributing anything back, bogging down the network, and making the entire thing less enjoyable for everyone.
While punishing freeloaders seems intuitive, this study does, as you say, give creedence to the idea that people with lots of music should have the ability to punish those that do not share music on the Gnutella network.
Could this possibly also be the grounds for figuring out why certain open source projects fail and others succeed? Or is there another reason for that?
Fine, but that does not make my argument any less relevent. Sorry I made that error. Next time I post an opinion, I will make sure to research every inane factoid on the subject matter just to please you.
This is very bad for Microsoft's image in the console industry. Even if they try to say that these sorts of things happen on all systems, few consumers will buy into that.
Console games have hitherto been very plug and play and never crashed. The only consoles that had nearly as many problems were the old eight bit first generation systems. Not only that, those systems often did not have problems until they got old (anyone with an original NES can attest to this.) Playstation 1 had the same issue with regards to age and functionality.
Consumers simply will not accept this. To them, this is simply what game console systems do not do, lest they are aging. They may like the games, but they will wonder whether it is worth since the system's reliability is so iffy.
Blame is placed correctly on Microsoft. Yeah, NVidia made the graphics chipset and AMD made the processor, but Microsoft put their name on it, not NVidia or AMD.
What you're saying is that we shouldn't blame the business that claims to have created it, whether or not they actually did. If I claim to have created something and put my name on it like Microsoft did, I will try to at least make sure I know how it was created and how it works.
I can't see how case 1, 2, or 3 could remotely be true. Mr. Robertson is a well respected business person, and I doubt he would put himself into such a legal quagmire.
I can't help but think of that scene in the Matrix where "Agent Smith" says "Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague, and we are the cure."
So, does this mean that the Matrix is aging the planet much quicker?
Cancer is defined by the process of uncontrolled cellular division. As a person ages, fewer and fewer cells can divide. If they could divide forever, how would you know which cells are the cancerous ones?
X-Files had an episode with a guy that was basically immortal because he was nothing more than cancer cells. He also never aged. Interesting episode.
Can you define consciousness? Some people will argue that everything is concious, even that chair that you're sitting on (or not sitting on), or that there is a sort of universal consciousness (something like the Hindu Brahman.) The idea of what consciousness is is hotly debated still.
The other question is, what exactly is intelligence? If we can't clearly define it, do we really know what is intelligent? Do we know WHO is intelligent? If we can't clearly define it, can we really create something that is intelligent? Perhaps we can evolve things into intelligence, but then, did we really create it, or did evolution create it?
//--End philosophical stuff here--
This is interesting technology for devices that have very specific applications, but not for general computing and nothing in regards to AI could this be applied. Basically, it uses evolution to find the best way to solve a problem, but not a set of problem. I'm sure it could be possible to modify it to make it use evolution to find circuits that could do general computing better, but that would be on a much higher complexity level. It might be a while until that happens.
Slashdot Mirror
Not just that, but also make sure that every word on your web page has a different color. That makes things easier to read.
No, it's the simple economic matter of supply and demand. I would pay for software if I had to, but Free software does what I want, so to pay for competing software is rationally stupid for me anyway since I can get it for free. I contribute to such Free software projects because it enhances the benefits of the product and the cost to me is a small amount of time.
Now, of course, perhaps I'm the exception, and perhaps most Free/Open Source people would be pirates if this option was not available to them. The problem with that thought is that most pirates are freeloaders. They want to take, but they don't want to give. In that scenario, there is no incentive to improve Free/Open Source software. However, that doesn't seem to be the case since we have such high quality software as FreeBSD, GNU/Linux, KDE, GNOME, etc.
Also, if most were just pirates, then what would the incentive be for companies such as IBM and SGI to release (as Open Source) such software as JFS ans XFS? These two filesystems are highly respected filesystems, and are used by some pretty large firms. If most Free/Open Source people were pirates, neither IBM nor SGI would make such a move since neither would profit on them. However, as it is, this is not the case. Open Sourcing XFS and JFS allows more developers to work on these projects without IBM and SGI having to pay for that development cost. This in turn raises the quality of such software, which in turn reflects back on the company, which in turn brings in more customers. What about the developers? Humans are quaint little things, and believe in "intrinsic" rewards. Developers are humans, and so they must obviously get an "intrinsic" reward.
