Actually all that cruft does slow things down in a major way when you try to initialize hardware. Compare the times of Coreboot --> Linux to BIOS --> bootloader ---> linux.
Anyways standardizing some of these component's wouldn't be a bad idea, say the ARM group providing a few standard modules than can be leased with the Core designs.
Most are self-financed in a way. Production costs are discounted before any royalties are paid out. Musicians unlike Coders or Artists that work on games do not receive a wage, but rather royalties. Why would you pay an employee royalties?
Trucks and heavy equipment. When a road is engineered for 40,000 pounds, 2-3 thousand doesn't to much to it. For roads other than highways, your biggest enemy is just time and weathering.
And glass/ceramic moving at over half the speed of sound and is more inherently reliable by design? In all likelyhood, desktop use of a modern SSD, the SSD should last longer than many of the other components, such as the motherboard.
The only reliable and cheap method of long term data storage (centuries scale) is still acid-free paper in a dry environment.
Not really the fairest way. Cars create very little wear and tear on the highways (They are like 95% of the volume and responsible for 5% of the wear and tear). The two main externalities of cars are pollution which a gas tax can roughly cover, and congestion, which tolls can cover. Per-mile only makes sense where the miles themselves create the externality like heavy trucks and farm equipment.
And what if it is overheating because the thermastat is stuck partially shut and your employer was too miserly to fix it? Contributory negligence is a defense. Why didn't IT setup a sane amount of data for emails, or include a graceful failure mode where e-mails less than a week old would be buffered, or a whilelist of customer and official employee addresses that would always make it through?
Anyways people really need to read the freaking order. The order of dismissal was only reversed in part. It found that the email were in fact damaging (one of the remanded parts), but because no claim was made that authorized use was exceeded. Not making such a claim, the order of dismissal was affirmed. Also some things about labor activity and competing state/federal jurisdiction, but it's not as relevant.
Not necessarily, there have been non-state land registration agencies that did a perfectly sufficient and satisfactory job in areas that the state had not "officially" opened. What is needed is a mutual pledge. "I pledge recognize the property of people in such in such and area, meeting such and such criteria, with such and such improvements, bounded by stakes in such and such a manner, and aid in it's defense if they have made they same pledge to me". Stakes in early mining camps worked the same way. The state is not synonymous with society or cooperation.
As for the U.S. as stolen property, it didn't necessarily need to happen that way. Colonial Pennsylvania require negotiations with the residence before taking occupancy above and beyond any royal land grant. Anyways people divide property in order to avoid conflict, acting upon divisions that are no longer of any consequence (as per both victims and perpetrators are long dead) will just stir up more conflict. In fact the natives you call the true owners probably stole it from a different tribe who stole it from yet a different tribe. At some point, time makes the illegitimate legitimate, or at least makes it so that restoring a lost title would cause more injustice then it would do as the new line of titleholders have long borne the liabilities of the land and did almost nothing to cause, encourage or abet the original loss, and the line of old-title holders have long been free of these liabilities, and have only a small probability that they personally would own the lands had they not been stolen century or more ago.
In addition the State is just a group of people. (Unless you wan't to make the claim that all governments are instituted by God.) If no one may properly make a claim to property under an appeal to justice, a.ka. having a right, then how did these people calling themselves "The State" do it? Now you can say that they had their guns and just did it, but that would completely preclude the "under an appeal to justice" part, and would imply that the man in question has no actual duty not to sabotage the power lines, save for fear of being caught. No, your original statement is misleading. To be factually accurate you would have to state that enforcement of and dispute settlement for certain types of property has been monopolized by the State. Property itself is a natural and spontaneous process that occurs as people realize the benefit of dividing their labor and set to modify their own behavior to encourage cooperation.
Yes property is a common good, and I use the term in it's Scholastic scense. The more common and widespread it's practice, the greater it's benefits for each individual that practices it. A modern usually uses the term public or common good to refer to a good or service that is merely divided among many people.It implies that might makes right, that a thing is okay just because a certain number of people want to share in the loot, or that it's okay to take some amount x so long as a greater amount y might be distributed widely as a result.
