What we -need- is not some silly new taxing scheme. We need some way to defend this kind of interests (OUR interests) in the senate/congress/wherever. We need to be able to stand up for this kind of things.
The problem is that minority viewpoints are not being heard in a major way. Why? Because the voting system doesn't allow it. What does a political party want? Well, for the majority to vote on them. How does it achieve that? Trying to satisfy everyone at once _AND NOT OFFENDING THE MAJORITY IN ANY WAY_.
That is clearly wrong. It should be possible for a political party to represent a minority that disagrees with the majority, and still thrive.
This is not impossible. But it does require a major overhaul of the voting system. It can be done.
There is no absolute certainty until either company confirms or denies it. However, besides this there is a multitude of signals that can be interpreted as indicative of what will happen. First among those is the fact that TransMeta is the only known company out there that specifically keeps what it's doing a secret. Secondly, when you dig deeper into that announcement you will find a link to a newsgroup in wich a) somebody speculates extensively about the nature of Transmeta's chip, depicting the what-if-amiga-uses-transmeta scenario and b) A high-profile Amiga employee (I'm not sure who, but he's not just anyone) is all but confirming that this his speculation is fairly close to the target. I do not believe this is all product hyping. Maybe the reactions from the communities involved are a bit on the extreme side but considering their (mutual?) interests in seeing Linux/Amiga/Transmeta (whatever applies) succeeding that was to be expected. If Amiga wanted to create a buzz (wich they don't need, they have plenty of that of their own) there would have been inconsistencies. But there aren't any. Everything just adds up. The design remarks, the secrecy of the chip-manufacturer, the openness in wich they make their announcements and discuss their products. They seem to be very much in sync with the ideals that the majority of the Slashdot population seems to have. Maybe they even are. If they do, then lying or product hyping without facts to back it up is totally out of character.
just my $0.2
P.S. If anyone digs up that link, feel free to post it in a reply.
Well, there is a way this could be solved actually, and it's not exactly hard to implement either. All CmdrTaco would need to do is take some advice from that insightful fellow whom wrote a feature here recently about the democracy level of sites like Slashdot - that is, make the submissions box accessible for the readers (not without a few strong-worded warnings to click through, mind:) and have them moderate it. Then people could moderate this kind of crap out of existence before it ever reached the main page. True, abuse would be possible, but if the numbers are upped - say, a submission would need at least 10 points out of 20 to be put onto the main page-, it would be quite difficult. If they put in a bottom line at about -5 below wich a post would be blasted out of the submissions box we can get rid of this garbage.
As far as I'm concerned, this has got TransMeta written all over it. Just add these two up:
"We have selected a very exciting CPU for the MCC, which is at the heart of a next-generation processing subsystem. The CPU subsystem will provide more than just traditional central processing services.."
and
"We are still under strict confidentiality constraints, and cannot disclose information about the CPU at this time. However, we believe the selection of this technology will give us a unique advantage for the Amiga."
Okay, so it's a new, revolutionary CPU, being developed in absolute secrecy. And they talked to Linus a LOT. As far as I'm concerned they might as well have said it was TransMeta outright. Nobody else matches the definition
Except that 1 line of 2000 code != 1 line of Linux code. Linux code here only means kernel code, while 2000 code includes the GUI etc, meaning 80% of that doesn't count. Add to that the fact that one line of kernel code is worth more in terms of stability and design and the equation goes totally haywire. I wonder how many centuries the NT programmers would need to build Linux..
Actually, it seems to be a little more complex than just if-else. Just look at this excerpt from those links:
Remote Agent receives the general goals that should be accomplished during the mission from Mission Control; for example, to take pictures of an asteroid. Remote Agent generates a plan of the tasks necessary to accomplish this goal. The tasks are assigned varying, and sometimes very broad, windows of time during which the task must be accomplished. The plan is called flexible, because it doesn't always dictate specific times or specific ways in which the task must be completed, and instead leaves those decisions up to Remote Agent. The hope is that if a spacecraft failure occurs or a task takes longer than expected, the spacecraft will still be able to successfully continue with the plan because of the time flexibility and will therefore still be able to accomplish the general mission goals.
Floris
Re:Sorry Katz, its technically feasible
on
Bootlegging Buffy
·
· Score: 1
Sorry, but they _can't_ control it. Remember, we're talking about _the internet_ here. The amount of information they'd have to block (including newsgroups, ICQ etc) in order to be efficient is so darned huge I'm pretty sure they can't pull it off in the long run however hard they tried. Sure, filtering certain sites and certain words helps. A little. But the information will find a way in anyway. It's in it's nature.
We actually -shouldn't- shy away from it. The word is defining part of our identity, and giving it up would be partly giving up just that, despite whatever connotations have been attached to it.
The best way to get rid of those would be to carry the Hacker name as if it were the embodyment of our pride and glory, so to speak. Sooner or later the message will come through. It has happened before.
For instance, in Holland, during the historical timeframe commonly referred to as "the Spanish Revolution" in wich the-then-still-joint nation of The Netherlands/Belgium won freedom from Spanish rule there was a group called 'de Geuzen'. The Spanish had invented the term to refer to them. It actually was meant as an insult, but they took the name and made it their banner! In the end it had lots of positive connotations (still does) wich can roughly be described as similar to the ones attached to Robin Hood - adventurous (seafaring) rogues, almost heroes, fighting for freedom.
I feel we could achieve the same if we stich together. In fact, I think we should try to enhance our image by deliberately trying to enhance some of the cliche's attached to our culture. Sortof like "embracing and extending" standards.;) When you can't beat them, join them!
Slashdot Mirror
What we -need- is not some silly new taxing scheme.
We need some way to defend this kind of interests (OUR interests) in the senate/congress/wherever.
