It's a pity that OpenID somehow doesn't take off as many expected and I don't think a Microsoft solution will either. Google comes to mind as one company that could probably do it successfully.
There are plenty of OpenID providers at this point; it's just a matter of getting more OpenID consumers now. Firefox is planning on adding native OpenID support real soon now, and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Google picks up on it as well. Yahoo is promoting their own account instead, although you can use your Yahoo! ID as an OpenID identity via idproxy.net.
Of course, none of this means that OpenID is guaranteed to become the ubiquitous identity standard, but it's not exactly dead in the water either.
How does Ingo's new CFS compare to the code Kolivas wrote? Which design is superior? Does Ingo's design actually borrow from Con's code, or does it just do more or less the same thing?
The gist of the exchange is that the two schedulers are similar, but not
identical. I'm not a kernel expert and I don't know squat about
schedulers, but in my opinion, the exchange seemed to indicate that CFS
is superior.
I agree with your sentiment, although some of your specific points are dated.
-- Only a very small core of Japanese people who knew Matz really got to commit anything. Not in that core? No matter how great the value of what you try to commit, you might as well gived up.
This is no longer true. There are several non-Japanese people with commit access, including Ryan Davis (aka zenspider). There is also a central system for bug reports. More importantly, development decisions are increasingly discussed on the ruby-core mailing list instead of the Japanese-only ruby-dev mailing list.
That said, it is (or was, as of last year) still far more difficult to get simple patches applied than it should be. I have submitted common-sense patches and had them inexplicably ignored.
- Unicode? That's an evil anti-Japanese conspiracy. We must wait until suitable Japanese standards like konjaku mojikyo are mature enough to support. Until then Ruby has built-in support for specific Japanese encodings and the rest of the world doesn't matter.
Matz has agreed to include Rails-style character encoding support in the next major release (which is slated for the end of next year, I believe). The main push for this has been the Rails community's frustration with the lack of decent character encoding support in Ruby.
This endlessly-repeated debate partly inspired my page about Japanese attitudes to Unicode.
I really didn't understand why there was so much anti-Unicode sentiment coming out of Japanese developers until about 6 months ago when I read your Unicode article.:)
-- Matz used (and still uses AFAIK) Unix only. If it's part of unix (eg fork()) it's in Ruby. If it's not (eg proper threading) it's not in Ruby. Similarly, Matz is used to old-style C with global static vars all over the place, and therefore that's how Ruby is always gonna be. Having been an IT manager in Japan on occasion, I'd say it's a cultural thing that there's no point fighting. Sure, Ruby 2 is right around the corner. Sure.
There are actually several Ruby implementations now. Although none are nearly as popular as the main tree, a couple (JRuby and Rubinus) are showing some real promise. That said, I would love to see a C implementation of Ruby that was threadsafe and reentrant.
-- Documentation is hobbyist-grade. I admit that while writing this post I googled a bit to check if my memories were still valid. I found that there is a project devoted to deducing the Ruby standard by experimenting with the Ruby implementation. If you can't see the problem with that...:)
The documentation is still horrible. It's far better than it was in 2001 or 2002, when several major libraries were only documented in Japanese, but it's still nowhere near as good as Python or PHP. There has been a push to improve the Ruby documentation under the Ruby Documentation Project, but they haven't made nearly as much progress as I'd like.
Of course back in the late 90s, Ruby 2 was just around the corner and it took a long time for it to become clear that these were systemic, rather than temporary, failings. The current wikipedia page basically sums up everything I just said under 'criticism'. What it fails to mention is that these failings were a conscious decision.
I think they might actually be on track for Ruby 2. One big (and relatively recent) change has been the sudden interest in Ruby from major players like Sun (who actually hired the JRuby developers), Microsoft (who hired the IronRuby developer), and Apple (who includes Ruby with MacOS X out of the box). This has obviously brought a lot of money into the Ruby community, but also focused a spotlight on the most glaring warts (you've touched on several, but there are certainly more).
Swap is for unused pages of RAM. If an application isn't using a particular chunk of memory, then there's no reason to keep it in memory. The disk cache, on the other hand, reduces the delay associated with disk activity by caching the contents of recently read files and a handful of other tricks. Here's an example of the disk cache in action:
pabs@vault:/store/mythtv> du -sh 1066*.avi 360M 1066_20060327233000_20060328000000-divx.avi pabs@ vault:/store/mythtv> time dd if=1066*.avi of=/dev/null bs=4096 91986+1 records in 91986+1 records out 376775134 bytes transferred in 3.864956 seconds (97484976 bytes/sec)
real 0m3.883s user 0m0.032s sys 0m0.468s pabs@vault:/store/mythtv> time dd if=1066*.avi of=/dev/null bs=4096 91986+1 records in 91986+1 records out 376775134 bytes transferred in 1.744253 seconds (216009442 bytes/sec)
real 0m1.758s user 0m0.032s sys 0m0.304s
97.5mb/s without the disk cache versus 216mb/s with the disk cache.