Now, as far as RMS being an idiot...
These are mixes, not copies of the original artwork (i.e. variations or inspirations from the original piece.) Does that still make it illegal?
That's not really the same thing. The above are actual mixes inspired by the games, not a rehashed midi.
So developer really wouldn't be supporting three different APIs as you would suspect.
Don't you mean 8 to 3 years? Oh, oh, you mean other distros.
Sorry for the misunderstanding, mea culpa.
I like your comment and agree, but for future reference (and this is not in any way meant to be a flame or troll or inane comment), you should know that mayonnaise are made from eggs!
This is just an FYI. You probably did not even know that.
Mayonnaise Recipe
I would not say it is overkill. I have taken care of a pool before (for over half of my life, I have lived in a house with a pool.) Taking care of a pool is a tedious and repetitive task. There are a lot of things that could and should be automated.
For example, this guy could extend this to controling those self-propelled pool vacuums to clean the pool (and do the backwash as well.) There are actually pool vacuums that propel themselves and clean the floor bottom by themselves. They climb right up the wall and back down. It is a really neat sight to see. I could imagine using the computer, putting the vacuum in a small compartment with an automatic door that the computer could open and close to let the vacuum out. Also, instead of having the vacuum having to run the vacuum nearly all the time like you would normally do (the vacuum has no AI or anything, it largely just goes back and forth), the computer would know the dimensions of the pool and how it is shaped and so strategize the fastest way to vacuum the bottom.
Also, chlorine is not the only chemical that needs to be put in the pool (but is the main component.) All pools have to worry about algae and the vacuum and chlorine are not enough to handle algae, so a lot of pool owners have a stock of algaecide for that.
I could also imagine there being cameras on the pool connected to the computer so that the computer could determine if there are people in it, the cleanliness of the pool, etc.
There are so many tedious tasks to taking care of a pool that having a system that is automated would be a blessing to many pool owners.
I'd like to see this modded up with not just +1 Funny mods, but also +1 Insightful. There is lots of evidence showing that we would all benefit more from utilizing hemp instead of dead trees. This is not some euphemism for legalizing Marijuana either. There is legitimate use to it. Also, I don't consider myself to be some left wing ultra environmentalist either. Some links:
Hemp Pulp and Paper Production
Why Hemp?
The Challenge of Making Hemp Paper (this is not just all pro-hemp paper, this gives a little bit more of a rounded view, with some discussion of disadvantages)
Those damn 10-10-220 commercials keep running through my head.
Now instead of those guys talking about 10-10-220, I can hear them saying, "A dollar buys you a lot at movie88. At movie88, you can watch any movie you want for just a buck!"
How can they do all that and not break the GPL?
Unless everything boots off the HDD and all the source code is stored there as well and no DVDs/CDs are included, I can't see how they can do all that. Hiding the bootloader is easy, but hiding access to the CD/DVD-ROM drive will be difficult (without breaking the GPL, that is) unless you boot off the HDD.
I think that if they do all that they say they will, RMS and GNU are going to have a fit.
I can imagine our support group:
(I stand up) "Hi, I'm ndogg."
(everyone) "Hi ndogg."
(me again) "Well, it started out for me like it did for many of you. I sat down for what I thought would be a fun session of UT2, logged into the server, and before I knew it, I was already dead. I got upset and tried again, thinking that the enemy killed me. After respawning, I saw some guy in front of me and tried to shoot him with my rocket launcher. I got so excited that I ended up shooting the wall next to me." (sob, sob )-;
(people getting up to hug me) "It's alright, we understand. Hey, I got an idea, let's all play UT2 and kick our own asses some more!"
(everyone lights up, with eyes wide) "YEAH!"
(we all run to the computers and load UT2)
I say that we start the Coalition of Sucky UT2 Players.
This way we could have strength in numbers...
