I don't get it. What legacy apps? These computers are supposed to be used just for running the hotel. All of that is done through the terminal application (which I read to be console, but it could be X). I guess they don't want to have to retrain all the workers to use Linux as the user-system. Windows doesn't seem to provide any advantage over Linux in this case (and plenty of disadvantages) except that it's what people know how to use. Surely they could just make them boot, give each person a login and a.bashrc that loads the ap. That, it seems, is mindnumbingly easy. Oh, but then they can't play minesweeper!
I use a combination of newhoo (or directory.mozilla.org or whatever it is today) and google. It's a good pair. Replaces yahoo and AltaVista quite well. Sometimes you just want to "browse" the web, not search it. Newhoo, which is a lot like Yahoo, only better, is good for that.
As I mentioned in another thread, yes, matter/antimatter is a full 100% on the E=mc^2 conversion, while Fusion is only about 10%. But the fuel for fusion is deuterium, which we got a whole lot of sitting in the ocean. Annihilation, on the other hand, requires antimatter, which is another story. Currently, an international group of physicists is using the largest single magnet ever made to see if there are in fact galaxies of antimatter out there. I was at a lecture by Sheldon Glashow (part of the pair that unified Weak and Electromagnetic forces) in which he claimed to have (with a colleague) proved that there aren't any galaxies of antimatter within a light-age-of-the-universe of us, or something like that. So all we're left with is the matter/antimatter pairs that spontaneously appear. An interesting application of that stuff is Hawking radiation. This is how you get energy out of a black hole. Let me try a really bad explanation: A matter/antimatter pair spontaneously forms at the event horizon of a black hole, creating an energy debt. The antimatter part gets sucked into the black hole and annihilates with part of the black hole, making it spin slower and have less mass and fulfilling the energy debt. Then we have a new antimatter particle that we can collide with our own non-black-hole-in matter particle, getting the energy from the black hole. Cool, huh? Yes, just like annihilation in general: really cool, but not likely to be of practical application for at least a century. Fusion, on the other hand . . .
Well, this is what I changed my/etc/rpmrc file to say:
require_vendor: 0 distribution: Red Hat 5.2 require_distribution: 0 topdir:/usr/src/redhat vendor: None packager: Andrew Chatham
optflags: i386 -O6 -mamdk6 -march=amdk6
tmppath:/tmp
I then did mv/usr/bin/gcc/usr/bin/gcc.bak; ln/opt/pgcc/bin/pgcc/usr/bin/gcc (you need to do this or nothing will compile; regular gcc doesn't understand optimizing for the k6). Using these settings it _really_ optimizes everything. And I haven't noticed anything being unstable.
They're pretty slow putting out the RPMs (it's a different "they", actually). Fortunately, all the tarballs have spec files in them, so here's what I do.
Untar the sources. Say it's gnome-libs. Get gnome-lib.spec, put it in/usr/src/redhat/SPECS
Put gnome-libs-whatever.tar.gz in/usr/src/redhat/SOURCES
Then rpm -bb --rmsource --clean/usr/src/redhat/SPECS/gnome-libs.spec
Yay, I have an RPM now, compiled with pgcc, optimized for my K6-2, weeks before there would be an official RPM.
You KDE and FreeBSD people keep complaining about how your DE/OS never gets the media attention that their counterparts (GNOME/Linux) get. I figured out why that is!
No adorable mascots. I'm not really talking about actual mascots, because that little devil guy is pretty cute (he can't touch Tux, though). GNOME doesn't even have anything but that foot, which isn't better than the K.
But anyway, think about it. Linux has adorable Linus Torvalds. The media love him, because he is the quintessential hacker (well, I guess RMS is the other kind of quintessential hacker). He's cute. Everyone thinks so. What does FreeBSD have? They don't have Linus Torvalds. So they lose the media fight.
Then there's GNOME. They have Miguel. Do reporters actually know what GNOME is? No, they don't. It runs on something called X, they reason, so it must be porn. But Miguel is so darn adorable! I don't know the name of anybody working on KDE, because they're not as adorable, so they don't get in the paper. Besides, they're mostly in Europe, and while Miguel is in Mexico, at least he's closer.
No, that's not it. It's a showing at 4 theatres endorsed by Lucas. Tickets cost $500. That money goes into the hands of the official ticket seller and then into the hands of starving people or something. It would be really stupid to try to scalp those.
Fox allowing only 1 screen/theater?
on
Star Wars Tidbits
·
· Score: 2
That's not been in any of the restrictions that I've seen. Something close to that is the restriction that if a multiplex theatre is going to show Episode 1, they have to show it on the biggest, best screen (for 2 months?). I didn't see anything saying they couldn't show it on the next-biggest screen too.
None of these encounters can result in an impact, except one in August 2039: the probability that the true asteroid actually follows a collision course for that date is less than the probability of being hit by an undiscovered asteroid within any given day.
There, we can go back to worrying about the ones we can't see.
As well all know, Lucas doesn't need the money, so the argument that he's hurting himself with these restrictions doens't make sense. It seems that he's trying to bring back the movie-going experience of the first shows. Sure, it cuts down on the convenience of modern movie-going, but the people who need that don't need to see the show when it first comes out anyway. They just keep telling the people in the theatre to stop clapping so they can hear. As a student a Duke, where camping out for tickets is very much a reality, I understand. I just wish I hadn't signed up for that summer job now.
Ah, but the big difference is that you can't get tapes off the internet! Otherwise, the analogy is the same, but that's a pretty important distinction.
At least the part where they say what it stands for seems to be a joke. They're just SGI. The explanation of what it stands for seems to be webmaster/market monkey work (not that the whole thing isn't anyway). Whew!
Met with Bill Gates at the LCS 35th reception...
on
Quickielanche
·
· Score: 1
I know what you mean. Two weekends ago, I hosted two high school students competing for a scholarship funded by the blood money of MS (Melinda Gates went to school here). On the one hand, I thought, "I'm oblidged to hate you guys. Your plane ticket was paid for by a monopoly." On the other hand, "Hey, it's our money now!"
How come everyone keeps saying, "No, Slashdot doesn't count as a million-hit-a-day website." if it's that high up? Does that mean there are at most 27 such sites, none of which run Linux?
Ok, I'll admit I haven't read the article yet, but I can respond to general arguments about abolishing copyright.
1) This would invalidate the GPL. Copyrights can work both ways, you know? Get rid of copyrights and people who write code can't control how it's used.
2) Lower quality works. While for certain things like computer programs and books, a person may make because it's a labor of love. But some things, like multi-million dollar movies, aren't going to happen unless the people who make them get a copyright. Sure, the actors and directors and maybe the pyrotechnicians like their work, but how long is the cameraman going to work without serious compensation? You can't get that kind of compensation unless there's a copyright.
3) Even though the goverment may do a bad job of protecting copyrights, it's probably better for us that they're the ones doing it. If there were no governmen-protected copyrights, it would be up to the producers to protect their own rights. How about all books being printed red-on-yellow so you can't make a b&w xerox? How about those stupid wheel thingies to use software again? (please, no!) Any attempt by the producer/distributor of intellectual property to protect their own interests results in a less pleasant experience for us, the user. The government may do a bad job of getting the little guys, but they can go after the big guys with great hoopla and create a stir.
It was what, a few years ago, that the media had its interest in Java, but Java wasn't ready. It was slow, the implementations of the virtual machines were bad, and it didn't really take off. Then media interest waned. They stopped paying attention to Java (the then-Microsoft-"competitor"), but did Java stop? No. Just because the media gets to something too early doesn't mean that it's a bad thing. If they hadn't paid all that attention to Java in the first place, a lot of tech-savy people wouldn't have started paying attention to it and supporting it, so that it's now in its second wind. Same with Linux. The media attention benefits the movement by getting tech-savy people to actually help (much moreso than in Java's case) the movement; as a side benefit, a few years down the road, when we are rapidly becoming the actual king of the hill, the non-tech people of the world can at least say, "Linux? Oh yeah, I remember hearing about that on CNN one time." Just because the media is early doesn't mean they can't be on time too.
They did mention that, if you didn't get it patched, you were playing with the tile version (which they accidentally shipped) which runs _slower_ on good computers. Then again, even with that, it's slow.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't get it. What legacy apps? These computers are supposed to be used just for running the hotel. All of that is done through the terminal application (which I read to be console, but it could be X). I guess they don't want to have to retrain all the workers to use Linux as the user-system. Windows doesn't seem to provide any advantage over Linux in this case (and plenty of disadvantages) except that it's what people know how to use. Surely they could just make them boot, give each person a login and a .bashrc that loads the ap. That, it seems, is mindnumbingly easy. Oh, but then they can't play minesweeper!