While I agree that the US invasion was sold on lies and serves the interests of the rich and powerful while making the US no more safe, the troops don't get any say in where they're sent and do. They didn't get up one day and decide to take over Iraq, "secure" the oil, and install a puppet government. Those decisions were made by people who are so far insulated from the costs and horrors of the war that they might as well be on another planet.
Seconded. My roommate is in Afghanistan at the moment, and has been stationed all over the middle east. I fully support him and vehemently oppose the bullshit war in Iraq, and I don't see that as a contradiction.
He spent a week of his last break stuffing his laptop and an external hard drive full of goodies for the next tour, by the way.
That's a timeline, not a list of versions. Mark's post, "The Myth of RSS Compatibility", is a more accurate list of the discrepancies between various RSS implementations.
I was agreeing with you. I don't trust Apple and their closed-source shenanigans any farther than I can throw them. I like Apple, Macs, and OSX, but all the glitter and polish in the world doesn't change the fact that I can't fix problems in Aqua when I find them, can't adapt Aqua to do what I want, and can't share my Aqua changes with others. I see no reason to kneecap myself with licensing restrictions when there are plenty of unencumbered alternatives.
I thought your comment was apt, insightful, and entertaining, so I quoted it on my page.
Evolution is both a theory and a fact. The process of evolution is a fact, because it's describing observed behavior (mutation, speciation, etc). The theory of evolution encompasses good old natural selection (the aggregate effect of random genetic mutations "selected" by fitness over time), which is the mechanism by which the process of evolution occurs.
I wrote this slightly more verbose post a while back with additional links and information. Here's a quote from Stephen Jay Gould, which summarizes the issue in a fairly succinct (albeit opinionated) manner:
In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact"
part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to
theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist
argument: evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages
about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and
scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what
confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this
argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I
devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a
scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in
the world of science that is, not believed in the scientific
community to be as infallible as it once was."
Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and
theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing
certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas
that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists
debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation
replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves
in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like
ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some
other yet to be discovered.
Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such
animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and
mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty
only because they are not about the empirical world.
Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists
often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they
themselves favor). In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a
degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I
suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility
does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.
Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and
theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always
acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms
(theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually
emphasized the difference between his two great and separate
accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a
theory natural selection to explain the mechanism of
evolution.
The URL you're looking for probably includes a list of observed speciation examples. Talk Origins has a couple of pages with examples of observed speciation, both natural and induced (artificial):
For the NVidia card, your best bet is probably to hit up the NVidia linux forums. You're probably not going to get too many useful answers on Slashdot.
I don't have any suggestions for the ATI card. Hope this helps though.
There are other RSS aggregators out there that aren't as complicated to set up. I've been working on one called Raggle. Check it out and see if you like it more.
Not if you filter the mailing lists as well, like I do. I'm using a pretty standard SpamProbe setup, except I pass all my mail though it (including lkml and debian-devel).
I have a GeForce 2 TwinView and a Geforce 4 Ti4600. Xinerama and Xinerama-aware applications -- Xine, E16, feh, etc -- work just fine with either of them.
Slashdot Mirror
Another satisfied ALIX2D3 here.
Yes.
IE7 is also much more obnoxious if it can't validate a certificate. It's slightly easier to skip through than Firefox 3, though.
There are plenty of OpenID providers at this point; it's just a matter of getting more OpenID consumers now. Firefox is planning on adding native OpenID support real soon now, and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Google picks up on it as well. Yahoo is promoting their own account instead, although you can use your Yahoo! ID as an OpenID identity via idproxy.net.
Of course, none of this means that OpenID is guaranteed to become the ubiquitous identity standard, but it's not exactly dead in the water either.
Kernel Trap has an ongoing archive of CFS-related discussion from the LKML, including this detailed email exchange betweeen Ingo and Con.
The gist of the exchange is that the two schedulers are similar, but not identical. I'm not a kernel expert and I don't know squat about schedulers, but in my opinion, the exchange seemed to indicate that CFS is superior.