Hmm, actually that might be a bad thing. Could you imagine a line of use coming down towards the enemy firing rockets in front of us? We would probably kill more of ourselves than then enemy would. The enemy would see people flying all over the place and (s)he would not be doing anything.
It would would be so much worse on a level with a pit in it. Could you imagine us trying to use the teleporter? We would try to look really good by using it, but we would probably end up teleporting ourselves into the pit.
Of course it could be that we would only end up proliferating our suckiness, but at least we would have a support group (and why not, there is a support group for everything these days.)
There is a group out there that has been working on unifying the packaging system across all the *BSDs out there. Open Packages has already been working on this, and much of the work has been to implement something that sort of a cross between FreeBSD's ports system and Debian's apt.
At first I thought that this was an announcement of that, but now I know that this is a seperate project with different goals.
I'm not sure I understand. More people want to quit smoking these days than ever before.
There is a certain intuitive logic to this. In an economy that punishes freeloaders, there comes a higher opportunity cost to freeloading. Basic economics say that fewer people will do something if the opportunity costs of doing that something goes up.
That's not such a bad idea. On Gnutella for example, freeloaders are more and more becoming the bane of Gnutella. They are getting their music, but not contributing anything back, bogging down the network, and making the entire thing less enjoyable for everyone.
While punishing freeloaders seems intuitive, this study does, as you say, give creedence to the idea that people with lots of music should have the ability to punish those that do not share music on the Gnutella network.
Could this possibly also be the grounds for figuring out why certain open source projects fail and others succeed? Or is there another reason for that?
Fine, but that does not make my argument any less relevent. Sorry I made that error. Next time I post an opinion, I will make sure to research every inane factoid on the subject matter just to please you.
This is very bad for Microsoft's image in the console industry. Even if they try to say that these sorts of things happen on all systems, few consumers will buy into that.
Console games have hitherto been very plug and play and never crashed. The only consoles that had nearly as many problems were the old eight bit first generation systems. Not only that, those systems often did not have problems until they got old (anyone with an original NES can attest to this.) Playstation 1 had the same issue with regards to age and functionality.
Consumers simply will not accept this. To them, this is simply what game console systems do not do, lest they are aging. They may like the games, but they will wonder whether it is worth since the system's reliability is so iffy.
Blame is placed correctly on Microsoft. Yeah, NVidia made the graphics chipset and AMD made the processor, but Microsoft put their name on it, not NVidia or AMD.
What you're saying is that we shouldn't blame the business that claims to have created it, whether or not they actually did. If I claim to have created something and put my name on it like Microsoft did, I will try to at least make sure I know how it was created and how it works.
I can't see how case 1, 2, or 3 could remotely be true. Mr. Robertson is a well respected business person, and I doubt he would put himself into such a legal quagmire.
I can't help but think of that scene in the Matrix where "Agent Smith" says "Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague, and we are the cure."
So, does this mean that the Matrix is aging the planet much quicker?
Without the confusing Next Page thing
Background on protein P53
A little more on P53
Cancer is defined by the process of uncontrolled cellular division. As a person ages, fewer and fewer cells can divide. If they could divide forever, how would you know which cells are the cancerous ones?
X-Files had an episode with a guy that was basically immortal because he was nothing more than cancer cells. He also never aged. Interesting episode.
Can you define consciousness? Some people will argue that everything is concious, even that chair that you're sitting on (or not sitting on), or that there is a sort of universal consciousness (something like the Hindu Brahman.) The idea of what consciousness is is hotly debated still.
//--End philosophical stuff here--
The other question is, what exactly is intelligence? If we can't clearly define it, do we really know what is intelligent? Do we know WHO is intelligent? If we can't clearly define it, can we really create something that is intelligent? Perhaps we can evolve things into intelligence, but then, did we really create it, or did evolution create it?
This is interesting technology for devices that have very specific applications, but not for general computing and nothing in regards to AI could this be applied. Basically, it uses evolution to find the best way to solve a problem, but not a set of problem. I'm sure it could be possible to modify it to make it use evolution to find circuits that could do general computing better, but that would be on a much higher complexity level. It might be a while until that happens.