In that migration, will Linux drivers be available for PCI-X cards we use? Now that Apple has gone to the desktop with 64-bit, the PC will probably see that transition within 2 years. How ready is Linux to deal with Intel and AMD's 64-bit offerings?
Good point. I dunno. Linux runs on Opteron now, I don't think it's much of a problem to move it to Athlon64. Linux is also running on Itanium as well. I don't know about PCI-X hardware, but there *is* a patch available for 2.4.20 kernels for PCI-X hotplug support that I've seen bantered about on the lkml, so I gotta believe that PCI-X drivers for invididual cards can't be THAT far behind. And Pogo Linux, Inc. has released Serial-ATA drivers already, so I don't think that hardware support is lagging behind Windows nearly as much as it was in the early days, and in some ways it's BEATING Windows (Linux had Itanium and Opteron support FIRST, for instance)
It's gotten better, but one of the major problems is the 4GB limit. Specifically, Win2K lets you have 2G of user space. Basically it boils down if you want your assemblies to much larger than 1.5-2GB, forget it. The whole system starts bogging down at 1.5 GB, and when you hit 2GB the system dies and throws up its hands. Needless to say, many product designers at a certain major auto manufacturer are still running on Solaris boxes. Microsoft, of course, has been profusely promising a fix, but still haven't delivered of course.
One problem is the GM IS&S directorate that no open source software shell be used. This came, interestingly enough, right after they began to move to Windows platforms for Unigraphics. More interesting is that their servers all run HP-UX, and that they integrate with their existing Win2K DFS system using CIFS 9000. Hmmm...no open source, huh? (For the uninitiated -- CIFS 9000 is just Samba relabelled by HP)
Ah well. I did the best I could to advocate Open Source while I was there and was told to just 'drink the kool-aid.' *sigh*
We did have to change our IG software. We were using Performer, now we use a third party developed renderer. For years our the company that developed our renderer has supported both Linux and Windows. Now they only support rendering on Windows. They still support the API for Linux though.
But I'll bet the company that developed your renderer now has their hands in Microsoft's back pocket.
For years, Unigraphics (currently owned by EDS), was available on RISC-based Unix workstations only. They wanted to develop the stuff for Intel processors, so the first Intel platform they ported to was Solaris x86. They had a fully-working Linux port in progress. Then they started doing a Windows port. The first Windows port required Hummingbird Exceed (or other X server) to be running on the NT machine. Well, Microsoft jumped in, gave them free developers and free development tools and other free resources to make their Windows port into a logo-compliant application. They immediately dropped the Linux port, and rumours have it that they are dropping the Solaris x86 port. If it weren't for their existing customer base, they'd be dropping their Unix ports too.
Much the same story for CATIA and SDRC (now EDS, coincidentally?) I-DEAS.
Additonally, note that the cash register was first patented in 1883, so my explanation still makes sense in regards to n.99 and n.95 prices showing up in advertising in the 1880s.
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blc as h_register.htm
Um, Cecil Adams admits that he does know. From the article you linked to:
So what's the real explanation? Having spent two hours poring over the microfilm--no guarantee that I'm not full of BS, but at least it's scientific BS--
How would the register show $10? The cashier never rang it. The customer gave the cashier $20, the cashier gave the customer back $10, and the cashier pocketed the money. Nothing was ever entered into the cash register (you have to ring things up usually in cash register to get the drawer to open)
Well, actually the *cashier* might do under the counter sales. Take the money for an item, give the item to the customer, don't report it to the *store* owner.
That's what I meant by keeping the cashier honest, I was just not too clear. The parent poster is right.
It might be that the psychological difference between $19.95 and $20 is what kept it going and spread it to stores that do have to charge sales tax. I dunno.
Actually, the practice originally comes from a tactic that store owners used to keep their cashiers honest.
If the product is $10, then they could just make change for $20 out of their pocket, i.e., hand the customer back a $10 bill and stuff the $20 in their pocket.
Of course cashiers would conveniently "forget" to stuff that $20 back into the drawer.
But if the product is $9.95, then they have to open up the drawer to get a nickel out.
When you add up that most customers would be like at least 2-3 items, products priced at $9.95 and $19.95 would cause the cashiers to *have* to make change out of the drawer, thus keeping them honest.
Yeah, but in this case one of the people slapping the GPL the code in the middle of the Harry Potter book is Caldera, which today is none other than SCO itself.
You can't go around claiming a bunch of people illegally stole your work when you're part of those group of people. It's called failure to mitigate your own damages.
Same with your landlord. Your landlord's failure to enforce thet terms of the lease on others doesn't limit his rights to enforce them on you. But if you're lease terms say that you can't knock down walls in your apartment, and your landlord is swinging the sledgehammer with you, your landlord just lost his right to enforce that particular lease term on you.
Now my point is this: the reason they can't sue X and grant immunity to Y -- because by distributing the code, they are, as specifically stated in the GPL since NOTHING ELSE gives them the right to distribute the code, agreeing to the terms of the GPL. Which means if their code is in there, by distributing to Y and holding them harmless, their case for sueing X has basically been totally destroyed.
Well, SCO has specifically referred to Unix patents.
And according to the terms of the GNU General Public License, if you can't satisfy patent laws AND the terms of the GPL simulataneously you have no right to use the code at all.
Does this mean that SCO, by telling their users it's alright, is violating GPL? I'm not a lawyer, but I know a bit about IP law. But this whole mess is confusing even me, especially since SCO keeps saying conflicting things.
My head hurts now. I wonder if I can sue SCO for medical bills and psychological trauma?:)
Ok, you've got my curiosity up now. Particuarly about the plagiarism avoidance system.
I could see how it would be possible to design to a plagiarism avoidance system using expert and/or knowledge-based systems techniques.
Obviously you can check to make sure things are attributed properly to their sources -- this entails merely looking at the syntax of the of the quote in question and verifying that all the attribution requirements are there and cross-referencing that with the references page, verifying things like title, author, date, etc.
No brainer there. You can verify to make sure that two students didn't submit the same paper (or close to the same paper) by doing diff checks or perhaps using the technique bantered about here in the SCO case of doing 5-line MD5 comparisons, walkign through the paper and overlapping them, etc. That makes sense.
But with a statement that is totally unattributed in a research paper -- unless you had a MASSIVE database of possible source texts, I don't see how this would be possible or even practical.
So I gotta know -- 1) am I on the right track as to how this thing works (this is just total guess work) and 2) how well DOES this thing work? Is there some technique I'm missing here?
Why does Apple use DDR as opposed to say RDRAM or some other higher-speed technology? I mean, it might not be 64-bit compatible, I don't know, but they don't put it in their 32-bit machines either.
Ok, okay, I'm sure a thousand people are going to call me clueless now...:-)
Heh. I was in a flippant mood when I wrote that...:) The post was reductio ad absurdum as was my other post in the parent thread.
That said, I don't think it's evil or even a bad idea to cater to the rich as matter of general principles and I don't think that this is entirely a bad idea to begin with, other than the fact that if they do it wrong, it will defeat the purpose of the HOV lane.
Furthermore, my state doesn't have such lanes, and it's inconceivable that it could *ever* have such lanes, particularly not in the Detroit area. It's a cultural thing, you'd have to be a Detroiter to understand completely why, but it boils down the fact that Detroiters LOVE their cars, so much so that what scarcely exists of a mass transit system is barely used at all.
It's not like it isn't already being done every single day. OJ bought his way out of jail. Bill Gates bought his way out of having his company split up. So let a few people drive in the HOV lane. what's the big deal? Jealous?
Right. Because catering to the rich is a very bad idea. It's not like they have money they're willing to spend. No, they stuff it all their mattress and HORDE it so NO ONE ELSE can have it. Yup. That's what they do alright. No point in spending any money, no siree bob.
Well, one problem is GETTING hydrogen. As the article points out,
"And consumers of natural gas -- already the primary source of hydrogen for everything from hydrogenated foods to NASA rockets -- learned this week that natural-gas supplies are at their lowest levels in 25 years."
Hmmm...I'd think that researchers would be looking for economically viable and environmentally friendly ways of getting hydrogen from a very abundant source on this planet. Or maybe I'm just crazy.
Slashdot Mirror
In that migration, will Linux drivers be available for PCI-X cards we use? Now that Apple has gone to the desktop with 64-bit, the PC will probably see that transition within 2 years. How ready is Linux to deal with Intel and AMD's 64-bit offerings?
