Warner OWNS it, they have no desire in any way to do anything at all with the property. we are lucky as hell to get the DVD's. It was a bastard child as far as the executives were concerned and unless someone make them see that there is a 1.2Billion dollar profit in re-rendering the CGI they dont care. It will die in their vaults as an unloved redheaded step child.
It's only a weird 20 year old unloved redheaded step child of a TV show until someone shows an interest. If anyone with a big enough wallet went to them and said I want to redo it in HD, then it's 24 carat gold in a vault and they think like Battlestar Galactica type of remake. Much like the companies that wanted to port AAA games to Linux, they were thinking about covering porting costs and tuning a small profit to stay in business, the studios saw dollar signs and wanted millions up front for the right to make the port and most the revenue from it too. The only way it'd happen is if there was copyright reform, you could badger WB into releasing the raw HD footage and it'd be done as a fan project. And I wouldn't hold my breath for that.
If you've just bought a new game on Steam and it's a 20GB download, do you want to wait half an hour (100Mbit) or 3 minutes (Gigabit)? If you're browsing 20MP+ photos online, do the pictures load faster in your browser? What if your disk crashed and you want to get something big from online backup? And as far as I know there's still no BluRay quality streaming service, if you're downloading a torrent then 5 minutes or an hour certainly matters. Yes, 100 to 1000 Mbit is less important than 10 to 100 and even less important than 1 to 10, but I'd take it for a reasonable premium. I know the people on Gigabit trial here in Norway now has been promised to continue it for $100 (599 NOK) a month, which is only slightly more than I pay for 100 Mbit today. I don't need it, but just having more than enough and never lacking bandwidth is one less concern.
Digging a little they're talking about a 50/50Mbit connection (Norwegian), so the article is wildly exaggerated... triple the mean connection yes, not 10-20 times.
One part conveniently left out is the military's part in this, they want fiber optics for a bunch of NATO surveillance activities, polar satellites and so on. It's pretty obvious why if you look at a map. Supplying the about 2600 permanent inhabitants with really fast broadband (100% fiber optics now) is just a side effect. True, this cabin area about 3 miles from the main settlement wasn't originally included in the plans, but when the inhabitants dig the ditch and all the fiber company has to do is roll out the cable drum it's a pretty good deal for them too. There are several rural areas - though not quite that remote - here in Norway which has done the digging as a community effort to make the cost bearable for the fiber company. Just last quarter the median broadband in Norway passed 10 Mbit/s, the mean is 18.4 Mbit/s and improving at a nice pace.
Assuming there's anything useful you can do about it, For example, say that gene X means I'm ten times as likely to develop incurable condition Y, but it's a 0.1% chance as opposed to 0.01% chance in the general population. Is that going to help me in some way? If you get a long list of potential illnesses that you might be somewhat predisposed to does that do anything other than turn you into a hypocondriac? Tell me what I need to know for treatment or symptoms to look out for or lifestyle changes, the rest which may or may not come but is a throw of the dice just keep it in my journal so you know to look for it later. I don't need to hear that I'll get Alzheimer in 40 years, really I don't.
The whole problem boils down to the religious meaning of marriage. I'm perfectly fine with adults having any sexual relations with each other that they want, equal rights to secure their life partner through inheritance and such and regardless of biological capability they should have the same right to recognition as parents as other non-biological parents through adoption and such. I really don't have any problem understanding why Christians, Muslims etc. get all pissed when you use the word marriage about it though. In English buttsex (sodomy) is named after one of the dens of evil God cleansed with fire and brimstone killing every last man and there's plenty other quotes to back up homosexuality being a sin. And Jesus only redeems those who repent their sins, clearly these people aren't repenting anything.
In short, you have to get extremely creative to pretend this was any kind of union God would have blessed and not sent you on a one-way trip to Hell. And when you try to use the same word for a terrible sin and a holy union, worlds collide. Imagine if the pedophiles united and insisted people stop using the word molestation because it's bigoted and discriminatory against adult-child love relationships. Would you just roll with that or would you go "Hell no I'm not going to use the same words as when I make love to my [girlfriend/boyfriend/whatever rocks your boat]." That the government regulates marriage is an imperfect separation of state and church, it should limit itself to civil unions that provide civil rights and leave the theological and social battle over what is or is not a marriage to others.
Right now I have a feeling it's blackmail on both sides, the religious trying to deny homosexuals rights based on being same sex, while the homosexuals are trying to force a new interpretation of the Bible on the religious by forcing them to redefine their words and their concepts. Freedom of religion also means the freedom to believe in a 2000 year old text which in no shape or form recognizes a same sex couple as equal to a mixed-sex couple, no matter how much some homosexuals seem to want it to.
If it was an unexpected system failure, I might have had more sympathy. Bugs happen despite your best efforts and pinning down the source of the problem and rushing a patch or workaround through the system takes a little while. You can't really guard against the unknown unknowns. That an upgrade might fail though that's a known unknown, you don't know why but you should assume that it may and have a plan to roll back to the working version. Particularly something as stateless as the authentication system, assuming that's what actually failed and they didn't just take it down to fix something else. I mean it's like having two doors to the building and discovering that your new door jams, bar it shut and reopen the old one. I'd probably take my business elsewhere, online banking is a commodity these days and the self-service is much the same everywhere.
