I'm sorry to reply to my own comment, but this is too funny. From the site mentioned in my previous post...
The genitalia of the Ximian red ape is quite visible between its legs, but don't attempt to disable it with a strike to that region. It has almost no nerve endings in its genitals, which additionally allows the red ape to make love for hours without orgasming. Instead, aim your blow for the sharp bone ridge above its eyes; the sonar organ located therein will ring with the force of your blow for many minutes, stunning the creature.
Will Helix^H^H^H Ximian Gnome allow me to make love for hours without orgasming? Try to picture a little Krynn gnome with bright red genitalia between his legs!...wait, don't!
If you do a google search on ximian then you come up with the following funny link...
Some important lessons for you ... The genitalia of the Ximian red ape is quite visible between its legs, but don't
attempt to disable it with a strike to that region. It has almost no nerve... www.armory.com/~crisper/Fiction/lessons.html - 15k
They don't need their own *nix distribution. The Windows 2k kernel is a very nice kernel. Add to that a *nix filesystem and some GNU Tools and nobody would be able to tell the difference... ...except that Windows2k*nix would have better driver support than *nix.
Did anyone else notice how Ballmer refered to the 'Unix phenomenon '?
If we look at Merrium Webster's definition of phenomenon: 2. a : an object or aspect known through the senses rather than by thought or intuition b : a temporal or spatiotemporal object of sensory experience as distinguished from a noumenon c : a fact or event of scientific interest susceptible of scientific description and explanation 3. a : a rare or significant fact or event b plural phenomenons : an exceptional, unusual, or abnormal person, thing, or occurrence
usage see PHENOMENA
Unix doesn't fit into any of these categories! Perhaps he should have said 'Unix foundation' because when you have a 35 year old server operating system, it seems pretty damn intuitive that it would be competition to a 5 year old Windows NT. There is nothing unusual or unscientific about that.
You can stand there looking uncomfortable while the DeCSS song is playing on a small record player. Every once and a while you can sing out, 'Here I come to save the day!'.
Don't forget the smaller projects that have paid developers.
The NSA people who designed NSA Secure Linux were being paid. I worked on an OSS project at university and was paid. The lead developers of this projects were paid as well (they didn't even have to teach classes, they are full time faculty who only work on this project).
My point is that MS may depreciate or change the technology if it will gain them more money. This is contrary to your point a.
'Be' is hardly a 'large-corporation', but they abandoned all of the BeOS users by jumping on the embedded systems bandwagon and announcing no further development for the BeOS.
I do agree with your second point, that they will assure the installed base.
I think the problem with sdl is that it is still in its infancy and a may go in many different directions. Many open source projects are similar to this. But, there are also projects like Apache, Linux, Gimp, Perl, and others. Many companies could commit to Perl and Apache without worrying about the direction of the project changing. Once a project like SDL has a large enough userbase, it will stay on track, because the userbase are the people who develop it.
It's number discrimination! Linus is discriminating against odd tenths of a number.
Sure they lack factors of 2, but they are still numbers. With one exception, every prime number is odd and prime numbers are important. Does Linus Torvals hate prime numbers?
This 'even-numbered' favoritism is surely a sign of some deeply rooted hatred and fear.
...as opposed to committing to a technology owned by MS or some other large corporation?
Companies are in the business of making profits. Profits come from changing technology to something that is supposedly 'new and improved' and charging the same markets for the product all over again.
It's a basic business model... if you can't increase your markets, then you exploit your available markets. Having many people committed to SDL will benefit SDL by allowing more people to have control over it. The technology is owned by the people who use it. Nobody pays a dime.
Instead of marketing it as 2x, 3x, etc., would it be too difficult for the manufacturers to just call it by the amount of data that it holds (i.e. 1.3 GB or 1.8 GB)?
As so many other Slashdot readers pointed out, Miguel is focusing on Free-speech, not free-beer.
Here's a quote from the article that bothered me:
Porting Evolution to Windows is a possibility, but not an immediate priority. Evolution has a number of features that are not available in other mail clients,
the most important (Hello Richard!) is that Evolution is free software. That means that people get the software and they get a number of rights on the software that they do not usually get with proprietary software, they can:
Copy the code, and redistribute it.
They can modify the code, to make adjustments, tune it, expand it or to make it smaller, or to reuse pieces of it.