Good point. I dunno. Linux runs on Opteron now, I don't think it's much of a problem to move it to Athlon64. Linux is also running on Itanium as well. I don't know about PCI-X hardware, but there *is* a patch available for 2.4.20 kernels for PCI-X hotplug support that I've seen bantered about on the lkml, so I gotta believe that PCI-X drivers for invididual cards can't be THAT far behind. And Pogo Linux, Inc. has released Serial-ATA drivers already, so I don't think that hardware support is lagging behind Windows nearly as much as it was in the early days, and in some ways it's BEATING Windows (Linux had Itanium and Opteron support FIRST, for instance)
It's gotten better, but one of the major problems is the 4GB limit. Specifically, Win2K lets you have 2G of user space. Basically it boils down if you want your assemblies to much larger than 1.5-2GB, forget it. The whole system starts bogging down at 1.5 GB, and when you hit 2GB the system dies and throws up its hands. Needless to say, many product designers at a certain major auto manufacturer are still running on Solaris boxes. Microsoft, of course, has been profusely promising a fix, but still haven't delivered of course.
:)
Pro/E of course will eventually run on Linux,
One problem is the GM IS&S directorate that no open source software shell be used. This came, interestingly enough, right after they began to move to Windows platforms for Unigraphics. More interesting is that their servers all run HP-UX, and that they integrate with their existing Win2K DFS system using CIFS 9000. Hmmm...no open source, huh? (For the uninitiated -- CIFS 9000 is just Samba relabelled by HP)
Ah well. I did the best I could to advocate Open Source while I was there and was told to just 'drink the kool-aid.' *sigh*
Here's a quick summery:
"Lindows is a good OS! My *mommy* even said so."
"Oh yeah, well MY *mommy* has a better OS than *your* mommy!"
"Does not!"
"Does to!"
"Argh! I'm telling!"
Not much different than the usual stuff you read about operating systems on Slashdot.
Just a little side note here:
We did have to change our IG software. We were using Performer, now we use a third party developed renderer. For years our the company that developed our renderer has supported both Linux and Windows. Now they only support rendering on Windows. They still support the API for Linux though.
But I'll bet the company that developed your renderer now has their hands in Microsoft's back pocket.
For years, Unigraphics (currently owned by EDS), was available on RISC-based Unix workstations only. They wanted to develop the stuff for Intel processors, so the first Intel platform they ported to was Solaris x86. They had a fully-working Linux port in progress. Then they started doing a Windows port. The first Windows port required Hummingbird Exceed (or other X server) to be running on the NT machine. Well, Microsoft jumped in, gave them free developers and free development tools and other free resources to make their Windows port into a logo-compliant application. They immediately dropped the Linux port, and rumours have it that they are dropping the Solaris x86 port. If it weren't for their existing customer base, they'd be dropping their Unix ports too.
Much the same story for CATIA and SDRC (now EDS, coincidentally?) I-DEAS.
Additonally, note that the cash register was first patented in 1883, so my explanation still makes sense in regards to n.99 and n.95 prices showing up in advertising in the 1880s.
c as h_register.htm
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bl
Um, Cecil Adams admits that he does know. From the article you linked to:
So what's the real explanation? Having spent two hours poring over the microfilm--no guarantee that I'm not full of BS, but at least it's scientific BS--
(emphasis mine).
Kids these days :) You probably don't remember when it used to still be common practice to hand out *hand written* receipts. :)
Note to self: Patent "drive-thru" method of selling.
... :)
Ummm..prior art? Oh, never mind. This is the USPTO we're dealing with here. They'll put patent examiners on it who don't have cars or something
How would the register show $10? The cashier never rang it. The customer gave the cashier $20, the cashier gave the customer back $10, and the cashier pocketed the money. Nothing was ever entered into the cash register (you have to ring things up usually in cash register to get the drawer to open)
Well, actually the *cashier* might do under the counter sales. Take the money for an item, give the item to the customer, don't report it to the *store* owner.
That's what I meant by keeping the cashier honest, I was just not too clear. The parent poster is right.
It's a buggy whip, I think.
It might be that the psychological difference between $19.95 and $20 is what kept it going and spread it to stores that do have to charge sales tax. I dunno.
Actually, the practice originally comes from a tactic that store owners used to keep their cashiers honest.
If the product is $10, then they could just make change for $20 out of their pocket, i.e., hand the customer back a $10 bill and stuff the $20 in their pocket.
Of course cashiers would conveniently "forget" to stuff that $20 back into the drawer.
But if the product is $9.95, then they have to open up the drawer to get a nickel out.
When you add up that most customers would be like at least 2-3 items, products priced at $9.95 and $19.95 would cause the cashiers to *have* to make change out of the drawer, thus keeping them honest.
Little known fact, but it's true.
He probably works for nVidia. :)
Yeah, but in this case one of the people slapping the GPL the code in the middle of the Harry Potter book is Caldera, which today is none other than SCO itself.