This is no longer true. There are several non-Japanese people with commit access, including Ryan Davis (aka zenspider). There is also a central system for bug reports. More importantly, development decisions are increasingly discussed on the ruby-core mailing list instead of the Japanese-only ruby-dev mailing list.
That said, it is (or was, as of last year) still far more difficult to get simple patches applied than it should be. I have submitted common-sense patches and had them inexplicably ignored.
Matz has agreed to include Rails-style character encoding support in the next major release (which is slated for the end of next year, I believe). The main push for this has been the Rails community's frustration with the lack of decent character encoding support in Ruby.
I really didn't understand why there was so much anti-Unicode sentiment coming out of Japanese developers until about 6 months ago when I read your Unicode article. :)
There are actually several Ruby implementations now. Although none are nearly as popular as the main tree, a couple (JRuby and Rubinus) are showing some real promise. That said, I would love to see a C implementation of Ruby that was threadsafe and reentrant.
The documentation is still horrible. It's far better than it was in 2001 or 2002, when several major libraries were only documented in Japanese, but it's still nowhere near as good as Python or PHP. There has been a push to improve the Ruby documentation under the Ruby Documentation Project, but they haven't made nearly as much progress as I'd like.
I think they might actually be on track for Ruby 2. One big (and relatively recent) change has been the sudden interest in Ruby from major players like Sun (who actually hired the JRuby developers), Microsoft (who hired the IronRuby developer), and Apple (who includes Ruby with MacOS X out of the box). This has obviously brought a lot of money into the Ruby community, but also focused a spotlight on the most glaring warts (you've touched on several, but there are certainly more).
Swap is for unused pages of RAM. If an application isn't using a particular chunk of memory, then there's no reason to keep it in memory. The disk cache, on the other hand, reduces the delay associated with disk activity by caching the contents of recently read files and a handful of other tricks. Here's an example of the disk cache in action:
97.5mb/s without the disk cache versus 216mb/s with the disk cache.10 years and ditto.
Seconded. My roommate is in Afghanistan at the moment, and has been stationed all over the middle east. I fully support him and vehemently oppose the bullshit war in Iraq, and I don't see that as a contradiction.
He spent a week of his last break stuffing his laptop and an external hard drive full of goodies for the next tour, by the way.
That's a timeline, not a list of versions. Mark's post, "The Myth of RSS Compatibility", is a more accurate list of the discrepancies between various RSS implementations.
I was agreeing with you. I don't trust Apple and their closed-source shenanigans any farther than I can throw them. I like Apple, Macs, and OSX, but all the glitter and polish in the world doesn't change the fact that I can't fix problems in Aqua when I find them, can't adapt Aqua to do what I want, and can't share my Aqua changes with others. I see no reason to kneecap myself with licensing restrictions when there are plenty of unencumbered alternatives.
I thought your comment was apt, insightful, and entertaining, so I quoted it on my page.
This comment needs a lot more love.
Evolution is both a theory and a fact. The process of evolution is a fact, because it's describing observed behavior (mutation, speciation, etc). The theory of evolution encompasses good old natural selection (the aggregate effect of random genetic mutations "selected" by fitness over time), which is the mechanism by which the process of evolution occurs.
I wrote this slightly more verbose post a while back with additional links and information. Here's a quote from Stephen Jay Gould, which summarizes the issue in a fairly succinct (albeit opinionated) manner:
The URL you're looking for probably includes a list of observed speciation examples. Talk Origins has a couple of pages with examples of observed speciation, both natural and induced (artificial):
Hope this helps...
For the NVidia card, your best bet is probably to hit up the NVidia linux forums. You're probably not going to get too many useful answers on Slashdot.
I don't have any suggestions for the ATI card. Hope this helps though.
There are other RSS aggregators out there that aren't as complicated to set up. I've been working on one called Raggle. Check it out and see if you like it more.
And now the evil overly concise equivalents!
C / C++:Perl:Ruby:Parrot Assembly:Not if you filter the mailing lists as well, like I do. I'm using a pretty standard SpamProbe setup, except I pass all my mail though it (including lkml and debian-devel).
Use a blowfish instead of 3DES. Eg, replace
withThis also works with RSH tunneling. For example, when I rsync files from remote machines, I typically use a command like this:
The blowfish equivalent is
.What does a low UID have to do with anything?
I have a GeForce 2 TwinView and a Geforce 4 Ti4600. Xinerama and Xinerama-aware applications -- Xine, E16, feh, etc -- work just fine with either of them.
Use pstotext.
Here is a screenshot of Links, Twin, and a whole bunch of other goodies. Who says the command-line is dead?
The obligatory /. pedantic correction: