I found it interesting that the story was somewhat typical of medical and science journalism these days. Here are the facts from the article:
One scientific study: Hokkaido University, Japan, 150 people aged 20 to 35, showing 10 had "severe problems with memory"
One quote from the university's professor of neurobiology, including "Young people today are becoming stupid."
2 "journalism" case studies, of two young people who suffered from extreme memory loss (the human angle)
3 experts from Japan, Britian, and the US, who guessed at why this might be the case, all pointing fingers at technology (all who gain from people with memory problems).
1 typical British hyberbolic headline, "Computer-mad generation has a memory crash".
<rant>
This kind of reporting seriously annoys me. The original scientists call it a preliminary study, it gets posted on the wire, and "journalists" make the story sound like they just discovered a cure for cancer or that the end of the world is next week. Journalists once were the voice of moderation (let's check the story, just the facts) but now have resorted to encouraging panic to sell papers.
</rant>
For one thing, this research has yet to be independantly verified. It is possible that the study was flawed / biased, that the results aren't as bad as they first seem, or that 7% of the population has ALWAYS had "serious memory problems" by the age of 20. I know a few kids I went to school with had problems memorizing, even before they were in the second grade.
This seems to be a raw old-world vs. new-world story. A few extreme cases are used to call the entire younger generation flawed, to say that new teaching methods suck, etc. etc., until you want to walk away and say "You don't get it, old-timer!"
Sure, I have trouble remembering dates, times, birthdays, etc. That's because, when I judge a date to be important, I put it into my PDA, which reminds me with enough time in advance to do something about it. I simply don't spend any time memorizing this stuff. But I can judge what is important and what isn't. Important stuff goes into my backup memory (the PDA), unimportant stuff goes into the shredder.
To say that the PDA is making me stupid makes as much sense as saying cars make us slower. Sure, if it was me vs. someone from 2000 years ago, that person may be able to walk 10 miles faster than me. Maybe significantly faster. But I can beat him with a car anyday.
The end test is effectiveness. I believe we haven't come up with an education method that truly prepares kids for working with technology, but we are getting better. The answer isn't to take away technology until they've memorized tables and historical dates, but instead to teach them to use the technology more effectively. If they have to look up when Columbus landed in America, but know how to use Quicken to do their taxes and use Outlook to insure they never have to send a belated birthday card, then more power to them. Or better yet, can figure out Linux or BSD enough to use the open-source versions.
Let's stop living in 1950, and start living in 2050, or at least 2000.
My favorite was drinking Candyland. Yery difficult, since we pretty much made the rules up as we went along. Even though there was a limited beer supply, I'd say it was a zero sum game, because all players participated in creating the rules, and, in the end, Candyland is a lame, non-skill game unless you add some extra challenges.
The third rule of Geek Mafia is, if this is your first time with Geek Mafia, YOU WILL CODE!
Re:What happens if 2600 lose the appeal?
on
DVD Case Follow-Up
·
· Score: 5
Great idea, coming under the title "civil disobedience". Many protesting today like to call their actions civil disobedience. They often forget, however, that there are two components to civil disobedience - breaking the law, and suffering the consequences. The idea is to show that the state is unfair in having the law, but more unfair in enforcing it.
Ghandi didn't become famous because he and his followers were criminals / law breakers. They became famous because they were imprisoned and beaten for breaking unfair laws, and this behavior on the part of the state turned public opinion against the state.
Same with Martin Luther King and other leaders of the US civil rights movement - the scenes of violence on the part of the state against demonstrators turned the tide of public opinion against the state, leading them to action (overturning those laws).
The state should respond to the citizens - if the law is being broken uniformly, either the state needs to:
Educate the public (assuming they have not been informed or do not understand the law),
Enforce the law (assuming the law is being broken because the public believes the state will not enforce it), or
Repeal the law (assuming it is being broken by a majority who understand but disagree with the law).
Civil disobedience wakes up the state and forces the end game. When you say you are simply going to ignore the law, rather than fight it (by lobbying your congressman, demonstrating, etc), realize that you are voting that the law in unfair and should not be enforced - but if they decide to enforce the law in your particular case, you will be fighting alone. Maybe EFF will help, maybe not - it's up to the activist community to decide whether to help you.
Personally, I will ignore the law in private, and fund organizations like EFF. I'm not sure what recourse a non-American has, or if the DMCA applies, but they were able to bring a foriegner to court over DeCSS, and I imagine it will happen again.