I use a combination of newhoo (or directory.mozilla.org or whatever it is today) and google. It's a good pair. Replaces yahoo and AltaVista quite well. Sometimes you just want to "browse" the web, not search it. Newhoo, which is a lot like Yahoo, only better, is good for that.
Oh well, what do you expect from an Econ major :)
As I mentioned in another thread, yes, matter/antimatter is a full 100% on the E=mc^2 conversion, while Fusion is only about 10%. But the fuel for fusion is deuterium, which we got a whole lot of sitting in the ocean. Annihilation, on the other hand, requires antimatter, which is another story. Currently, an international group of physicists is using the largest single magnet ever made to see if there are in fact galaxies of antimatter out there. I was at a lecture by Sheldon Glashow (part of the pair that unified Weak and Electromagnetic forces) in which he claimed to have (with a colleague) proved that there aren't any galaxies of antimatter within a light-age-of-the-universe of us, or something like that. So all we're left with is the matter/antimatter pairs that spontaneously appear. An interesting application of that stuff is Hawking radiation. This is how you get energy out of a black hole. Let me try a really bad explanation: A matter/antimatter pair spontaneously forms at the event horizon of a black hole, creating an energy debt. The antimatter part gets sucked into the black hole and annihilates with part of the black hole, making it spin slower and have less mass and fulfilling the energy debt. Then we have a new antimatter particle that we can collide with our own non-black-hole-in matter particle, getting the energy from the black hole. Cool, huh? Yes, just like annihilation in general: really cool, but not likely to be of practical application for at least a century. Fusion, on the other hand . . .
Efficiencies of energy conversion, according to good old E=mc^2, IIRC:
Burning coal: ~0.0003%
Fission: 2%
Fusion: ~10%
Antimatter/matter: 100%
Too bad there isn't a whole lot of antimatter laying around. Well, actually, good thing.
Hard Water!!!!
Well, this is what I changed my /etc/rpmrc file to say:
/usr/src/redhat
/tmp
/usr/bin/gcc /usr/bin/gcc.bak; ln /opt/pgcc/bin/pgcc /usr/bin/gcc (you need to do this or nothing will compile; regular gcc doesn't understand optimizing for the k6). Using these settings it _really_ optimizes everything. And I haven't noticed anything being unstable.
require_vendor: 0
distribution: Red Hat 5.2
require_distribution: 0
topdir:
vendor: None
packager: Andrew Chatham
optflags: i386 -O6 -mamdk6 -march=amdk6
tmppath:
I then did mv
They're pretty slow putting out the RPMs (it's a different "they", actually). Fortunately, all the tarballs have spec files in them, so here's what I do.
/usr/src/redhat/SPECS
/usr/src/redhat/SOURCES
/usr/src/redhat/SPECS/gnome-libs.spec
Untar the sources. Say it's gnome-libs. Get gnome-lib.spec, put it in
Put gnome-libs-whatever.tar.gz in
Then rpm -bb --rmsource --clean
Yay, I have an RPM now, compiled with pgcc, optimized for my K6-2, weeks before there would be an official RPM.
Putting the FreeBSD maintainers into USA Today will not make them muppets. I'm sorry you were offended by my logic. Have a lollipop.
You KDE and FreeBSD people keep complaining about how your DE/OS never gets the media attention that their counterparts (GNOME/Linux) get. I figured out why that is!
No adorable mascots. I'm not really talking about actual mascots, because that little devil guy is pretty cute (he can't touch Tux, though). GNOME doesn't even have anything but that foot, which isn't better than the K.
But anyway, think about it. Linux has adorable Linus Torvalds. The media love him, because he is the quintessential hacker (well, I guess RMS is the other kind of quintessential hacker). He's cute. Everyone thinks so. What does FreeBSD have? They don't have Linus Torvalds. So they lose the media fight.
Then there's GNOME. They have Miguel. Do reporters actually know what GNOME is? No, they don't. It runs on something called X, they reason, so it must be porn. But Miguel is so darn adorable! I don't know the name of anybody working on KDE, because they're not as adorable, so they don't get in the paper. Besides, they're mostly in Europe, and while Miguel is in Mexico, at least he's closer.
There. QED.
No, that's not it. It's a showing at 4 theatres endorsed by Lucas. Tickets cost $500. That money goes into the hands of the official ticket seller and then into the hands of starving people or something. It would be really stupid to try to scalp those.