And this idea of just compensation is a slap in the face. That they pay any amount at all is to recognize that the land is not rightfully theirs. As Frederick Douglas wrote about his wages in the shipyard "The thought itself vexed me, and the manner in which Master Hugh received my wages, vexed me more than the original wrong. Carefully counting the money and rolling it out, dollar by dollar, he would look me in the face, as if he would search my heart as well as my pocket, and reproachfully ask me, "Is that all?"—implying that I had, perhaps, kept back part of my wages; or, if not so, the demand was made, possibly, to make me feel, that, after all, I was an "unprofitable servant." Draining me of the last cent of my hard earnings, he would, however, occasionally—when I brought[252] home an extra large sum—dole out to me a sixpence or a shilling, with a view, perhaps, of kindling up my gratitude; but this practice had the opposite effect—it was an admissi
Then perhaps a PCI with a basic SNES ASIC and a FGPA, so custom chips included in cartridges could be flashed onto the array before starting. Of course it's a lot more expensive, but you could get accuracy easily.
So the hardware someone paid good money for is just an extension of the Apple store? If Apple doesn't want to sell such apps, then fine, but untill or unless there is an officially recognized way to the iphone/ipad (like the dev modes of some android phones) to run arbitrary third party code of my choosing, I won't consider buying either device.
Many organizations employ load balancers for their SSL sites, that employ hardware crypto, oft' with no method of extracting private keys available.
It's not no method, as you can often glitch or probe the hardware. It's just especially costly and takes more time than it takes for someone to realize that their machine has been stolen.
GTK 3.2+ has remote capibility, by translating to HTML interfaces.
Also the X sever has already been gutted quite a bit, Especially since it was modularized. For instance compositing managers have taken over windows management. Mode setting has being added to the kernel, memory management by separate things like G.E.M. Eventually X may just be used for legacy toolkits and remote windowing. If Wayland can properly support input mapping and swapping to/from X, I don't see why the remote capability through X could not be kept or even improved, A variation of X that only needed to know how to interpret the final Wayland outputs rather than having hundreds of device input drivers could make it pretty lean.
How about instead of raising taxes, we abolish patents? This will let smaller businesses be more competitive without fear of lawsuits as well as opening up opportunities int he third word to industrialize.
Pretty much what the other guy said. Petty tyrants would steal it all anyways or the institutions in these nations wouldn't allow the systematic changes necessary for them to begin generating that same wealth themselves. Leave the capital right wheres it's most effecient and sell the goods and services produced to everyone in the world. And there is still a lot of growth to be had.
I don't think so. The success of the Arduino revolves around how easy it is to get it to reach out and touch something using all the pin interfaces (turn on a LED, control a motor, use PCM to regulate your barbeque temperature. Now there does seem to be a small overlap, it's can't complete with the arduino over it's entire range of applications.
Abusus non tollit usum. Some people have used a similar argument to try to do bad thing in the past, however that simply isn't relavent to the accuracy. (Software Patents shouldn't exist anyways (When's the last time someone from Microsoft said that?)) Should I believe Linux sprang fully formed, a system in itself from the loins of Linus? Now for some words from the big cheese himself.
I'd like any feedback on
things people like/dislike in minix, as my OS resembles it somewhat
(same physical layout of the file-system (due to practical reasons)
among other things).
PS. Yes - it's free of any minix code, and it has a multi-threaded fs.
So it's own code, but not exactly a clean room implementation, nor 100% original. The linux kernel has taken BSD code and incorporated it in the kernel. How exactly does this work unless they two kernels work in a similar fashion? "Stealing" in the context of intellectual ideas is always metaphorical and may or may not have anything do with copyrights or patents.(which again, I am no great fan of) e.g IThree years I built some raised gardens with two by twelves. In the next two years each of my neighbors neighbors stole the idea.