Didn't someone once say that "Creator of Master of Orion 3" was the "job that would most likely get you killed if you didn't do it right?" I think that if Alan messes up a quality series like this, his job would be more dangerous than that of a bomb defuser.
Good luck Alan Emrich - the gaming world is watching, and we've been playing FPSs while waiting for number 3...
Re:Microsoft can't do anything about free..
on
Linux Is Going Down
·
· Score: 2
But money is a great motivator.
Yes, if all the companies started to turn their backs on Linux, it would still go on. But driver development is slower when hardware companies don't think enough of you to open specifications. It's harder to distribute software when you rely on DSL and Cable modems, rather than the fat pipes of businesses. It's hard to be inovative when you are playing catch-up with companies sinking billions into R&D.
The open-source movement crawls when money is scarce, and the developers are part-time. It screams when the money comes quickly. Money is fuel. A full-time "straight world" job lets the hacker work on the kernel part-time. The sale of CDs and books lets a Linux company hire full time staff to work on distributions. Big IPOs make MBAs consider what part of their business can convert over, what resources can be dedicated.
Time is one fuel for open source, but time is often fueled by money. If the money evaporates, you'll still get your drivers, it will just take months rather than days.
Re:Open Source Movement and America
on
eWeek on Linux
·
· Score: 1
Despite what some ACs say, I don't think you've been trolled. Check out his website. This guy appears to mean every word he says, as much as an existentialist can. His guestbook is a SlashDot microcosm, with Shoeboy signing in and a goatse.cx link
Open Source Movement and America - Huh?
on
eWeek on Linux
·
· Score: 2
I must say, you succeeded in totally confusing this American. It seems you are speaking to a discussion I have never heard.
Are you saying that the European standpoint is pragmatism, while the Americans are too idealistic? Like pre-Stalin and Lenin socialists? That American open source displays the idealism that will fade into cynicism and pragmatism as time marches on?
If all this is true, how is it affecting the open source movement? Is code being negatively affected by only using variable names from the Red Book? Is the code being made inefficient because the party leaders forbid the use of GOTOs? Is there code being supressed because the ideas are too dangerous?
Are you just saying that the leadership should start thinking about making money and listening to businesses? Or that they should wear suits and ties? Or get business cards and official titles?
I agree that the European view of today may be the American view of tommorrow, but I'm not sure how American ideals (whatever you see them as) is holding back Linux progress, or the European ideals will propel Linux forward. I'm interested in this discussion, but I need a little more than "Americans are different than Europeans, perhaps more youthfully idealistic. This might be a bad thing."
So, if I'm running 2.4.0, only the one change would show up, right?
BTW, I just installed 2.4.1, and some of it is broken. ACPI doesn't seem to compile (missing header file?), which most people don't care about, since they aren't running a notebook made in the last year. Expect a 2.4.2 in a week or so.
final:
- Al Viro: core file hardlink attack avoidance fix
pre12:
- Get non-cpuid Cyrix probing right (it's not a NexGen)
- Jens Axboe: cdrom tray status and queing cleanups
(etc., etc.)
Does this mean that there is only one change in 2.4.1? Or are all those changes (listed under pre12 through pre8) included in the final?
Some of the changes under pre# would affect me (APCI, AGP, r128, eepro100 updates), but the one change under final would not (as far as I can tell). I'll probably still install it, but can anyone read these change files? Are these all changes to 2.4.1, or are these just the last few change cycles?
I'm still not sure what I'll be paying for under the new Napster deal.
Is it for the basic service Napster provides, linking users with MP3 files together? In that case, there are similar free services, which makes it a little hard to compete (think Netspace vs. Microsoft)
Is it some sort of royalty fee for the songs? Because it seems they are charging a per-month fee, which wouldn't even cover the cost of one CD. Better than making no money, but does it stop Time-Warner from suing me?
How will they pay royalties? Search transfers for artist names? Occasionaly, the artist's name doesn't show up, and what if it's wrong? For instance, the Gourds (from Austin) did a remake of "Gin and Juice" (great remake, too), which is being labeled on naspter as either a Phish song or a Ween song. Has technology gotten to the point where a song can be uniquely identified, even if ripped at different bit rates, etc? Or will they just hack it?
This is a strange story - it once was "we're thinking about a pay system" to "the system might be in place in 5 or 6 months". Still no real story, no hint how it will be done. Perhaps the best question is, which Napster version is the one where they start monitoring your habits? Is it already out?