So what did the third oarsman on the left of the trading vessel accomplish by himself? Nothing new about taking a share in a great project led by a lord or rich merchant. And there's nothing new about making products that go into value chains like from wool you spin thread, from threat you weave cloth, from cloth you tailor clothes. With eBay and big data we could probably do better without money now than ever before, simply by finding closed loops where person A wants what B has, B wants what C has and C wants what A has. Particularly if we set up timed contracts, like I give you ten sacks of flour now and I get a fresh bread a week for a year. It would still be extremely inconvenient though.
So many people here seem absurdly obsessed with what money is, when to the average wage earner it's just a convenient way to convert work into shelter, food, clothes, transport, entertainment and so on. That's what 90% use it for and 9 of the last 10% just want a stable value so they don't have to become investors or speculators in real world goods while they save up for their next big purchase. Yes, like gold. Money exists as a convenience because it is universally accepted, easily divided, instantly transferable, easy to transport and so on. It exists because it's a better deal than instantly trading my pay check for gold and trading it back one milligram at a time when I want a soda.
My investments are of course valued using currency but if the dollar crashes while the investment object stays the same it just means it'll be worth more expressed in dollars, which is exactly the opposite of what happens if you're holding dollars. And if the prices all move together then it's rather irrelevant, if gold prices and house prices both double it matters little when I want to sell my gold to buy a house. I guess the rest matters if you got billions to move and millions to earn, but for most people thousands to move and soda money to earn isn't worth the bother.
It's easy to say it's just the phone company pushing it but here in Norway there used to be 2.6 million land lines (PSTN/ISDN). In the last statistics (H1 2013) there's less than 600.000 and the trend has been >10% reduction each year, so probably less than 550.000 right now. Fiber and cable are growing, xDSL is dropping the moment people get alternatives. Practically everybody already have a cell phone and would never consider dropping it, so price wise you can be on the cell phone forever before you break even having a land line as well. In the cities with multiple choices of Internet providers and plenty cell phone towers it's all but dead, serving a few elderly and such that don't want or need anything else.
I'm one of those with no land line, I have fiber + cell phone and if the power goes the fiber line goes too. Long story short, if all the towers near me go down or I can't get charge for my cell phone for so long that it's actually a problem - if I forgot to charge mine and there's an emergency I'd bang the neighbors' doors - then we're in deeper shit than me not having a cell phone. I worry as much about not being able to call for an ambulance roughly as much as being struck by lightning twice in a row. If you live on a farm far out in a rural area with crap cell phone coverage and your land line is truly your life line to civilization it's different, but I don't think it's necessary everywhere. That said, who says a tree won't fall over and take down a telephone pole or a land slide wash out a ground cable?
If I wanted to be really safe, I'd rather not depend on any local infrastructure at all and use something like inReach which I could bring along and will work no matter where I am as long as I got clear sight to the sky. Imagine you take a nasty fall and break a leg, do you really want to crawl all the way back to your land line? What if you're stuck and can't get loose? Yes, it costs a bit ($300 + $12/mo cheapest plan) and is only useful for emergencies but consider it like fire insurance - be happy if you don't have to use it ever. Of course you need to have a decent replacement for day to day activities, but it kind of puts a cap on how much the "emergency service" of land lines are worth. Cell phone only service would suck, but there's no way I'd turn down fiber or cable to replace copper.
You seem to have missed the point. That is the entire basis of a language, a shared body of specific knowledge. "You're such a Samantha" is from a SatC language, heavily based on English. That is why I and everyone else that know English can understand the words but not the meaning. But, lets assume we know nothing about SatC and English both. In that case "You're such a Samantha" is completely identical to "You're such a slut/bitch/smartypants" (whatever "Samantha" means to SitC fans). Samantha is just a random assortment of sounds/letters that denote an idea, No different than any other word.
Yes, but nearly all languages can be broken down into reusable words. The idea is that in this language the metaphors wildly change meaning depending on the context in which they were spoken. Say that in the context of clothes "being a Samantha" is someone who dresses fabulously, while in the context of sex "being a Samantha" means being a slut. So the would be diplomat tries to say "Your dress looks fabulous" but without the correct contextual clues the universal translator will say "You are such a slut" instead. A conversation becomes an irreducible complexity because taking away one sentence or one word changes the meaning of everything else being said, so it can't deduct what it is they're saying by looking at common phrases nor can it express any new sentences, like what the Enterprise crew would like to say. It's almost like trying to decipher a conversation between two people with cultural references serving as a one time pad, without the key you are totally lost.
No programming language or IDE is ever going to free you from having to express your ideas clearly and break them down into little sequences of instructions. In a big project this overshadows everything else. Bad foundations? Bad design? The project is doomed no matter how trendy or modern your language/IDE is.