Lastly I'll leave you with a bit of advice, though I know you will likely ignore it. Adjectives describing personal qualities never settle an argument, and usually derail it. It's better just to try to find the common ground first. Here's the question. Does linux owe it's current form and existence more to Minix and Unix than any other operating systems? If not show me the evidence, if so then just a matter of settling to which degree.
Windows has some add-ons that make it more posix-compliant, but they are implemented in user-space. It's an afterthought at best. On the other hand Linux has a Posix interface in the kernel, and only breaks away from the specification when there is a really good reason to.
The Tanerbaum Torvalds debate is about the design decision of the respective kernels. This does not imply that Torvalds did not consult Tanerbaums Operating System Books or code when he first began his project. The use of the same filesystem clearly shows the influence. Aristotle and Socrates did not agree on everything, yet Socrates was a clear influence upon Aristotle.
But I think all your objection is just because I didn't make my first post all that clear. If you want to say linux "stole" technology (factually copied or adapted), then you should start by looking a Unix and Minix systems. I'm not saying that any copyright or patent was violated, or that linux has added no novel contributions of it's own. On the contrary it's the fastest evolving software project on the planet.
POSIX: Portable Operating System Interface for UNIX.
Linux tries to keep pretty close to to it. 'nuff said.
It's also no secret linus learned OS design a large part from hands on operation with minix, and that the minix file system was the first file system linux used.
Actually they stole most of thier ideas from Bell Labs (Unix) and initially borrowed code from minix so that Linus didn't need to write an entire OS in one go.
But, any legal action by the FSF against the secondary distributors (why they would ever want to do that I don't know.) would be barred by promissory estopel, if they the distributed the "source" package provided to them by the FSF, that also included any modifications that they made. A reasonable reliance was made on the FSF's declaration about the tar file being the source, and no other person or group is in a better position to know what the source of Emacs actually is besides the FSF.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyways standardizing some of these component's wouldn't be a bad idea, say the ARM group providing a few standard modules than can be leased with the Core designs.
There are probably is one or two mathematical journals that accept prefix notation in their style guides.
Most are self-financed in a way. Production costs are discounted before any royalties are paid out. Musicians unlike Coders or Artists that work on games do not receive a wage, but rather royalties. Why would you pay an employee royalties?
Trucks and heavy equipment. When a road is engineered for 40,000 pounds, 2-3 thousand doesn't to much to it. For roads other than highways, your biggest enemy is just time and weathering.
And glass/ceramic moving at over half the speed of sound and is more inherently reliable by design? In all likelyhood, desktop use of a modern SSD, the SSD should last longer than many of the other components, such as the motherboard. The only reliable and cheap method of long term data storage (centuries scale) is still acid-free paper in a dry environment.
Not really the fairest way. Cars create very little wear and tear on the highways (They are like 95% of the volume and responsible for 5% of the wear and tear). The two main externalities of cars are pollution which a gas tax can roughly cover, and congestion, which tolls can cover. Per-mile only makes sense where the miles themselves create the externality like heavy trucks and farm equipment.
If you care enough you should be using something like arch, slack, or gentoo and build your system to you own specs.
Anyways people really need to read the freaking order. The order of dismissal was only reversed in part. It found that the email were in fact damaging (one of the remanded parts), but because no claim was made that authorized use was exceeded. Not making such a claim, the order of dismissal was affirmed. Also some things about labor activity and competing state/federal jurisdiction, but it's not as relevant.
The prevent encryption on public bands. (CB, HAM, shortwave)
Not necessarily, there have been non-state land registration agencies that did a perfectly sufficient and satisfactory job in areas that the state had not "officially" opened. What is needed is a mutual pledge. "I pledge recognize the property of people in such in such and area, meeting such and such criteria, with such and such improvements, bounded by stakes in such and such a manner, and aid in it's defense if they have made they same pledge to me". Stakes in early mining camps worked the same way. The state is not synonymous with society or cooperation.