I disagree - Linux is still too geeky. It needs a corporation, with marketers, to make the whole thing more palitible.
Here's just a few good changes a corporate structure could make to the kernel:
Stop refering to "UNIX", it just makes men feel insecure. How about "MANIX", or "TESTICLIX"?
Instead of saying, "Core dumped", say, "Oops, there was an error! Exiting Program!", and display a little icon of a penguin falling over. Yes, even in text mode (it's not that hard). And instead of "core", name the core "Delete me, I'm useless!" (the geeks will know what it is)
Make XFree part of the Kernel, eliminate text mode. You can get a terminal by typing "CTRL-ALT-SHIFT-TAB" three times fast
If that doesn't work, keep text mode, but devote the bottom line of the display to scrolling ads.
Signals? More like "intersystem communication quantum packets"!
More verbose, understandable instructions. Instead of "ls", "show-directory", insted of "kill", "stop-the-program-with-this-program-identifiers"
Merging of Microsoft Office Paperclip technology with Linus, the Singing Penguin
I've got a fairly recent laptop (Dell Inspiron 5000), and (basic RedHat 7.0) + 2.4.0 + XFree 4.02 appears to work great. I can't compare to 2.2, however, because XFree wouldn't work correctly (without DRI support for my video driver).
Of course, I have the RH7.0 shipped kernel as a LILO item, so I can go back if things get bad. But as it is, 2.4.0 sees my weird (docking station) USB setup, my non-standard APM (no APM, but no crashes either), allows XFree to load without the interesting but distressing screen burn look...
I'm glad I got my EE, even though all I do these days is CS, and, if I do get that masters, it will probably be in CS.
Your Windows NT comment is interesting - it seems you aren't just trolling, that you are serious. The only problem with offering the Windows NT kernel as an example of good code is that... you can't see it. You need to sign a non-disclosure to look at it, which makes it unusuable for demonstation purposes.
Perhaps one day, when Microsoft opens the Microsoft Source Code museum, it will be possible to evaluate the code, and compare it to other code. It may be a enlightening excercise to see what was good enough to support most of the business world for about a decade. Until then, the original poster is better off looking at open source code, like TeX.
With California's growing population, they better think long and hard about air and water quality. If it's bad having rolling blackouts, it's even worse to have the water turned off for a day, or to burden the state with health care costs for lung cancer for prisoners, which will make up half the population by 2050.
As an economist, you must be familiar with the theory that says the difference between a luxury and a necessity is just a matter of time. Indoor plumbing, electricity, high quality food, vacations and holidays, and a hundred other things were once luxuries only kings could afford, but now are part of everyday life.
I believe there is a path from luxury to neccesity:
Luxury - Only the rich and powerful can afford it. Because of it's luxury status, the few manufacturers can charge huge margins, because the rich will pay for it anyway. Because they are not made in bulk, the overcharge is necessary. ("Wired" houses, luxury import cars, etc)
Leisure item - It's nice, but not necessary, so the upper-middle class gets it. It still works as a status symbol, justifying low production and high costs. Imitators start introducing low-cost versions. (Boats, luxury cars, SUVs?, etc.)
Consumer item - Everyone wants it. Bulk manufacturing makes it cheaper, and there is true competition, so prices stay close to their ideal point. Government regulation starts. (Cars, Air Conditioning, etc.)
Neccesity - The product becomes so necessary for society that the government, for the common good, has to regulate it, so that everyone has it, and the product is of good quality. (Electricity, indoor plumbing, trash service, etc.)
I believe electricity is now a neccessary item, and it was irresponsible to de-regulate it without extreme government oversight. Of course, this really isn't deregulation, but tough shitskis. If we had true de-regulation, the poor would be suffering without electricity, while the rich would paying a premimium to keep it coming. The corporations would keep prices at just the level that the middle class could afford it, but no lower.
It's small but you can find a copy that will play on RealPlayer here.
I assume you mean RealPlayer plays it in a small window - this can be stretched, even to full screen (using RealPlayer on a Windows machine), but, with this preview, you aren't missing much (some CG, but basically an animated version of the poster). There are other related downloads, such as desktop wallpaper.
BTW, could you put an extra "<BR>" or two in your sig? Too often, I read one of your comments and think the sig is part of what you are saying, that you are basically saying the person you are responding to has an incorrect opinion. I think one of your questions to an interviewee got posted that way, so it looked like you were asking a question while calling him an idiot. Of course, seeing his responce, that might have been what you were doing...