Well you find one way to break it down... but I often feel there's so many possible ways to organize things, it's just how I'd want to solve it and when I have to interact with other people's code they've done the same thing completely differently. Just take a simple thing like pulling data from a database, putting them on a form, have someone edit the information and save it back to the database. How many various implementations of that have I seen? Maaaaaaaaany, but there's no clear winner. You can do it with an SQL query, a strored procedure, an ORM tool and they all might work. You can use the MVC pattern or you could just totally ignore it, the user will never know. Layers are a bit like mathematical models, they're simplifications of reality. Sometimes the world refuses to be simple.
Ahem... if Mr. Gorodish is correct, and Waze was licensed under GPLv2, then we do in fact have a right to the source code, and Google would be breaking the law by not providing it.
Yes, but you generally can't ask for the contract to be fulfilled in court. If you agree to build a house for me and fail to fulfill the contract they'll award damages but they won't drag you there in chains to build the house. There are a few narrow exceptions to this called "specific performance" involving unique real estate, antiques, works of art, collector's items and such where the court may insist the transaction be completed, but it's very much the exception and only when money can't fully compensate your loss. They'll never force a company to open up their own source code, even if they somehow managed to mix it with GPL code. Both sides might of course offer it as a settlement or parts of one, but in an actual court verdict it will be a dollar value while the proprietary source stays closed source.
It's not quite as bad as it sounds, the actual hardware drivers are still accelerated and exposed as OpenGL, it's just that XWayland doesn't make use of it. If you look at this diagram it's the line between the X-server and libDRM that's broken when you use XWayland instead because Wayland can't talk directly down to that level. XWayland needs to be rewritten to accelerate graphics using OpenGL instead, then it'll hook into the green box above libDRM and all will be well. Luckily for the Wayland project so does the X-server want to as well, "Glamor" that they talk about is essentially 2D X11 over OpenGL.
Old: X-client --> X-server --> libDRM --> hardware Old using Wayland: X-client --> XWayland --> (broken, software fallback) --> hardware
New in X-server: X-client --> X-server (Glamor) --> OpenGL --> libDRM --> hardware New using Wayland X-client --> XWayland (Glamor) --> OpenGL --> libDRM --> hardware
Long term it looks like the plan is to expose everything via OpenGL/OpenGL ES for rendering and EGL for the windowing system so the direct link between X11 and libDRM would go away. That is still a few years off though.
Client X11 apps speak the X11 protocol to XWayland, XWayland speaks the Wayland protocol to Wayland so it's basically a big compatility shim. From Wayland's side it's just another client and if you use an X11 server you don't need it, it's not really part of either. Maybe the closest analogy is WINE, if you use Windows or run native Linux applications you don't need it. But if you want to run Windows applications on Linux you need WINE, likewise if you want to run X11 applications on Wayland you need XWayland. Basically you take an X11 server, stop it from talking to actual hardware and makes it draw to a Wayland window instead.
The Linux kernel was nothing special. Seriously. There were many such hobby projects at the time, and it wasn't a particularly great one. The success of Linux was the success of Linus as "the guy in charge" of an open source project. It grew and flourished because of leadership, not (early) technological advantage.
I hear you say it but my impression is that Linus personally wrote a lot of the critical code in early Linux. To use a car analogy, it's a whole lot easier to get people to work on fenders and windshield wipers if you know the engine is developed by someone with real drive so you won't end up with all the accessories (GNU utils) with no engine (HURD). It's easy to sit at the top and say this is the direction we're going and by we I mean you because by myself it's not moving at all, compared to actually taking charge and inviting others to tag along. True it doesn't scale as eventually the project needs more and more management, but Linux would never have gotten off the ground if Linus was just a good technical manager.
I would like to introduce Mr. Cicconi to a device called a 'Telephone', particularly a variant colloquially termed a 'landline'. Historically 'telephone' companies, such as AT&T, would sell users a 'landline' to which they could connect a 'telephone'. These services included a basic connection charge as well as usage charges. In the event that a connection was made form one 'landline' to another, the party that initiated the session was charged for the usage of the session. This is exactly the treatment that Mr. Hastings is proposing.
That's who takes care of the bill. If you operate a call center, do you think all the phone lines are free because you only get incoming calls? If you call abroad, do you think your carrier gets to pocket all that money? No, they in turn have to pay the other side of the connection for the privilege of going through their network. Of course both sides will try to keep as much as possible of that money leading to peering disputes.
Also tear-free video seems to be one god awfully big workaround for limitations in X. The stated goal of Wayland was a system in which "every frame is perfect, by which I mean that applications will be able to control the rendering enough that we'll never see tearing, lag, redrawing or flicker." I doubt he'd say that if X had no tearing lag, redrawing or flicker which seems like rather huge deficiencies to me.
Because it would have been A> futile, and B> converted this into a full-scale shooting war, which no one, but particularly Ukranians, want to see in their country. Ukraine cannot, as a practical matter, do anything about Russia.