We need to be able to stand up for this kind of things.
The problem is that minority viewpoints are not being heard in a major way. Why? Because the voting system doesn't allow it. What does a political party want? Well, for the majority to vote on them. How does it achieve that? Trying to satisfy everyone at once _AND NOT OFFENDING THE MAJORITY IN ANY WAY_.
That is clearly wrong. It should be possible for a political party to represent a minority that disagrees with the majority, and still thrive.
This is not impossible. But it does require a major overhaul of the voting system. It can be done.
There is no absolute certainty until either company confirms or denies it.
However, besides this there is a multitude of signals that can be interpreted as indicative of what will happen. First among those is the fact that TransMeta is the only known company out there that specifically keeps what it's doing a secret.
Secondly, when you dig deeper into that announcement you will find a link to a newsgroup in wich a) somebody speculates extensively about the nature of Transmeta's chip, depicting the what-if-amiga-uses-transmeta scenario and b) A high-profile Amiga employee (I'm not sure who, but he's not just anyone) is all but confirming that this his speculation is fairly close to the target.
I do not believe this is all product hyping. Maybe the reactions from the communities involved are a bit on the extreme side but considering their (mutual?) interests in seeing Linux/Amiga/Transmeta (whatever applies) succeeding that was to be expected. If Amiga wanted to create a buzz (wich they don't need, they have plenty of that of their own) there would have been inconsistencies. But there aren't any. Everything just adds up. The design remarks, the secrecy of the chip-manufacturer, the openness in wich they make their announcements and discuss their products. They seem to be very much in sync with the ideals that the majority of the Slashdot population seems to have. Maybe they even are. If they do, then lying or product hyping without facts to back it up is totally out of character.
just my $0.2
P.S. If anyone digs up that link, feel free to post it in a reply.
Well, there is a way this could be solved actually, and it's not exactly hard to implement either. All CmdrTaco would need to do is take some advice from that insightful fellow whom wrote a feature here recently about the democracy level of sites like Slashdot - that is, make the submissions box accessible for the readers (not without a few strong-worded warnings to click through, mind :) and have them moderate it. Then people could moderate this kind of crap out of existence before it ever reached the main page. True, abuse would be possible, but if the numbers are upped - say, a submission would need at least 10 points out of 20 to be put onto the main page-, it would be quite difficult. If they put in a bottom line at about -5 below wich a post would be blasted out of the submissions box we can get rid of this garbage.
just my $.02
As far as I'm concerned, this has got TransMeta written all over it. Just add these two up:
.."
"We have selected a very exciting CPU for the MCC, which is at the heart of a next-generation processing subsystem. The CPU subsystem will provide more than just traditional central processing services
and
"We are still under strict confidentiality constraints, and cannot disclose information about the CPU at this time. However, we believe the selection of this technology will give us a unique advantage for the Amiga."
Okay, so it's a new, revolutionary CPU, being developed in absolute secrecy. And they talked to Linus a LOT. As far as I'm concerned they might as well have said it was TransMeta outright. Nobody else matches the definition
Except that 1 line of 2000 code != 1 line of Linux code. Linux code here only means kernel code, while 2000 code includes the GUI etc, meaning 80% of that doesn't count. Add to that the fact that one line of kernel code is worth more in terms of stability and design and the equation goes totally haywire. ..
I wonder how many centuries the NT programmers would need to build Linux
Floris
-
You people rock! Slashdot rocks! Damn, even Andover News rocks!
:)
Hey, is this machine in overload mode due to all the people congratulating Rob & Hemos yet?
Floris
* Broader hardware support (eg. USB, MPEG-2, bleeding edge video and sound support)
Ah, that explains Philips then.
Or doesn't it?
Floris
Actually, it seems to be a little more complex than just if-else. Just look at this excerpt from those links:
Remote Agent receives the general goals that should be accomplished during the mission from Mission Control; for example, to take pictures of an asteroid. Remote Agent generates a plan of the tasks necessary to accomplish this goal. The tasks are assigned varying, and sometimes very broad, windows of time during which the task must be accomplished. The plan is called flexible, because it doesn't always dictate specific times or specific ways in which the task must be completed, and instead leaves those decisions up to Remote Agent. The hope is that if a spacecraft failure occurs or a task takes longer than expected, the spacecraft will still be able to successfully continue with the plan because of the time flexibility and will therefore still be able to accomplish the general mission goals.
Floris
Sorry, but they _can't_ control it. Remember, we're talking about _the internet_ here. The amount of information they'd have to block (including newsgroups, ICQ etc) in order to be efficient is so darned huge I'm pretty sure they can't pull it off in the long run however hard they tried. Sure, filtering certain sites and certain words helps. A little. But the information will find a way in anyway. It's in it's nature.
Floris.
We actually -shouldn't- shy away from it. The word is defining part of our identity, and giving it up would be partly giving up just that, despite whatever connotations have been attached to it.
;) When you can't beat them, join them!
The best way to get rid of those would be to carry the Hacker name as if it were the embodyment of our pride and glory, so to speak. Sooner or later the message will come through. It has happened before.
For instance, in Holland, during the historical timeframe commonly referred to as "the Spanish Revolution" in wich the-then-still-joint nation of The Netherlands/Belgium won freedom from Spanish rule there was a group called 'de Geuzen'. The Spanish had invented the term to refer to them. It actually was meant as an insult, but they took the name and made it their banner! In the end it had lots of positive connotations (still does) wich can roughly be described as similar to the ones attached to Robin Hood - adventurous (seafaring) rogues, almost heroes, fighting for freedom.
I feel we could achieve the same if we stich together. In fact, I think we should try to enhance our image by deliberately trying to enhance some of the cliche's attached to our culture. Sortof like "embracing and extending" standards.
Floris.