I usually have a hard time making my way through legal documents (anyone else try to read the text of Valenti's testimony?), but this one was clear, to the point, and very convincing.
In the U.S., it is actually a point of law that any judge is able to rule on any subject (law students may know the case that affirmed this). This means a judge that has no agricultural background can rule on agricultural cases, those with no science background can rule on scientific cases, etc, and that a judge who can't turn on a computer can rule on computer issues. This is necessary (should a case not be tried due to a lack of "expert" judges in a district?), but annoying, resulting in judges issuing decisions that make us shake our heads in confusion.
Because judges are often not experts, they require a case be argued in terms of earlier cases, or rely on expert witnesses. Often, the defendant who "looks better" in the eyes of the law will have "better" expert witnesses and present "more convincing" previous cases to base decisions. A corporation's lawyers will often look better than lawyers representing a hacker's magazine.
For this reason, Amicus Briefs that are as clear as this one are very important. This lets a judge hear what the real experts think, and even confirm the briefs with outside sources.
Of course, it would also help to create a new degree, comp-sci-law, so that all programmers are also lawyers. That way, we can argue these kinds of cases on equal footing, and we make money whichever way a case goes. Maybe a few of us would make it into Congress as well...
The IP address for www.microsoft.com is 207.46.230.218
Instead of the regular Linux/Microsoft wars, or commenting on CmdrTaco's extreme editorial stance (if two thousand people are submitting it, then how can you say it isn't news?), how about some useful info?
If you have the IP addresses for these sites, you can still reach them.
That being said, anyone have the IP address for msn.zone.com? I'm having Bejeweled withdrawl!!!
Here's a link to the book at Amazon. At $45, and hardback, I may wait until I get through a few other books, or at least read one of the starter Extreme Programming books first.
Correct - ideally, I would want to not touch existing code, but instead treat exisiting code as units, calling functions from test routinues, setting up test builds, etc.
However, I failed to mention that the code in question is in procedural Fortran (a dialect of Fortran 77), without data structures, and destined for a real-time environment. Most function interaction is through global variables (a datapool), and the code is somewhat tweaked for real-time.
None of the existing test are really computer based. They all require human interaction (story-based tests, comparing plots, watching for lights). It would be a significant effort to determine interfaces (all global variables look alike), and to even determine what the units are.
Unit testing would be nice, but it isn't really object-oriented code. It would take some real trickery to make it look object-oriented enough to use unit-testing, and, once you have made those changes, then how do you know you are testing the same things? For this type of code, it is a real possibility that the test functions would cause significant changes to existing code, or there would be code forks between existing code and test code.
It's also not possible to move to better languages. We have scripts, we have Fortran, and we have assembly - that's it.
It may not be as bad as other maintainance projects, but there is a significant amount of non-OOP code out there, and I'm not sure unit-testing will map well on all of it.
This plan of action (make test function, make code, verify code, repeat) seems to work well for brand new software. It answers the question, "Where do I start", with a great answer: start with something you can test. Sounds very much like the scientific method, and seems to work in the real world.
But, what do you do when you have an existing piece of software? Most software is maintained, not created. If a system is already using unit testing, then you can be assured that your changes and additions do not break preexisting code. But if there is no unit testing, then there needs to be an extreme effort to integrate it into the code. This isn't productive - you are adding no new features, and, until you have completed the test suite, you aren't sure that your test code isn't breaking something!
You can argue about future productivity gains, but sometimes those that give the money don't care about future gains. In my business, we make local changes to large systems (modifications to aircraft simulators). The existing self-test functions are inadequate, but we aren't being paid to make the whole system better, just to add our part. There isn't even assurance that we will do future work, so it is possible that our testing features will assist a competitor!
Interesting idea, I'll use it on my pet projects, but I'll need to see a proven path for existing systems before I go to my boss and ask for a procedure change.
Is it just me, or are there a lot of these kind of lawsuits going around now? I know there always were, but it appears there have been an escalation lately. Namely, big companies suing web-sites and indiviuals to stop using trademarked names, such as Nintendo suing sites using the Pokemon name.
Has there been a new law that has forced companies to more aggresively pursue copyrights and trademarks? Did all the lawyers make a resolution to cause more agony in the new year? Or is this just business as usual, and we're just noticing it more now?
I understand a bit about trademarks, that you have to get out a stick and enforce it every once in awhile or you lose it, but this seems a little ridiculous.