It might still come to a full scale shooting war, but it is simply too soon. "First they took Sudetenland (Crimea), then they took Eastern Ukraine (Western Czechoslovakia), then our great leaders went to Moscow (Munich) and bought 'Peace in our time' for the rest of Ukraine (Czechoslovakia). Soon war will be upon you too." may get NATO involved which is realistically the only way Ukraine could ever hope to defend against the Russian army. Politically and socially we're not ready for that yet, if they started a shooting war now they'd stand alone and be crushed. If they try appeasement and show that Putin won't stop his expansion maybe NATO will draw a real line in the sand like England and France did with Poland, which may get Putin to back down or at least give them a fighting chance. Until then, they'll bide their time.
Of course the dangerous part here is that this is not your proxy war in Korea or Vietnam or Afghanistan, if NATO first should commit to anything and get called on it we are looking at no less than WW3. Of course Putin would be crazy to risk war with NATO, but the one thing we can't do is bluff and assume he won't as that destroys all credibility if we get caught. And while it's cruel to say it, Russia hasn't done enough to Ukraine just yet that we're ready to commit to such an action. That may change though, if Putin continues the course of action he seems to be on. But if the rest is all blustering I think he can keep Crimea and go home.
Depends, there's investigative journalism and there's a whole lot of news that is simply stating widely known facts about current events, like everything from sports to events to accidents to new products to weather where one newspaper is 95% the same as the next. Other things are more work like food or travel guides, but where the amateur's subject matter knowledge far outshines the journalistic aspects. Yes, journalism is a skill but a lot of "easy" work they did before has been taking over by bloggers and is no worse for wear.
You are woefully ill-informed if you believe 5C simply "sounds like a lot" but "local variations are far greater".
In 2010 my little place on earth was -1.4C colder than normal, in 2011 it was 2.2C warmer than normal so that's a swing of 3.6C from one year to the next. Are you seriously disputing that this is way, way greater in magnitude than any global warming that may or may not have happened in one year? Like I said, 5C in a century is 0.05C/year so how am I to tell if that's 3.6C natural variation or 3.55C natural variation and 0.05C global warming? I wasn't really arguing about whether global warming is real and what the effects are, I'm talking about 99% of the population using whatever their local climate is as indicator and that statistically it's not worth a shit. Even if you've lived there all your life, looking at 115 years of climate statistics for my city there's way too much variation to be certain it's a trend and not just statistical randomness.
Of course, scientists don't do stupid things like look at one local climate or one isolated even, but do a poll on how many in the US believe in global warming before and after the 2014 polar vortex, I dare you. That's what I was talking about.
Yes it does. You will recall that in the end, there was a real wolf who did appear. He ate all the sheep. So if the townspeople had reacted to the warnings not with scorn but by realizing that they were unprepared for actual wolves, their sheep would have been safe.
Time to read your childhood stories again, they were prepared for actual wolves but only as long as they responded and due to the many false alarms they ignored the actual emergency. If there's any relevant analogy to the current situation it's to not run around like Chicken Little claiming the sky is falling unless it's true because nobody will take your warnings seriously afterwards. At least some scientists and politicians like to promote their worst doomsday predictions and every time they fail to come true it hurts their credibility, leaving many people to think it's all bogus and a sham. The media doesn't exactly help either, they like extreme headlines because they sell so they often take highly speculative bullshit and print it up huge as accepted scientific facts.
Even if you take some of the worst case predictions they're talking about something like 5C over 100 years, which might sound a lot but we're talking 0.05C/year on average. Local variations are far, far greater than that, what you personally has experienced is pretty much irrelevant. One warm summer and people say it's global warming, one cold winter and people say it's bullshit. Even when you look at 10+ year averages chances are many places have gone against the global trend, either because of natural variation or because of shifting weather patterns. What matter is if you sample thousands and thousands of places and the total keeps going up, not one particular place. But most people will look out the window and base their opinion on that.
Humm... a site that offers absolutely no actual benchmarks just a mysterious performance number (check their FAQ) with zero ability to reproduce or verify, submitted by users with all kinds of overclocked rigs that's credible. For example it claims the FX-8350 has much better single thread performance (1,512) vs (1,217) which is not supported by any serious review I can find. So either the whole world is in a conspiracy against Passmark, or these numbers are a joke. I wonder how much AMD paid them to invent these numbers?
Well, AMD the company is quite different from AMD the Intel-competitor. While they seem to have stopped the downward trend for now, they're doing it by divesting their CPU/APU business and ramping up lots of semi-custom business like consoles and such. It might be a way for AMD to be profitable but large parts of the market will be left to Intel's mercy.
The GMA500 driver might be doing fine, but for some reason they keep licensing third party graphics for the integrated solution on Atom processors, or at least the ones making it into industrialized products. Getting OpenGL up under Linux on PC/104 or other embedded board is a royal pain in my experience.
Open source support depends on whether they're licensing it from PowerVR or using their own in-house graphics. If you check this page Intel now use their own graphics in "Valleyview" systems, which should be much more open than before.