As for the U.S. as stolen property, it didn't necessarily need to happen that way. Colonial Pennsylvania require negotiations with the residence before taking occupancy above and beyond any royal land grant. Anyways people divide property in order to avoid conflict, acting upon divisions that are no longer of any consequence (as per both victims and perpetrators are long dead) will just stir up more conflict. In fact the natives you call the true owners probably stole it from a different tribe who stole it from yet a different tribe. At some point, time makes the illegitimate legitimate, or at least makes it so that restoring a lost title would cause more injustice then it would do as the new line of titleholders have long borne the liabilities of the land and did almost nothing to cause, encourage or abet the original loss, and the line of old-title holders have long been free of these liabilities, and have only a small probability that they personally would own the lands had they not been stolen century or more ago.
In addition the State is just a group of people. (Unless you wan't to make the claim that all governments are instituted by God.) If no one may properly make a claim to property under an appeal to justice, a.ka. having a right, then how did these people calling themselves "The State" do it? Now you can say that they had their guns and just did it, but that would completely preclude the "under an appeal to justice" part, and would imply that the man in question has no actual duty not to sabotage the power lines, save for fear of being caught. No, your original statement is misleading. To be factually accurate you would have to state that enforcement of and dispute settlement for certain types of property has been monopolized by the State. Property itself is a natural and spontaneous process that occurs as people realize the benefit of dividing their labor and set to modify their own behavior to encourage cooperation.
Yes property is a common good, and I use the term in it's Scholastic scense. The more common and widespread it's practice, the greater it's benefits for each individual that practices it. A modern usually uses the term public or common good to refer to a good or service that is merely divided among many people.It implies that might makes right, that a thing is okay just because a certain number of people want to share in the loot, or that it's okay to take some amount x so long as a greater amount y might be distributed widely as a result.
And this idea of just compensation is a slap in the face. That they pay any amount at all is to recognize that the land is not rightfully theirs. As Frederick Douglas wrote about his wages in the shipyard "The thought itself vexed me, and the manner in which Master Hugh received my wages, vexed me more than the original wrong. Carefully counting the money and rolling it out, dollar by dollar, he would look me in the face, as if he would search my heart as well as my pocket, and reproachfully ask me, "Is that all?"—implying that I had, perhaps, kept back part of my wages; or, if not so, the demand was made, possibly, to make me feel, that, after all, I was an "unprofitable servant." Draining me of the last cent of my hard earnings, he would, however, occasionally—when I brought[252] home an extra large sum—dole out to me a sixpence or a shilling, with a view, perhaps, of kindling up my gratitude; but this practice had the opposite effect—it was an admissi
Then perhaps a PCI with a basic SNES ASIC and a FGPA, so custom chips included in cartridges could be flashed onto the array before starting. Of course it's a lot more expensive, but you could get accuracy easily.
Isn't the chipsets used just about out of patent, and thus allowing perfect emulation by including a copy of the chips used on a USB device?
So the hardware someone paid good money for is just an extension of the Apple store? If Apple doesn't want to sell such apps, then fine, but untill or unless there is an officially recognized way to the iphone/ipad (like the dev modes of some android phones) to run arbitrary third party code of my choosing, I won't consider buying either device.
Many organizations employ load balancers for their SSL sites, that employ hardware crypto, oft' with no method of extracting private keys available.
It's not no method, as you can often glitch or probe the hardware. It's just especially costly and takes more time than it takes for someone to realize that their machine has been stolen.
GTK 3.2+ has remote capibility, by translating to HTML interfaces.
Also the X sever has already been gutted quite a bit, Especially since it was modularized. For instance compositing managers have taken over windows management. Mode setting has being added to the kernel, memory management by separate things like G.E.M. Eventually X may just be used for legacy toolkits and remote windowing. If Wayland can properly support input mapping and swapping to/from X, I don't see why the remote capability through X could not be kept or even improved, A variation of X that only needed to know how to interpret the final Wayland outputs rather than having hundreds of device input drivers could make it pretty lean.