Or, perhaps, there is a new product in the works - maybe a Pokemon / Dough Boy crossover? Watch the show, buy the trading cards, eat the cereal, bake the character-shaped cookies?
If I'm absolutly correct about that last one, sorry Slashdot. You can remove this comment if the lawyers knock on your door
I'm not entirely sure that business reply mail is paid for at the start or when it is mailed back. I've seen some charities request that you add a stamp to the return envelope to help them with mailing costs. There is a junk mail FAQ that says companies are charged for business reply envelopes when they are sent. It also states that this in ineffective. If you attach a brick, the post office can throw it away. If it gets to them and they are charged for it, they won't notice. If you fill it with something destructive, they still won't care enough to stop it.
The Post Office has an official policy that there is no such thing as junk mail - that all advertising mail is valued by both parties. Check here, and search for "junk".
All these tactics sound cool, but are ineffective. If you want the mail to stop, get off their lists. Junkbusters is a good place to start, and a quick Google search will find others. A truly noble thing would be to lobby your congress person for European-style laws that allow opting out on a national level.
This is probably the best choice for unwanted junk mail. All that mail is an environmental nightmare, killing trees, poisong rivers through the paper-making process, and filling landfills with 70 billion pieces of junk a year. Let 'em know what you want (I still get ThinkGeek mailings), and let 'em know what you can do without.
Slashdot Mirror
One scientific study: Hokkaido University, Japan, 150 people aged 20 to 35, showing 10 had "severe problems with memory"
One quote from the university's professor of neurobiology, including "Young people today are becoming stupid."
2 "journalism" case studies, of two young people who suffered from extreme memory loss (the human angle)
3 experts from Japan, Britian, and the US, who guessed at why this might be the case, all pointing fingers at technology (all who gain from people with memory problems).
1 typical British hyberbolic headline, "Computer-mad generation has a memory crash".
<rant>
This kind of reporting seriously annoys me. The original scientists call it a preliminary study, it gets posted on the wire, and "journalists" make the story sound like they just discovered a cure for cancer or that the end of the world is next week. Journalists once were the voice of moderation (let's check the story, just the facts) but now have resorted to encouraging panic to sell papers.
</rant>
For one thing, this research has yet to be independantly verified. It is possible that the study was flawed / biased, that the results aren't as bad as they first seem, or that 7% of the population has ALWAYS had "serious memory problems" by the age of 20. I know a few kids I went to school with had problems memorizing, even before they were in the second grade.
This seems to be a raw old-world vs. new-world story. A few extreme cases are used to call the entire younger generation flawed, to say that new teaching methods suck, etc. etc., until you want to walk away and say "You don't get it, old-timer!"
Sure, I have trouble remembering dates, times, birthdays, etc. That's because, when I judge a date to be important, I put it into my PDA, which reminds me with enough time in advance to do something about it. I simply don't spend any time memorizing this stuff. But I can judge what is important and what isn't. Important stuff goes into my backup memory (the PDA), unimportant stuff goes into the shredder.
To say that the PDA is making me stupid makes as much sense as saying cars make us slower. Sure, if it was me vs. someone from 2000 years ago, that person may be able to walk 10 miles faster than me. Maybe significantly faster. But I can beat him with a car anyday.
The end test is effectiveness. I believe we haven't come up with an education method that truly prepares kids for working with technology, but we are getting better. The answer isn't to take away technology until they've memorized tables and historical dates, but instead to teach them to use the technology more effectively. If they have to look up when Columbus landed in America, but know how to use Quicken to do their taxes and use Outlook to insure they never have to send a belated birthday card, then more power to them. Or better yet, can figure out Linux or BSD enough to use the open-source versions.
Let's stop living in 1950, and start living in 2050, or at least 2000.
My favorite was drinking Candyland. Yery difficult, since we pretty much made the rules up as we went along. Even though there was a limited beer supply, I'd say it was a zero sum game, because all players participated in creating the rules, and, in the end, Candyland is a lame, non-skill game unless you add some extra challenges.
The third rule of Geek Mafia is, if this is your first time with Geek Mafia, YOU WILL CODE!
Ghandi didn't become famous because he and his followers were criminals / law breakers. They became famous because they were imprisoned and beaten for breaking unfair laws, and this behavior on the part of the state turned public opinion against the state.
Same with Martin Luther King and other leaders of the US civil rights movement - the scenes of violence on the part of the state against demonstrators turned the tide of public opinion against the state, leading them to action (overturning those laws).
