Just to satisfy my curiosity, was this post a complete troll? There's no harm in coming out about it now, since the story's kind of old anyway. If so, the title is funny. If not...it was, right?
hey, grammar fascist, learn to spell or change your nick/sig. It makes you look like an idiot. Don't say it was a typo, either. "E" is really far from "I". God, I hate self-styled grammar-fascists.
Do you know anything about this at all? You don't just "register" or "reserve" common english words like "water" in most nations' trademark systems. Read something about trademark law.
Do you think Killustrator isn't completely trying to mooch off the brand that Adobe spent time and money developing in Illustrator? What is unreasonable about this?
How is coding to OS X/Cocoa treating you? How do you like ObjC? How are the tools that come with OS X? I use windows and I'm thinking about switching to OS X cause it looks rad. I've been reading the developer docs on the apple site, but I'm curious as to how the stuff is in real life.
dude, by then there'll be little nano-mites scurry up and down the thing managing it, stiching things together, letting small bits go as dust or severing the requisite parts to avoid catastrophic failure. Come on, Diamond Age.
dude, sun hardware reliability/quality is dropping quickly. The newer low-end ultras are built like shite, and they break and crash all the time. The uptimes are shite, everything about them is going to shite. Basically like really good PCs now, pretty much cause they just use commodity PC crap. I'd agree that sun hardware WAS much more reliable than PC hardware, but it's changing now.
jeb.
FOA, as far as "powerfulness" goes, I'm sure it'll ultimately be functionally equivalent, it's just that some things will be nastier to do than others.
If by "powerful", you mean if it complicates the definition of the system by 1000% to make it 10% easier to do something you want to do less than 1% of the time, than I would agree. Java is often less "powerful" than C++. But the compilers for it actually compile the whole language.
the Sun Java Community Process folks are working on the genericity issue right now. It's fairly high-priority I think. Hopefully, there solution won't be as complex as C++, so that it will get properly implemented by more than one compiler in my lifetime.
Internet is in the hands of profit seeking companies, and the bean counters say "we don't have to have 100% reliability, 80% is good enough, so stop using three backbones where one will do",
I think that's a rather naive attitude. When these "bean counters" took over, it was so that regular people would be able to afford internet connectivity. The problem with the techies you refer to is sure, they'll design an awesome, redundant system...that only the government, stanford research labs, and BBN can afford to be connected to. The economic principles that shape the behaviour of said profit-seeking companies has made the internet an affordable medium for a lot more people. The trade-off is that we don't have the same reliability any more.
jeb.
Re:Because we're not brain dead postmodern liberal
on
Uplifting Dolphins
·
· Score: 1
On another note, if an ISP offers shell accounts or allows you to colo your own box, can the box that you have a shell on potentially be used to sniff the packets of all the other ISP users on your segment? Do they switch them or have some other way of dealing with this problem. If I have a dialup and my ISP has shell accounts, is it possible/more likely that some 31337 h4x0r d00ds are sniffing my packets?
I'm glad this question got posted. In addition to talk about what a database can hold, can anyone who has info post more about real-world performance with large databases?
Currently, I'm using MS SQL Server 7 for a project in which the database is growing by about 800,000 records/day. It's a pretty flat DB but it's not going too fast. Also, I am using Java and JDBC to do a lot of stuff with the database. I've noticed a very large performance difference between different JDBC drivers. I switched from Weblogic to NetDirect and inserting some 9,000 rows in a table went from taking somewhere on the order of four minutes to a little over a minute and a half. Also, I've noticed that using batches for inserts where supported does not really speed things up at all. Does anyone have any info on the fastest JDBC driver/rdbms combination for fairly large and rapidly growing databases?
Is it worth the frustration to switch to oracle, performance-wise? I messed around with it briefly on solaris and it seemed like an incredibly difficult system to use.
Normally, when you have a robot arm made of N joints rotating about a single axis, it is extremely computationally complex to put the robot's "hand" at an arbitrary (x,y,z) by setting angles of the joints, right? (I'm seriously asking. I *think* it is, but I don't really know).