Slashdot Mirror
Warner OWNS it, they have no desire in any way to do anything at all with the property. we are lucky as hell to get the DVD's. It was a bastard child as far as the executives were concerned and unless someone make them see that there is a 1.2Billion dollar profit in re-rendering the CGI they dont care. It will die in their vaults as an unloved redheaded step child.
It's only a weird 20 year old unloved redheaded step child of a TV show until someone shows an interest. If anyone with a big enough wallet went to them and said I want to redo it in HD, then it's 24 carat gold in a vault and they think like Battlestar Galactica type of remake. Much like the companies that wanted to port AAA games to Linux, they were thinking about covering porting costs and tuning a small profit to stay in business, the studios saw dollar signs and wanted millions up front for the right to make the port and most the revenue from it too. The only way it'd happen is if there was copyright reform, you could badger WB into releasing the raw HD footage and it'd be done as a fan project. And I wouldn't hold my breath for that.
If you've just bought a new game on Steam and it's a 20GB download, do you want to wait half an hour (100Mbit) or 3 minutes (Gigabit)? If you're browsing 20MP+ photos online, do the pictures load faster in your browser? What if your disk crashed and you want to get something big from online backup? And as far as I know there's still no BluRay quality streaming service, if you're downloading a torrent then 5 minutes or an hour certainly matters. Yes, 100 to 1000 Mbit is less important than 10 to 100 and even less important than 1 to 10, but I'd take it for a reasonable premium. I know the people on Gigabit trial here in Norway now has been promised to continue it for $100 (599 NOK) a month, which is only slightly more than I pay for 100 Mbit today. I don't need it, but just having more than enough and never lacking bandwidth is one less concern.
Digging a little they're talking about a 50/50Mbit connection (Norwegian), so the article is wildly exaggerated... triple the mean connection yes, not 10-20 times.
One part conveniently left out is the military's part in this, they want fiber optics for a bunch of NATO surveillance activities, polar satellites and so on. It's pretty obvious why if you look at a map. Supplying the about 2600 permanent inhabitants with really fast broadband (100% fiber optics now) is just a side effect. True, this cabin area about 3 miles from the main settlement wasn't originally included in the plans, but when the inhabitants dig the ditch and all the fiber company has to do is roll out the cable drum it's a pretty good deal for them too. There are several rural areas - though not quite that remote - here in Norway which has done the digging as a community effort to make the cost bearable for the fiber company. Just last quarter the median broadband in Norway passed 10 Mbit/s, the mean is 18.4 Mbit/s and improving at a nice pace.
Assuming there's anything useful you can do about it, For example, say that gene X means I'm ten times as likely to develop incurable condition Y, but it's a 0.1% chance as opposed to 0.01% chance in the general population. Is that going to help me in some way? If you get a long list of potential illnesses that you might be somewhat predisposed to does that do anything other than turn you into a hypocondriac? Tell me what I need to know for treatment or symptoms to look out for or lifestyle changes, the rest which may or may not come but is a throw of the dice just keep it in my journal so you know to look for it later. I don't need to hear that I'll get Alzheimer in 40 years, really I don't.
The whole problem boils down to the religious meaning of marriage. I'm perfectly fine with adults having any sexual relations with each other that they want, equal rights to secure their life partner through inheritance and such and regardless of biological capability they should have the same right to recognition as parents as other non-biological parents through adoption and such. I really don't have any problem understanding why Christians, Muslims etc. get all pissed when you use the word marriage about it though. In English buttsex (sodomy) is named after one of the dens of evil God cleansed with fire and brimstone killing every last man and there's plenty other quotes to back up homosexuality being a sin. And Jesus only redeems those who repent their sins, clearly these people aren't repenting anything.
In short, you have to get extremely creative to pretend this was any kind of union God would have blessed and not sent you on a one-way trip to Hell. And when you try to use the same word for a terrible sin and a holy union, worlds collide. Imagine if the pedophiles united and insisted people stop using the word molestation because it's bigoted and discriminatory against adult-child love relationships. Would you just roll with that or would you go "Hell no I'm not going to use the same words as when I make love to my [girlfriend/boyfriend/whatever rocks your boat]." That the government regulates marriage is an imperfect separation of state and church, it should limit itself to civil unions that provide civil rights and leave the theological and social battle over what is or is not a marriage to others.
Right now I have a feeling it's blackmail on both sides, the religious trying to deny homosexuals rights based on being same sex, while the homosexuals are trying to force a new interpretation of the Bible on the religious by forcing them to redefine their words and their concepts. Freedom of religion also means the freedom to believe in a 2000 year old text which in no shape or form recognizes a same sex couple as equal to a mixed-sex couple, no matter how much some homosexuals seem to want it to.
If it was an unexpected system failure, I might have had more sympathy. Bugs happen despite your best efforts and pinning down the source of the problem and rushing a patch or workaround through the system takes a little while. You can't really guard against the unknown unknowns. That an upgrade might fail though that's a known unknown, you don't know why but you should assume that it may and have a plan to roll back to the working version. Particularly something as stateless as the authentication system, assuming that's what actually failed and they didn't just take it down to fix something else. I mean it's like having two doors to the building and discovering that your new door jams, bar it shut and reopen the old one. I'd probably take my business elsewhere, online banking is a commodity these days and the self-service is much the same everywhere.