You can't go around claiming a bunch of people illegally stole your work when you're part of those group of people. It's called failure to mitigate your own damages.
Same with your landlord. Your landlord's failure to enforce thet terms of the lease on others doesn't limit his rights to enforce them on you. But if you're lease terms say that you can't knock down walls in your apartment, and your landlord is swinging the sledgehammer with you, your landlord just lost his right to enforce that particular lease term on you.
Now my point is this: the reason they can't sue X and grant immunity to Y -- because by distributing the code, they are, as specifically stated in the GPL since NOTHING ELSE gives them the right to distribute the code, agreeing to the terms of the GPL. Which means if their code is in there, by distributing to Y and holding them harmless, their case for sueing X has basically been totally destroyed.
Well, SCO has specifically referred to Unix patents.
:)
And according to the terms of the GNU General Public License, if you can't satisfy patent laws AND the terms of the GPL simulataneously you have no right to use the code at all.
Does this mean that SCO, by telling their users it's alright, is violating GPL? I'm not a lawyer, but I know a bit about IP law. But this whole mess is confusing even me, especially since SCO keeps saying conflicting things.
My head hurts now. I wonder if I can sue SCO for medical bills and psychological trauma?
Ok, you've got my curiosity up now. Particuarly about the plagiarism avoidance system.
:)
I could see how it would be possible to design to a plagiarism avoidance system using expert and/or knowledge-based systems techniques.
Obviously you can check to make sure things are attributed properly to their sources -- this entails merely looking at the syntax of the of the quote in question and verifying that all the attribution requirements are there and cross-referencing that with the references page, verifying things like title, author, date, etc.
No brainer there. You can verify to make sure that two students didn't submit the same paper (or close to the same paper) by doing diff checks or perhaps using the technique bantered about here in the SCO case of doing 5-line MD5 comparisons, walkign through the paper and overlapping them, etc. That makes sense.
But with a statement that is totally unattributed in a research paper -- unless you had a MASSIVE database of possible source texts, I don't see how this would be possible or even practical.
So I gotta know -- 1) am I on the right track as to how this thing works (this is just total guess work) and 2) how well DOES this thing work? Is there some technique I'm missing here?
Enquiring minds want to know
Cray's X1 also debuted, but it was much lower @112
Yeah, but can you imagine a B...oh never mind....
The question is "How many teraflops does Deep Th...."
*KABLOOM* *the Earth is suddenly destroyed by a Vogon Destructor fleet to make way for a new hyperspace bypass*
Why does Apple use DDR as opposed to say RDRAM or some other higher-speed technology? I mean, it might not be 64-bit compatible, I don't know, but they don't put it in their 32-bit machines either.
:-)
Ok, okay, I'm sure a thousand people are going to call me clueless now...
Heh. I was in a flippant mood when I wrote that... :) The post was reductio ad absurdum as was my other post in the parent thread.
That said, I don't think it's evil or even a bad idea to cater to the rich as matter of general principles and I don't think that this is entirely a bad idea to begin with, other than the fact that if they do it wrong, it will defeat the purpose of the HOV lane.
Furthermore, my state doesn't have such lanes, and it's inconceivable that it could *ever* have such lanes, particularly not in the Detroit area. It's a cultural thing, you'd have to be a Detroiter to understand completely why, but it boils down the fact that Detroiters LOVE their cars, so much so that what scarcely exists of a mass transit system is barely used at all.
Ahem. Works with GCC 3.3? That's GNU/XCode!
-- Richard Stallman
It's not like it isn't already being done every single day. OJ bought his way out of jail. Bill Gates bought his way out of having his company split up. So let a few people drive in the HOV lane. what's the big deal? Jealous?
Right. Because catering to the rich is a very bad idea. It's not like they have money they're willing to spend. No, they stuff it all their mattress and HORDE it so NO ONE ELSE can have it. Yup. That's what they do alright. No point in spending any money, no siree bob.
to make hydrogen from water, you also need to add large amounts of energy
:)
Precisely why I said 'economically viable'.
Well, one problem is GETTING hydrogen. As the article points out,
"And consumers of natural gas -- already the primary source of hydrogen for everything from hydrogenated foods to NASA rockets -- learned this week that natural-gas supplies are at their lowest levels in 25 years."
Hmmm...I'd think that researchers would be looking for economically viable and environmentally friendly ways of getting hydrogen from a very abundant source on this planet. Or maybe I'm just crazy.