That's not been in any of the restrictions that I've seen. Something close to that is the restriction that if a multiplex theatre is going to show Episode 1, they have to show it on the biggest, best screen (for 2 months?). I didn't see anything saying they couldn't show it on the next-biggest screen too.
The important part of the article:
None of these encounters can result in an impact, except one in August 2039: the probability that the true asteroid actually follows a collision course for that date is less than the probability of being hit by an undiscovered asteroid within any given day.
There, we can go back to worrying about the ones we can't see.
As well all know, Lucas doesn't need the money, so the argument that he's hurting himself with these restrictions doens't make sense. It seems that he's trying to bring back the movie-going experience of the first shows. Sure, it cuts down on the convenience of modern movie-going, but the people who need that don't need to see the show when it first comes out anyway. They just keep telling the people in the theatre to stop clapping so they can hear. As a student a Duke, where camping out for tickets is very much a reality, I understand. I just wish I hadn't signed up for that summer job now.
Ah, but the big difference is that you can't get tapes off the internet! Otherwise, the analogy is the same, but that's a pretty important distinction.
At least the part where they say what it stands for seems to be a joke. They're just SGI. The explanation of what it stands for seems to be webmaster/market monkey work (not that the whole thing isn't anyway). Whew!
I know what you mean. Two weekends ago, I hosted two high school students competing for a scholarship funded by the blood money of MS (Melinda Gates went to school here). On the one hand, I thought, "I'm oblidged to hate you guys. Your plane ticket was paid for by a monopoly." On the other hand, "Hey, it's our money now!"
How come everyone keeps saying, "No, Slashdot doesn't count as a million-hit-a-day website." if it's that high up? Does that mean there are at most 27 such sites, none of which run Linux?
I know, I know. I was just kidding. However, all the things you list were originally not private industry :)
Wait a second, didn't Moscow get in trouble a while ago for investing in private industry?
Ok, I'll admit I haven't read the article yet, but I can respond to general arguments about abolishing copyright.
1) This would invalidate the GPL. Copyrights can work both ways, you know? Get rid of copyrights and people who write code can't control how it's used.
2) Lower quality works. While for certain things like computer programs and books, a person may make because it's a labor of love. But some things, like multi-million dollar movies, aren't going to happen unless the people who make them get a copyright. Sure, the actors and directors and maybe the pyrotechnicians like their work, but how long is the cameraman going to work without serious compensation? You can't get that kind of compensation unless there's a copyright.
3) Even though the goverment may do a bad job of protecting copyrights, it's probably better for us that they're the ones doing it. If there were no governmen-protected copyrights, it would be up to the producers to protect their own rights. How about all books being printed red-on-yellow so you can't make a b&w xerox? How about those stupid wheel thingies to use software again? (please, no!) Any attempt by the producer/distributor of intellectual property to protect their own interests results in a less pleasant experience for us, the user. The government may do a bad job of getting the little guys, but they can go after the big guys with great hoopla and create a stir.
Ok, that's enough from me.
It was what, a few years ago, that the media had its interest in Java, but Java wasn't ready. It was slow, the implementations of the virtual machines were bad, and it didn't really take off. Then media interest waned. They stopped paying attention to Java (the then-Microsoft-"competitor"), but did Java stop? No. Just because the media gets to something too early doesn't mean that it's a bad thing. If they hadn't paid all that attention to Java in the first place, a lot of tech-savy people wouldn't have started paying attention to it and supporting it, so that it's now in its second wind. Same with Linux. The media attention benefits the movement by getting tech-savy people to actually help (much moreso than in Java's case) the movement; as a side benefit, a few years down the road, when we are rapidly becoming the actual king of the hill, the non-tech people of the world can at least say, "Linux? Oh yeah, I remember hearing about that on CNN one time." Just because the media is early doesn't mean they can't be on time too.
They did mention that, if you didn't get it patched, you were playing with the tile version (which they accidentally shipped) which runs _slower_ on good computers. Then again, even with that, it's slow.
some would embrace and romance her, some would criticize her, others (*cough*Al Gore*cough*) would whore her.
"I think the detail [source] we give is significantly higher than our competitors, particularly for Windows 2000," Muth said.
What competitors are those? Linux? No, it's all GPL'd Apple? No, Darwin's out in the open. Who then?