An interest presentation http://blip.tv/linuxconfau/x-and-the-future-of-linux-graphics-4711540
How about instead of raising taxes, we abolish patents? This will let smaller businesses be more competitive without fear of lawsuits as well as opening up opportunities int he third word to industrialize.
Pretty much what the other guy said. Petty tyrants would steal it all anyways or the institutions in these nations wouldn't allow the systematic changes necessary for them to begin generating that same wealth themselves. Leave the capital right wheres it's most effecient and sell the goods and services produced to everyone in the world. And there is still a lot of growth to be had.
I don't think so. The success of the Arduino revolves around how easy it is to get it to reach out and touch something using all the pin interfaces (turn on a LED, control a motor, use PCM to regulate your barbeque temperature. Now there does seem to be a small overlap, it's can't complete with the arduino over it's entire range of applications.
Abusus non tollit usum. Some people have used a similar argument to try to do bad thing in the past, however that simply isn't relavent to the accuracy. (Software Patents shouldn't exist anyways (When's the last time someone from Microsoft said that?)) Should I believe Linux sprang fully formed, a system in itself from the loins of Linus? Now for some words from the big cheese himself.
I'd like any feedback on things people like/dislike in minix, as my OS resembles it somewhat (same physical layout of the file-system (due to practical reasons) among other things).
PS. Yes - it's free of any minix code, and it has a multi-threaded fs.
So it's own code, but not exactly a clean room implementation, nor 100% original. The linux kernel has taken BSD code and incorporated it in the kernel. How exactly does this work unless they two kernels work in a similar fashion? "Stealing" in the context of intellectual ideas is always metaphorical and may or may not have anything do with copyrights or patents.(which again, I am no great fan of) e.g IThree years I built some raised gardens with two by twelves. In the next two years each of my neighbors neighbors stole the idea.
Lastly I'll leave you with a bit of advice, though I know you will likely ignore it. Adjectives describing personal qualities never settle an argument, and usually derail it. It's better just to try to find the common ground first. Here's the question. Does linux owe it's current form and existence more to Minix and Unix than any other operating systems? If not show me the evidence, if so then just a matter of settling to which degree.
Windows has some add-ons that make it more posix-compliant, but they are implemented in user-space. It's an afterthought at best. On the other hand Linux has a Posix interface in the kernel, and only breaks away from the specification when there is a really good reason to.
The Tanerbaum Torvalds debate is about the design decision of the respective kernels. This does not imply that Torvalds did not consult Tanerbaums Operating System Books or code when he first began his project. The use of the same filesystem clearly shows the influence. Aristotle and Socrates did not agree on everything, yet Socrates was a clear influence upon Aristotle.
But I think all your objection is just because I didn't make my first post all that clear. If you want to say linux "stole" technology (factually copied or adapted), then you should start by looking a Unix and Minix systems. I'm not saying that any copyright or patent was violated, or that linux has added no novel contributions of it's own. On the contrary it's the fastest evolving software project on the planet.
POSIX: Portable Operating System Interface for UNIX.
Linux tries to keep pretty close to to it. 'nuff said.
It's also no secret linus learned OS design a large part from hands on operation with minix, and that the minix file system was the first file system linux used.
Actually they stole most of thier ideas from Bell Labs (Unix) and initially borrowed code from minix so that Linus didn't need to write an entire OS in one go.
two "l"'s actually platter, a type of plate larger than a dining plate on which food is served,
But, any legal action by the FSF against the secondary distributors (why they would ever want to do that I don't know.) would be barred by promissory estopel, if they the distributed the "source" package provided to them by the FSF, that also included any modifications that they made. A reasonable reliance was made on the FSF's declaration about the tar file being the source, and no other person or group is in a better position to know what the source of Emacs actually is besides the FSF.
Oh, but then isn't ion thrust an option since you have a lot of time to use.