The state should respond to the citizens - if the law is being broken uniformly, either the state needs to:
Educate the public (assuming they have not been informed or do not understand the law),
Enforce the law (assuming the law is being broken because the public believes the state will not enforce it), or
Repeal the law (assuming it is being broken by a majority who understand but disagree with the law).
Civil disobedience wakes up the state and forces the end game. When you say you are simply going to ignore the law, rather than fight it (by lobbying your congressman, demonstrating, etc), realize that you are voting that the law in unfair and should not be enforced - but if they decide to enforce the law in your particular case, you will be fighting alone. Maybe EFF will help, maybe not - it's up to the activist community to decide whether to help you.
Personally, I will ignore the law in private, and fund organizations like EFF. I'm not sure what recourse a non-American has, or if the DMCA applies, but they were able to bring a foriegner to court over DeCSS, and I imagine it will happen again.
Good luck Alan Emrich - the gaming world is watching, and we've been playing FPSs while waiting for number 3...
Yes, if all the companies started to turn their backs on Linux, it would still go on. But driver development is slower when hardware companies don't think enough of you to open specifications. It's harder to distribute software when you rely on DSL and Cable modems, rather than the fat pipes of businesses. It's hard to be inovative when you are playing catch-up with companies sinking billions into R&D.
The open-source movement crawls when money is scarce, and the developers are part-time. It screams when the money comes quickly. Money is fuel. A full-time "straight world" job lets the hacker work on the kernel part-time. The sale of CDs and books lets a Linux company hire full time staff to work on distributions. Big IPOs make MBAs consider what part of their business can convert over, what resources can be dedicated.
Time is one fuel for open source, but time is often fueled by money. If the money evaporates, you'll still get your drivers, it will just take months rather than days.
Despite what some ACs say, I don't think you've been trolled. Check out his website. This guy appears to mean every word he says, as much as an existentialist can. His guestbook is a SlashDot microcosm, with Shoeboy signing in and a goatse.cx link
Are you saying that the European standpoint is pragmatism, while the Americans are too idealistic? Like pre-Stalin and Lenin socialists? That American open source displays the idealism that will fade into cynicism and pragmatism as time marches on?
If all this is true, how is it affecting the open source movement? Is code being negatively affected by only using variable names from the Red Book? Is the code being made inefficient because the party leaders forbid the use of GOTOs? Is there code being supressed because the ideas are too dangerous?
Are you just saying that the leadership should start thinking about making money and listening to businesses? Or that they should wear suits and ties? Or get business cards and official titles?
I agree that the European view of today may be the American view of tommorrow, but I'm not sure how American ideals (whatever you see them as) is holding back Linux progress, or the European ideals will propel Linux forward. I'm interested in this discussion, but I need a little more than "Americans are different than Europeans, perhaps more youthfully idealistic. This might be a bad thing."
Thanks, I suspected as much, but I'm glad someone cleared it up.
BTW, I just installed 2.4.1, and some of it is broken. ACPI doesn't seem to compile (missing header file?), which most people don't care about, since they aren't running a notebook made in the last year. Expect a 2.4.2 in a week or so.
final:
- Al Viro: core file hardlink attack avoidance fix
pre12:
- Get non-cpuid Cyrix probing right (it's not a NexGen)
- Jens Axboe: cdrom tray status and queing cleanups
(etc., etc.)
Does this mean that there is only one change in 2.4.1? Or are all those changes (listed under pre12 through pre8) included in the final?
Some of the changes under pre# would affect me (APCI, AGP, r128, eepro100 updates), but the one change under final would not (as far as I can tell). I'll probably still install it, but can anyone read these change files? Are these all changes to 2.4.1, or are these just the last few change cycles?
Is it for the basic service Napster provides, linking users with MP3 files together? In that case, there are similar free services, which makes it a little hard to compete (think Netspace vs. Microsoft)
Is it some sort of royalty fee for the songs? Because it seems they are charging a per-month fee, which wouldn't even cover the cost of one CD. Better than making no money, but does it stop Time-Warner from suing me?
How will they pay royalties? Search transfers for artist names? Occasionaly, the artist's name doesn't show up, and what if it's wrong? For instance, the Gourds (from Austin) did a remake of "Gin and Juice" (great remake, too), which is being labeled on naspter as either a Phish song or a Ween song. Has technology gotten to the point where a song can be uniquely identified, even if ripped at different bit rates, etc? Or will they just hack it?