By mounting a straight "arm" on a spherical motor, is it easier to set the end of that arm to a given (x,y,z) on that sphere that the end of that arm moves through than it is to do the same with the more complex robot arm?
I would imagine that yes, it is, but you are also only capable of positioning the end of the arm on a sphere, so even if you were searching, the dimension of the search space is reduced from the more general robot arm, so does this matter, really?
Basically, what I'm getting at it is that I took a neuroscience class once, and it's really amazing how easily the brain can position your limbs with such great precision. Apparently, most of the computational horsepower needed to walk is located in the base of your spine, just fairly small bundle of neurons. I always wondered how brains and such could solve this IK problem with such ease while computers struggled with it so. Could it be because biological systems use this different limb-positioning method?
jeb.
Someone once told me that he read that all memes are false.
It's ostensibly a mail server, but it includes a bunch of features for businesses, like letting people have calendars and stuff that are shared so that they can schedule stuff without a million emails going back and forth to the effect of "how about wednesday at 3?". It's notoriously difficult to configure and keep running, and a lot of larger installations have full-time exchange staffs to keep it running right. It breaks all the time. We use it at my office, and last summer, I'd say there was about a two month period were exchange was down for a few hours every week for one reason or another. I don't do IT stuff, and don't know who does, so I don't know why, but it seems to be really flaky.
the features, however, are highly desirable, and are one of the most effective of Microsoft's "embrace-extend-extinguish" strategy. You start using these proprietary extensions, you like them, you want them from desktop all the way up to server back to desktop.
I guess the scheduling bit is sort of like how CVS manages diffs and stuff, but it's not really like CVS at all (CVS always works, does one thing really well, etc. Exchange does 900 things flakily, also, first and foremost, it's an email server).
This could all be wrong, I've never actually installed, maintained, read docs, or anything for exchange. I've just heard about it from.
jeb
Someone told me that he read that all memes are false.
So...you're guessing the guy uses windows because he says he doesn't need the manuals to figure out how to work his software. That's a bad thing? That's good design.
I don't even pretend to understand this kind of stuff, but what do they mean by "disappear" and "vanish"? Is the amount of information in the universe reduced? Or do they just mean that you can't see the stuff any more?
Also, the article says, "About 1,000 miles above the event horizon (in the case of stellar-mass black holes)." What does "stellar-mass" mean?
I disagree on your advice about having lots of drivers in a speaker (and about "car stereos sounding so good". I've never heard a good-sounding car stereo, but that's another point).
Just listen to the speaker. If it can produce sound well, go with it. The more drivers you have for different ranges, the more crossing over you need to do. Crossovers are a nightmare. They F up everything about the sound, esp phase. The only thing good I can see about tending towards more drivers is that you could use very shallow crossovers and just allow the speakers to blend, avoiding ringing, etc., but that's probably gonna lead to a host of other problems if you have two different drivers on the same baffle radiating the same signal at different amplitudes.
What I really wanted to say was, "don't try to reason why it should sound better, listen", but I guess I can't say that with a straight face now.
NS-10Ms sound awesome! NS-10s sound like crap, on purpose! That's the point of NS-10s! If you get your mix to sound good on NS-10Ms, it'll sound good in every car, walkman, and boombox in the world. It's easy to make a thumpin' mix on your freakin' Bag End system or Genelecs, but then it sounds like ass on Labtec CS150s. The reason NS-10s exist is not to provide accurate monitoring, but to give engineers a window into the rest of the world's stereos. That's why studios have them. You might also notice in these videos that they have the NS10s, sure, as nearfields, but behind them are some big built in Yuris or Genelecs. I'm glad you enjoy them, I guess, but they are not accurate sounding speakers, unless the accuracy you are looking for is "accurate imitation of the world's audio hardware in one place".