So what did the third oarsman on the left of the trading vessel accomplish by himself? Nothing new about taking a share in a great project led by a lord or rich merchant. And there's nothing new about making products that go into value chains like from wool you spin thread, from threat you weave cloth, from cloth you tailor clothes. With eBay and big data we could probably do better without money now than ever before, simply by finding closed loops where person A wants what B has, B wants what C has and C wants what A has. Particularly if we set up timed contracts, like I give you ten sacks of flour now and I get a fresh bread a week for a year. It would still be extremely inconvenient though.
So many people here seem absurdly obsessed with what money is, when to the average wage earner it's just a convenient way to convert work into shelter, food, clothes, transport, entertainment and so on. That's what 90% use it for and 9 of the last 10% just want a stable value so they don't have to become investors or speculators in real world goods while they save up for their next big purchase. Yes, like gold. Money exists as a convenience because it is universally accepted, easily divided, instantly transferable, easy to transport and so on. It exists because it's a better deal than instantly trading my pay check for gold and trading it back one milligram at a time when I want a soda.
My investments are of course valued using currency but if the dollar crashes while the investment object stays the same it just means it'll be worth more expressed in dollars, which is exactly the opposite of what happens if you're holding dollars. And if the prices all move together then it's rather irrelevant, if gold prices and house prices both double it matters little when I want to sell my gold to buy a house. I guess the rest matters if you got billions to move and millions to earn, but for most people thousands to move and soda money to earn isn't worth the bother.
It's easy to say it's just the phone company pushing it but here in Norway there used to be 2.6 million land lines (PSTN/ISDN). In the last statistics (H1 2013) there's less than 600.000 and the trend has been >10% reduction each year, so probably less than 550.000 right now. Fiber and cable are growing, xDSL is dropping the moment people get alternatives. Practically everybody already have a cell phone and would never consider dropping it, so price wise you can be on the cell phone forever before you break even having a land line as well. In the cities with multiple choices of Internet providers and plenty cell phone towers it's all but dead, serving a few elderly and such that don't want or need anything else.
I'm one of those with no land line, I have fiber + cell phone and if the power goes the fiber line goes too. Long story short, if all the towers near me go down or I can't get charge for my cell phone for so long that it's actually a problem - if I forgot to charge mine and there's an emergency I'd bang the neighbors' doors - then we're in deeper shit than me not having a cell phone. I worry as much about not being able to call for an ambulance roughly as much as being struck by lightning twice in a row. If you live on a farm far out in a rural area with crap cell phone coverage and your land line is truly your life line to civilization it's different, but I don't think it's necessary everywhere. That said, who says a tree won't fall over and take down a telephone pole or a land slide wash out a ground cable?
If I wanted to be really safe, I'd rather not depend on any local infrastructure at all and use something like inReach which I could bring along and will work no matter where I am as long as I got clear sight to the sky. Imagine you take a nasty fall and break a leg, do you really want to crawl all the way back to your land line? What if you're stuck and can't get loose? Yes, it costs a bit ($300 + $12/mo cheapest plan) and is only useful for emergencies but consider it like fire insurance - be happy if you don't have to use it ever. Of course you need to have a decent replacement for day to day activities, but it kind of puts a cap on how much the "emergency service" of land lines are worth. Cell phone only service would suck, but there's no way I'd turn down fiber or cable to replace copper.
You seem to have missed the point. That is the entire basis of a language, a shared body of specific knowledge. "You're such a Samantha" is from a SatC language, heavily based on English. That is why I and everyone else that know English can understand the words but not the meaning. But, lets assume we know nothing about SatC and English both. In that case "You're such a Samantha" is completely identical to "You're such a slut/bitch/smartypants" (whatever "Samantha" means to SitC fans). Samantha is just a random assortment of sounds/letters that denote an idea, No different than any other word.
Yes, but nearly all languages can be broken down into reusable words. The idea is that in this language the metaphors wildly change meaning depending on the context in which they were spoken. Say that in the context of clothes "being a Samantha" is someone who dresses fabulously, while in the context of sex "being a Samantha" means being a slut. So the would be diplomat tries to say "Your dress looks fabulous" but without the correct contextual clues the universal translator will say "You are such a slut" instead. A conversation becomes an irreducible complexity because taking away one sentence or one word changes the meaning of everything else being said, so it can't deduct what it is they're saying by looking at common phrases nor can it express any new sentences, like what the Enterprise crew would like to say. It's almost like trying to decipher a conversation between two people with cultural references serving as a one time pad, without the key you are totally lost.
No programming language or IDE is ever going to free you from having to express your ideas clearly and break them down into little sequences of instructions. In a big project this overshadows everything else. Bad foundations? Bad design? The project is doomed no matter how trendy or modern your language/IDE is.