This is a strange story - it once was "we're thinking about a pay system" to "the system might be in place in 5 or 6 months". Still no real story, no hint how it will be done. Perhaps the best question is, which Napster version is the one where they start monitoring your habits? Is it already out?
Here's just a few good changes a corporate structure could make to the kernel:
Stop refering to "UNIX", it just makes men feel insecure. How about "MANIX", or "TESTICLIX"?
Instead of saying, "Core dumped", say, "Oops, there was an error! Exiting Program!", and display a little icon of a penguin falling over. Yes, even in text mode (it's not that hard). And instead of "core", name the core "Delete me, I'm useless!" (the geeks will know what it is)
Make XFree part of the Kernel, eliminate text mode. You can get a terminal by typing "CTRL-ALT-SHIFT-TAB" three times fast
If that doesn't work, keep text mode, but devote the bottom line of the display to scrolling ads.
Signals? More like "intersystem communication quantum packets"!
More verbose, understandable instructions. Instead of "ls", "show-directory", insted of "kill", "stop-the-program-with-this-program-identifiers"
Merging of Microsoft Office Paperclip technology with Linus, the Singing Penguin
Just watch, Linux will be in the home in no time!
Of course, I have the RH7.0 shipped kernel as a LILO item, so I can go back if things get bad. But as it is, 2.4.0 sees my weird (docking station) USB setup, my non-standard APM (no APM, but no crashes either), allows XFree to load without the interesting but distressing screen burn look...
Your Windows NT comment is interesting - it seems you aren't just trolling, that you are serious. The only problem with offering the Windows NT kernel as an example of good code is that... you can't see it. You need to sign a non-disclosure to look at it, which makes it unusuable for demonstation purposes.
Perhaps one day, when Microsoft opens the Microsoft Source Code museum, it will be possible to evaluate the code, and compare it to other code. It may be a enlightening excercise to see what was good enough to support most of the business world for about a decade. Until then, the original poster is better off looking at open source code, like TeX.
With California's growing population, they better think long and hard about air and water quality. If it's bad having rolling blackouts, it's even worse to have the water turned off for a day, or to burden the state with health care costs for lung cancer for prisoners, which will make up half the population by 2050.
As an economist, you must be familiar with the theory that says the difference between a luxury and a necessity is just a matter of time. Indoor plumbing, electricity, high quality food, vacations and holidays, and a hundred other things were once luxuries only kings could afford, but now are part of everyday life.
I believe there is a path from luxury to neccesity:
Luxury - Only the rich and powerful can afford it. Because of it's luxury status, the few manufacturers can charge huge margins, because the rich will pay for it anyway. Because they are not made in bulk, the overcharge is necessary. ("Wired" houses, luxury import cars, etc)
Leisure item - It's nice, but not necessary, so the upper-middle class gets it. It still works as a status symbol, justifying low production and high costs. Imitators start introducing low-cost versions. (Boats, luxury cars, SUVs?, etc.)
Consumer item - Everyone wants it. Bulk manufacturing makes it cheaper, and there is true competition, so prices stay close to their ideal point. Government regulation starts. (Cars, Air Conditioning, etc.)
Neccesity - The product becomes so necessary for society that the government, for the common good, has to regulate it, so that everyone has it, and the product is of good quality. (Electricity, indoor plumbing, trash service, etc.)
I believe electricity is now a neccessary item, and it was irresponsible to de-regulate it without extreme government oversight. Of course, this really isn't deregulation, but tough shitskis. If we had true de-regulation, the poor would be suffering without electricity, while the rich would paying a premimium to keep it coming. The corporations would keep prices at just the level that the middle class could afford it, but no lower.
I assume you mean RealPlayer plays it in a small window - this can be stretched, even to full screen (using RealPlayer on a Windows machine), but, with this preview, you aren't missing much (some CG, but basically an animated version of the poster). There are other related downloads, such as desktop wallpaper.
BTW, could you put an extra "<BR>" or two in your sig? Too often, I read one of your comments and think the sig is part of what you are saying, that you are basically saying the person you are responding to has an incorrect opinion. I think one of your questions to an interviewee got posted that way, so it looked like you were asking a question while calling him an idiot. Of course, seeing his responce, that might have been what you were doing...