I think that one of the things that ticks audio people off about Bose isn't so much the fact that their products are inferior, overpriced, or any of those good, hard, substantive reasons (not that they aren't true), but that they have cultivated this undeserved image of superiority among the consumer brands. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, or that it's reasonable to call them "crappy" because of it, it's great marketing, but it ticks people that are into this kind of stuff off to know end. Sort of like MS's "Freedom to Innnovate" BS.
Take, for example, the Bose Wave Radio. My mom has this radio. It cost something like $500! Yes, it sounds better than most crappy boomboxes, because it can deliver bandwidth broader than like 3KHz. It's fairly well designed. The speakers, though small, receive a bass boost from the fact that they are in very small, well folded transmission line enclosures. This is a good design idea. TLs work good in these kinds of apps, and most other good audio companies don't have the financial wherewithal to set up tooling to produce the folded enclosure at a reasonable price, even though it's just a molded hunk of plastic. Sounds ok, right?
The thing is, Bose yammers on and on about their "Patented Wave-guide Technology". TLs have been in use for something like 70 years. I don't remember how long. Many companies make TL enclosed systems, they are well understood and documented at length in Dickinson. Further, the demo in the bose store shows the power of the waveguide by setting up a bose wave radio with a lever that pops the speakers an inch or two out in front of the speaker so you can see what a difference the wave guide makes. That's such a BS demo.
It does show that the system works, the speakers sound like shit out of the enclosure, but it's very misleading. Any speaker would sound horrible out of the enclosure because of the tremendous phase cancellation. Just mounting the speaker in a large baffle would do a lot for it. So regular moms and stuff come into the bose store and bose is like, "check THIS out!" and moms aren't like thinking about physics and stuff, so they fork over $500 for this dumb miracle radio.
That's why audio people get so ticked off about Bose.
Slashdot Mirror
I've had an AOL mailbox for about 8 years or so. I get virtually zero spam to it. Of my like 2 zillion email accounts, I get the least spam at AOL.
How far is LEO? How about using one of them Helios planes?
Approved:
AMD, nVidia, Transmeta
Not Approved:
Intel, Microsoft, ATI
Regardless of what these companies do, the response on /. is determined by which list they are in.
sweeeet.
Just to satisfy my curiosity, was this post a complete troll? There's no harm in coming out about it now, since the story's kind of old anyway. If so, the title is funny. If not...it was, right?
hey, grammar fascist, learn to spell or change your nick/sig. It makes you look like an idiot. Don't say it was a typo, either. "E" is really far from "I". God, I hate self-styled grammar-fascists.
Do you think Killustrator isn't completely trying to mooch off the brand that Adobe spent time and money developing in Illustrator? What is unreasonable about this?
jeb.
dude, by then there'll be little nano-mites scurry up and down the thing managing it, stiching things together, letting small bits go as dust or severing the requisite parts to avoid catastrophic failure. Come on, Diamond Age.
don't upgrade.
dude, sun hardware reliability/quality is dropping quickly. The newer low-end ultras are built like shite, and they break and crash all the time. The uptimes are shite, everything about them is going to shite. Basically like really good PCs now, pretty much cause they just use commodity PC crap. I'd agree that sun hardware WAS much more reliable than PC hardware, but it's changing now. jeb.
If by "powerful", you mean if it complicates the definition of the system by 1000% to make it 10% easier to do something you want to do less than 1% of the time, than I would agree. Java is often less "powerful" than C++. But the compilers for it actually compile the whole language.
jeb.
jeb.
I think that's a rather naive attitude. When these "bean counters" took over, it was so that regular people would be able to afford internet connectivity. The problem with the techies you refer to is sure, they'll design an awesome, redundant system...that only the government, stanford research labs, and BBN can afford to be connected to. The economic principles that shape the behaviour of said profit-seeking companies has made the internet an affordable medium for a lot more people. The trade-off is that we don't have the same reliability any more.
jeb.
jeb.
jeb.