They can redistribute their modifications.
All of this, within the licensing terms of the GNU GPL.
I am a big fan of free-speech software, but unfortunatly, to 99% of corporate America, free-speech is not an important feature for software. The goal of Helix Gnome and Evolution are to make Gnome a viable alternative to Windows. I understand that to mean that Evolution should strive to be absolutely better than Outlook (since it can't continually play 'catch-up'). 'Better than outlook' would be it's most important feature, since as I have previously mentioned, corporate culture doesn't care about 'free-speech'.
Can someone who knows more about Neural Net's help me out?
This doesn't seem like much of a break-through. The article mentions Back-propagation networks as an effective (but as I understand it, slow) NN. The article says that this technique is an improvement on back-props. I do know that in the last year, Quick-props and Fast-props have both came out which are 'major' improvements on the back-props algorithm.
My question for the specialist is, how is the PoE model any different/better/worse than these other improvements? It is my understanding that Quick-props is very good for practical image recognition problems.
Your reply to my post hit on a lot of key points that I agree with fully.
I mostly wrote that post because whenever I read a story about XFree86 on/. everyone bashes it. I mentioned in my post that I didn't agree with the comments that I made. You may have overlooked that. I am glad, however, that you brought up a lot of key points. It's nice to hear people defend XFree86 for a change. I try to stay away from pixmap UIs. Enlightenment was slow on my P3. Sawmill is an excellent window manager (although it still suffers from pixmap-bloat). I really enjoy the Sawmill-Gnome combo which as we all know, includes XFree86.
I'll save everyone from having to Bitch about Xfree86. I really don't feel this way, but it is apparent to me that whenever Xfree86 stories appear on/. the readers feel obligated to state the following:
Xfree86 sucks. Classic example of Bloatware. Designed in 1963 by some unix hacker who wanted to run visual apps remotely via network. Everything and the kitchen sink has been hacked into the code since then. Not stable. Takes up too much RAM. Linux better come up with a good alternative if it ever wants a piece of the embedded market. Piece of crap. blah blah blah.
I think that you get the point. Since I did all of the complaining, please limit your replies to positive comments only.
Good idea Karma Sink. To further this idea, you can have him read "The Linux Kernel" by David Rusling. You can download this free book from linuxdoc.org. My personal opinion of this book is that it is a bit 'rough around the edges'. I don't think the book ever had an editor to go through and fix the grammar.
However, "The Linux Kernel" is a very informative book and it is a good start to learning about operating systems.
I've found that with some of my cousins, that if I start out with stories about Linus Torvalds, or the kid who got arrested for DeCSS, then they become more interested in the source code and being able to play with it.
It goes a little deeper than what you describe. Apple recently had some problems with Korean companies selling iMac look-alike computers. In order to assure a legal defense against companies such as these, Apple has to stop everyone from mimicking it's look and feel. For example, the companies could claim that they were copying the themes, and not the Mac OS.
Besides, I think that Aqua is has a very nice look and feel. If everyone used Aqua look-alikes, then I would get sick of it pretty fast.
I liked the Aqua enlightenment theme. I feel that it is one of the best themes I've seen (combined with the Aqua gtk theme of course). I said the following in another article, but since it is so important, here it is again:
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."- James Madison
This doesn't just apply to governments. This applies to your privacy and rights with businesses. Stand up for your rights.
"
I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."- James Madison
Read this once. Next, reread it. I believe this quote to be very pertinent to internet censorship at both a legal level and at a commercial level (as the above article may suggest).
Slashdot Mirror
XINAWM= Xena, Warrier Mistress
Lucy Lawless! aaaah...
They don't need their own *nix distribution. The Windows 2k kernel is a very nice kernel. Add to that a *nix filesystem and some GNU Tools and nobody would be able to tell the difference...
...except that Windows2k*nix would have better driver support than *nix.
Did anyone else notice how Ballmer refered to the 'Unix phenomenon '?
If we look at Merrium Webster's definition of phenomenon:
2. a : an object or aspect known through the senses rather than by thought or intuition
b : a temporal or spatiotemporal object of sensory experience as distinguished from a noumenon
c : a fact or event of scientific interest susceptible of scientific description and explanation
3. a : a rare or significant fact or event b plural phenomenons : an exceptional, unusual, or abnormal person, thing, or occurrence usage see PHENOMENA
Unix doesn't fit into any of these categories! Perhaps he should have said 'Unix foundation' because when you have a 35 year old server operating system, it seems pretty damn intuitive that it would be competition to a 5 year old Windows NT. There is nothing unusual or unscientific about that.