Well you find one way to break it down... but I often feel there's so many possible ways to organize things, it's just how I'd want to solve it and when I have to interact with other people's code they've done the same thing completely differently. Just take a simple thing like pulling data from a database, putting them on a form, have someone edit the information and save it back to the database. How many various implementations of that have I seen? Maaaaaaaaany, but there's no clear winner. You can do it with an SQL query, a strored procedure, an ORM tool and they all might work. You can use the MVC pattern or you could just totally ignore it, the user will never know. Layers are a bit like mathematical models, they're simplifications of reality. Sometimes the world refuses to be simple.
Ahem... if Mr. Gorodish is correct, and Waze was licensed under GPLv2, then we do in fact have a right to the source code, and Google would be breaking the law by not providing it.
Yes, but you generally can't ask for the contract to be fulfilled in court. If you agree to build a house for me and fail to fulfill the contract they'll award damages but they won't drag you there in chains to build the house. There are a few narrow exceptions to this called "specific performance" involving unique real estate, antiques, works of art, collector's items and such where the court may insist the transaction be completed, but it's very much the exception and only when money can't fully compensate your loss. They'll never force a company to open up their own source code, even if they somehow managed to mix it with GPL code. Both sides might of course offer it as a settlement or parts of one, but in an actual court verdict it will be a dollar value while the proprietary source stays closed source.
It's not quite as bad as it sounds, the actual hardware drivers are still accelerated and exposed as OpenGL, it's just that XWayland doesn't make use of it. If you look at this diagram it's the line between the X-server and libDRM that's broken when you use XWayland instead because Wayland can't talk directly down to that level. XWayland needs to be rewritten to accelerate graphics using OpenGL instead, then it'll hook into the green box above libDRM and all will be well. Luckily for the Wayland project so does the X-server want to as well, "Glamor" that they talk about is essentially 2D X11 over OpenGL.
Old:
X-client --> X-server --> libDRM --> hardware
Old using Wayland:
X-client --> XWayland --> (broken, software fallback) --> hardware
New in X-server:
X-client --> X-server (Glamor) --> OpenGL --> libDRM --> hardware
New using Wayland
X-client --> XWayland (Glamor) --> OpenGL --> libDRM --> hardware
Long term it looks like the plan is to expose everything via OpenGL/OpenGL ES for rendering and EGL for the windowing system so the direct link between X11 and libDRM would go away. That is still a few years off though.
Client X11 apps speak the X11 protocol to XWayland, XWayland speaks the Wayland protocol to Wayland so it's basically a big compatility shim. From Wayland's side it's just another client and if you use an X11 server you don't need it, it's not really part of either. Maybe the closest analogy is WINE, if you use Windows or run native Linux applications you don't need it. But if you want to run Windows applications on Linux you need WINE, likewise if you want to run X11 applications on Wayland you need XWayland. Basically you take an X11 server, stop it from talking to actual hardware and makes it draw to a Wayland window instead.
The Linux kernel was nothing special. Seriously. There were many such hobby projects at the time, and it wasn't a particularly great one. The success of Linux was the success of Linus as "the guy in charge" of an open source project. It grew and flourished because of leadership, not (early) technological advantage.
I hear you say it but my impression is that Linus personally wrote a lot of the critical code in early Linux. To use a car analogy, it's a whole lot easier to get people to work on fenders and windshield wipers if you know the engine is developed by someone with real drive so you won't end up with all the accessories (GNU utils) with no engine (HURD). It's easy to sit at the top and say this is the direction we're going and by we I mean you because by myself it's not moving at all, compared to actually taking charge and inviting others to tag along. True it doesn't scale as eventually the project needs more and more management, but Linux would never have gotten off the ground if Linus was just a good technical manager.
Sure, but it'll be like opening a warp point inside a warp gate, B5 style. At least I hope it will.
I would like to introduce Mr. Cicconi to a device called a 'Telephone', particularly a variant colloquially termed a 'landline'. Historically 'telephone' companies, such as AT&T, would sell users a 'landline' to which they could connect a 'telephone'. These services included a basic connection charge as well as usage charges. In the event that a connection was made form one 'landline' to another, the party that initiated the session was charged for the usage of the session. This is exactly the treatment that Mr. Hastings is proposing.
That's who takes care of the bill. If you operate a call center, do you think all the phone lines are free because you only get incoming calls? If you call abroad, do you think your carrier gets to pocket all that money? No, they in turn have to pay the other side of the connection for the privilege of going through their network. Of course both sides will try to keep as much as possible of that money leading to peering disputes.
Also tear-free video seems to be one god awfully big workaround for limitations in X. The stated goal of Wayland was a system in which "every frame is perfect, by which I mean that applications will be able to control the rendering enough that we'll never see tearing, lag, redrawing or flicker." I doubt he'd say that if X had no tearing lag, redrawing or flicker which seems like rather huge deficiencies to me.
Because it would have been A> futile, and B> converted this into a full-scale shooting war, which no one, but particularly Ukranians, want to see in their country. Ukraine cannot, as a practical matter, do anything about Russia.