Currently, I'm using MS SQL Server 7 for a project in which the database is growing by about 800,000 records/day. It's a pretty flat DB but it's not going too fast. Also, I am using Java and JDBC to do a lot of stuff with the database. I've noticed a very large performance difference between different JDBC drivers. I switched from Weblogic to NetDirect and inserting some 9,000 rows in a table went from taking somewhere on the order of four minutes to a little over a minute and a half. Also, I've noticed that using batches for inserts where supported does not really speed things up at all. Does anyone have any info on the fastest JDBC driver/rdbms combination for fairly large and rapidly growing databases?
Is it worth the frustration to switch to oracle, performance-wise? I messed around with it briefly on solaris and it seemed like an incredibly difficult system to use.
jeb.
By mounting a straight "arm" on a spherical motor, is it easier to set the end of that arm to a given (x,y,z) on that sphere that the end of that arm moves through than it is to do the same with the more complex robot arm?
I would imagine that yes, it is, but you are also only capable of positioning the end of the arm on a sphere, so even if you were searching, the dimension of the search space is reduced from the more general robot arm, so does this matter, really?
Basically, what I'm getting at it is that I took a neuroscience class once, and it's really amazing how easily the brain can position your limbs with such great precision. Apparently, most of the computational horsepower needed to walk is located in the base of your spine, just fairly small bundle of neurons. I always wondered how brains and such could solve this IK problem with such ease while computers struggled with it so. Could it be because biological systems use this different limb-positioning method?
jeb.
Someone once told me that he read that all memes are false.
the features, however, are highly desirable, and are one of the most effective of Microsoft's "embrace-extend-extinguish" strategy. You start using these proprietary extensions, you like them, you want them from desktop all the way up to server back to desktop.
I guess the scheduling bit is sort of like how CVS manages diffs and stuff, but it's not really like CVS at all (CVS always works, does one thing really well, etc. Exchange does 900 things flakily, also, first and foremost, it's an email server).
This could all be wrong, I've never actually installed, maintained, read docs, or anything for exchange. I've just heard about it from.
jeb
Someone told me that he read that all memes are false.
jeb.
jeb.
Also, the article says, "About 1,000 miles above the event horizon (in the case of stellar-mass black holes)." What does "stellar-mass" mean?
jeb.
Just listen to the speaker. If it can produce sound well, go with it. The more drivers you have for different ranges, the more crossing over you need to do. Crossovers are a nightmare. They F up everything about the sound, esp phase. The only thing good I can see about tending towards more drivers is that you could use very shallow crossovers and just allow the speakers to blend, avoiding ringing, etc., but that's probably gonna lead to a host of other problems if you have two different drivers on the same baffle radiating the same signal at different amplitudes.
What I really wanted to say was, "don't try to reason why it should sound better, listen", but I guess I can't say that with a straight face now.
jeb.
jeb.
Take, for example, the Bose Wave Radio. My mom has this radio. It cost something like $500! Yes, it sounds better than most crappy boomboxes, because it can deliver bandwidth broader than like 3KHz. It's fairly well designed. The speakers, though small, receive a bass boost from the fact that they are in very small, well folded transmission line enclosures. This is a good design idea. TLs work good in these kinds of apps, and most other good audio companies don't have the financial wherewithal to set up tooling to produce the folded enclosure at a reasonable price, even though it's just a molded hunk of plastic. Sounds ok, right?
The thing is, Bose yammers on and on about their "Patented Wave-guide Technology". TLs have been in use for something like 70 years. I don't remember how long. Many companies make TL enclosed systems, they are well understood and documented at length in Dickinson. Further, the demo in the bose store shows the power of the waveguide by setting up a bose wave radio with a lever that pops the speakers an inch or two out in front of the speaker so you can see what a difference the wave guide makes. That's such a BS demo.
It does show that the system works, the speakers sound like shit out of the enclosure, but it's very misleading. Any speaker would sound horrible out of the enclosure because of the tremendous phase cancellation. Just mounting the speaker in a large baffle would do a lot for it. So regular moms and stuff come into the bose store and bose is like, "check THIS out!" and moms aren't like thinking about physics and stuff, so they fork over $500 for this dumb miracle radio.
That's why audio people get so ticked off about Bose.
jeb.