In the U.S., it is actually a point of law that any judge is able to rule on any subject (law students may know the case that affirmed this). This means a judge that has no agricultural background can rule on agricultural cases, those with no science background can rule on scientific cases, etc, and that a judge who can't turn on a computer can rule on computer issues. This is necessary (should a case not be tried due to a lack of "expert" judges in a district?), but annoying, resulting in judges issuing decisions that make us shake our heads in confusion.
Because judges are often not experts, they require a case be argued in terms of earlier cases, or rely on expert witnesses. Often, the defendant who "looks better" in the eyes of the law will have "better" expert witnesses and present "more convincing" previous cases to base decisions. A corporation's lawyers will often look better than lawyers representing a hacker's magazine.
For this reason, Amicus Briefs that are as clear as this one are very important. This lets a judge hear what the real experts think, and even confirm the briefs with outside sources.
Of course, it would also help to create a new degree, comp-sci-law, so that all programmers are also lawyers. That way, we can argue these kinds of cases on equal footing, and we make money whichever way a case goes. Maybe a few of us would make it into Congress as well...
This is a bit of an inside joke, but a very funny one. If you are on the outside, check this out.
Instead of the regular Linux/Microsoft wars, or commenting on CmdrTaco's extreme editorial stance (if two thousand people are submitting it, then how can you say it isn't news?), how about some useful info?
If you have the IP addresses for these sites, you can still reach them.
That being said, anyone have the IP address for msn.zone.com? I'm having Bejeweled withdrawl!!!
Here's a link to the book at Amazon. At $45, and hardback, I may wait until I get through a few other books, or at least read one of the starter Extreme Programming books first.
However, I failed to mention that the code in question is in procedural Fortran (a dialect of Fortran 77), without data structures, and destined for a real-time environment. Most function interaction is through global variables (a datapool), and the code is somewhat tweaked for real-time.
None of the existing test are really computer based. They all require human interaction (story-based tests, comparing plots, watching for lights). It would be a significant effort to determine interfaces (all global variables look alike), and to even determine what the units are.
Unit testing would be nice, but it isn't really object-oriented code. It would take some real trickery to make it look object-oriented enough to use unit-testing, and, once you have made those changes, then how do you know you are testing the same things? For this type of code, it is a real possibility that the test functions would cause significant changes to existing code, or there would be code forks between existing code and test code.
It's also not possible to move to better languages. We have scripts, we have Fortran, and we have assembly - that's it.
It may not be as bad as other maintainance projects, but there is a significant amount of non-OOP code out there, and I'm not sure unit-testing will map well on all of it.
But, what do you do when you have an existing piece of software? Most software is maintained, not created. If a system is already using unit testing, then you can be assured that your changes and additions do not break preexisting code. But if there is no unit testing, then there needs to be an extreme effort to integrate it into the code. This isn't productive - you are adding no new features, and, until you have completed the test suite, you aren't sure that your test code isn't breaking something!
You can argue about future productivity gains, but sometimes those that give the money don't care about future gains. In my business, we make local changes to large systems (modifications to aircraft simulators). The existing self-test functions are inadequate, but we aren't being paid to make the whole system better, just to add our part. There isn't even assurance that we will do future work, so it is possible that our testing features will assist a competitor!
Interesting idea, I'll use it on my pet projects, but I'll need to see a proven path for existing systems before I go to my boss and ask for a procedure change.
Has there been a new law that has forced companies to more aggresively pursue copyrights and trademarks? Did all the lawyers make a resolution to cause more agony in the new year? Or is this just business as usual, and we're just noticing it more now?
I understand a bit about trademarks, that you have to get out a stick and enforce it every once in awhile or you lose it, but this seems a little ridiculous.
Or, perhaps, there is a new product in the works - maybe a Pokemon / Dough Boy crossover? Watch the show, buy the trading cards, eat the cereal, bake the character-shaped cookies?
If I'm absolutly correct about that last one, sorry Slashdot. You can remove this comment if the lawyers knock on your door
The Post Office has an official policy that there is no such thing as junk mail - that all advertising mail is valued by both parties. Check here, and search for "junk".
All these tactics sound cool, but are ineffective. If you want the mail to stop, get off their lists. Junkbusters is a good place to start, and a quick Google search will find others. A truly noble thing would be to lobby your congress person for European-style laws that allow opting out on a national level.
This is probably the best choice for unwanted junk mail. All that mail is an environmental nightmare, killing trees, poisong rivers through the paper-making process, and filling landfills with 70 billion pieces of junk a year. Let 'em know what you want (I still get ThinkGeek mailings), and let 'em know what you can do without.