It might still come to a full scale shooting war, but it is simply too soon. "First they took Sudetenland (Crimea), then they took Eastern Ukraine (Western Czechoslovakia), then our great leaders went to Moscow (Munich) and bought 'Peace in our time' for the rest of Ukraine (Czechoslovakia). Soon war will be upon you too." may get NATO involved which is realistically the only way Ukraine could ever hope to defend against the Russian army. Politically and socially we're not ready for that yet, if they started a shooting war now they'd stand alone and be crushed. If they try appeasement and show that Putin won't stop his expansion maybe NATO will draw a real line in the sand like England and France did with Poland, which may get Putin to back down or at least give them a fighting chance. Until then, they'll bide their time.
Of course the dangerous part here is that this is not your proxy war in Korea or Vietnam or Afghanistan, if NATO first should commit to anything and get called on it we are looking at no less than WW3. Of course Putin would be crazy to risk war with NATO, but the one thing we can't do is bluff and assume he won't as that destroys all credibility if we get caught. And while it's cruel to say it, Russia hasn't done enough to Ukraine just yet that we're ready to commit to such an action. That may change though, if Putin continues the course of action he seems to be on. But if the rest is all blustering I think he can keep Crimea and go home.
Depends, there's investigative journalism and there's a whole lot of news that is simply stating widely known facts about current events, like everything from sports to events to accidents to new products to weather where one newspaper is 95% the same as the next. Other things are more work like food or travel guides, but where the amateur's subject matter knowledge far outshines the journalistic aspects. Yes, journalism is a skill but a lot of "easy" work they did before has been taking over by bloggers and is no worse for wear.
You are woefully ill-informed if you believe 5C simply "sounds like a lot" but "local variations are far greater".
In 2010 my little place on earth was -1.4C colder than normal, in 2011 it was 2.2C warmer than normal so that's a swing of 3.6C from one year to the next. Are you seriously disputing that this is way, way greater in magnitude than any global warming that may or may not have happened in one year? Like I said, 5C in a century is 0.05C/year so how am I to tell if that's 3.6C natural variation or 3.55C natural variation and 0.05C global warming? I wasn't really arguing about whether global warming is real and what the effects are, I'm talking about 99% of the population using whatever their local climate is as indicator and that statistically it's not worth a shit. Even if you've lived there all your life, looking at 115 years of climate statistics for my city there's way too much variation to be certain it's a trend and not just statistical randomness.
Of course, scientists don't do stupid things like look at one local climate or one isolated even, but do a poll on how many in the US believe in global warming before and after the 2014 polar vortex, I dare you. That's what I was talking about.
Yes it does. You will recall that in the end, there was a real wolf who did appear. He ate all the sheep. So if the townspeople had reacted to the warnings not with scorn but by realizing that they were unprepared for actual wolves, their sheep would have been safe.
Time to read your childhood stories again, they were prepared for actual wolves but only as long as they responded and due to the many false alarms they ignored the actual emergency. If there's any relevant analogy to the current situation it's to not run around like Chicken Little claiming the sky is falling unless it's true because nobody will take your warnings seriously afterwards. At least some scientists and politicians like to promote their worst doomsday predictions and every time they fail to come true it hurts their credibility, leaving many people to think it's all bogus and a sham. The media doesn't exactly help either, they like extreme headlines because they sell so they often take highly speculative bullshit and print it up huge as accepted scientific facts.
Even if you take some of the worst case predictions they're talking about something like 5C over 100 years, which might sound a lot but we're talking 0.05C/year on average. Local variations are far, far greater than that, what you personally has experienced is pretty much irrelevant. One warm summer and people say it's global warming, one cold winter and people say it's bullshit. Even when you look at 10+ year averages chances are many places have gone against the global trend, either because of natural variation or because of shifting weather patterns. What matter is if you sample thousands and thousands of places and the total keeps going up, not one particular place. But most people will look out the window and base their opinion on that.
Humm... a site that offers absolutely no actual benchmarks just a mysterious performance number (check their FAQ) with zero ability to reproduce or verify, submitted by users with all kinds of overclocked rigs that's credible. For example it claims the FX-8350 has much better single thread performance (1,512) vs (1,217) which is not supported by any serious review I can find. So either the whole world is in a conspiracy against Passmark, or these numbers are a joke. I wonder how much AMD paid them to invent these numbers?
Well, AMD the company is quite different from AMD the Intel-competitor. While they seem to have stopped the downward trend for now, they're doing it by divesting their CPU/APU business and ramping up lots of semi-custom business like consoles and such. It might be a way for AMD to be profitable but large parts of the market will be left to Intel's mercy.
The GMA500 driver might be doing fine, but for some reason they keep licensing third party graphics for the integrated solution on Atom processors, or at least the ones making it into industrialized products. Getting OpenGL up under Linux on PC/104 or other embedded board is a royal pain in my experience.
Open source support depends on whether they're licensing it from PowerVR or using their own in-house graphics. If you check this page Intel now use their own graphics in "Valleyview" systems, which should be much more open than before.