There is deep meaning to this.
The NSA people who designed NSA Secure Linux were being paid. I worked on an OSS project at university and was paid. The lead developers of this projects were paid as well (they didn't even have to teach classes, they are full time faculty who only work on this project).
'Be' is hardly a 'large-corporation', but they abandoned all of the BeOS users by jumping on the embedded systems bandwagon and announcing no further development for the BeOS.
I do agree with your second point, that they will assure the installed base.
I think the problem with sdl is that it is still in its infancy and a may go in many different directions. Many open source projects are similar to this. But, there are also projects like Apache, Linux, Gimp, Perl, and others. Many companies could commit to Perl and Apache without worrying about the direction of the project changing. Once a project like SDL has a large enough userbase, it will stay on track, because the userbase are the people who develop it.
Sure they lack factors of 2, but they are still numbers. With one exception, every prime number is odd and prime numbers are important. Does Linus Torvals hate prime numbers?
This 'even-numbered' favoritism is surely a sign of some deeply rooted hatred and fear.
Companies are in the business of making profits. Profits come from changing technology to something that is supposedly 'new and improved' and charging the same markets for the product all over again.
It's a basic business model... if you can't increase your markets, then you exploit your available markets. Having many people committed to SDL will benefit SDL by allowing more people to have control over it. The technology is owned by the people who use it. Nobody pays a dime.
650 is a hard number to multiply in my head.
'nuff said
Not very long indeed.
No, to the other question, as well.
Here's a quote from the article that bothered me:
I am a big fan of free-speech software, but unfortunatly, to 99% of corporate America, free-speech is not an important feature for software. The goal of Helix Gnome and Evolution are to make Gnome a viable alternative to Windows. I understand that to mean that Evolution should strive to be absolutely better than Outlook (since it can't continually play 'catch-up'). 'Better than outlook' would be it's most important feature, since as I have previously mentioned, corporate culture doesn't care about 'free-speech'.This doesn't seem like much of a break-through. The article mentions Back-propagation networks as an effective (but as I understand it, slow) NN. The article says that this technique is an improvement on back-props. I do know that in the last year, Quick-props and Fast-props have both came out which are 'major' improvements on the back-props algorithm.
My question for the specialist is, how is the PoE model any different/better/worse than these other improvements? It is my understanding that Quick-props is very good for practical image recognition problems.
That's a fake CmndrTaco generated first post if I ever saw one!
Maybe there is ICE 9 on PLANET 9! The astronauts will bring Ice 9 back with them and it will be the end of humanity!
I mostly wrote that post because whenever I read a story about XFree86 on /. everyone bashes it. I mentioned in my post that I didn't agree with the comments that I made. You may have overlooked that. I am glad, however, that you brought up a lot of key points. It's nice to hear people defend XFree86 for a change. I try to stay away from pixmap UIs. Enlightenment was slow on my P3. Sawmill is an excellent window manager (although it still suffers from pixmap-bloat). I really enjoy the Sawmill-Gnome combo which as we all know, includes XFree86.
Xfree86 sucks. Classic example of Bloatware. Designed in 1963 by some unix hacker who wanted to run visual apps remotely via network. Everything and the kitchen sink has been hacked into the code since then. Not stable. Takes up too much RAM. Linux better come up with a good alternative if it ever wants a piece of the embedded market. Piece of crap. blah blah blah.
I think that you get the point. Since I did all of the complaining, please limit your replies to positive comments only.
I'd like to damn the frogs to an eternity of DeCSS legal battles! I think that the this whole situation is illegal according to California law.
However, "The Linux Kernel" is a very informative book and it is a good start to learning about operating systems.
I've found that with some of my cousins, that if I start out with stories about Linus Torvalds, or the kid who got arrested for DeCSS, then they become more interested in the source code and being able to play with it.
Besides, I think that Aqua is has a very nice look and feel. If everyone used Aqua look-alikes, then I would get sick of it pretty fast.
...that the only truly universal language is Perl. You should send out another email, this time demanding that everyone speak and write in Perl.