Seriously though, what were they thinking? AOL _is_ a trademark. Dont get me wrong, I generally agree with a lot of the anti-megacorp stuff (software patents, the evils of the DMCA etc) but in this case they are clearly using AOLs trademark. It seems pretty justified to me.
Whether or not your system is built using GNU components, you still owe the FSF a debt of gratitude for promoting free software.
I am grateful to the FSF for providing excellent Free Software which I use daily. But there is no GNU software in Revol. The FSF arent the only people who have contributed to promoting Free Software.
Or did you put your system together from scratch? You did not: you're using busybox, for example, which is licenced under the GPL.
But its not part of the GNU system. That is the point here. Linux is under the GPL but it is not GNU software: it was not developed for the GNU Operating System. Distros such as Redhat, Debian etc. are modified versions of the GNU system with Linux as the kernel: hence the name GNU/Linux. I use GPLed software in my distribution but none of it is part of the GNU system, so it is not a modified version of GNU. I am therefore right in calling it just "Linux".
There is a big difference between GPLed software and GNU software.
Also remember - it's just a request . Not a demand. Not a EULA. Not a law. Nothing to lose sleep over.
I agree, infact I said this in an earlier comment.
Well to be fair they arent really demanding anything, just asking for equal credit, but you have a valid point.
This idea of restrictions is probably one of the reasons the Linux kernel has been more successful than Hurd. Hurd is part of the GNU system and to contribute to it you have to sign over the copyright for your code to the FSF. Linux has a mixed copyright with no such restriction. People obviously like being able to do things and contribute to things with less restrictions. Also see XEmacs which is streets ahead of GNU Emacs.
I used gcc but it was cross-compiled: gcc is not part of the system itself. The standard OS on the Psion Revo is EPOC which is also crosscompiled using gcc. Should this be GNU/EPOC?
I have a small linux distribution for the Psion Revo. Interestingly, I can name this just Linux (not GNU/Linux) because it contains no GNU software. All the normal GNU base utilities (glibc, gnu text/shellutils, bash) have been replaced with small embedded replacements (uclibc, busybox). So I can leave off "GNU/" and I am still correct.
Deep inside the Free Software Foundation's secret underground headquarters:
BMK: RMS! The GPL software alarm! Someone somewhere is releasing GPL'ed software under a non-GPL compatible NDA!
RMS: I might have guessed.. my arch nemesis the greedy capitalist Ransom Love, now using the power of his UnitedLinux alliance. Quick, Bradley, to the GNU-mobile!
....... several minutes later, outside the UnitedLinux building....
RMS: So, Ransom Love, still up to your old tricks eh? And still using names for products that dont properly reflect the GNU project's contribution as well!
RL: Theres nothing you can do this time, Stallman! I'm releasing this beta and theres nothing you can do to stop me!!
RMS: Not so fast, Love. You didnt reckon with my MAGIC BEARD!
RL: OH NO!!!!
**** ZAP ****
....... later, back at the FSF headquarters....
BK: Well, RMS, we certainly stopped that evil Ransom Love.
RMS: Yes Bradley, for the time being the world is safe again from the evil of Proprietory Software. But who knows when software hoarders will attack next?
Meanwhile, in the ruins of the UnitedLinux HQ..
RL: It's not over yet! I'll get you next time Stallman, next time!!!!
They are entirely different things. FreeBSD's emulation does translation of the system calls into the corresponding FreeBSD ones; UML is a full Linux kernel running in user space.
I am not disputing that they are a huge problem. The point of the original post was that using a P2P system would make the game more open to cheating. I am just showing that this is incorrect. Client side are a problem regardless of if you are using a Client Server or P2P architecture.
P2P multiplayer is much easier to write than Client Server: you simply exchange the status of the input devices. A Client Server system by contrast is a much bigger task - one that would probably take several months to complete. He cant neccesarily use the Quake netcode as from what I have seen of it, it is very integrated into the game itself.
In this situation, The Right Thing would probably be to use a simpler, albeit less powerful and flexible system rather than hacking something together from old code, which would likely lead to an awful mess.
Actually, if they do it right it should be possible for there to be little to no cheating at all. The only possible cheats would probably be client side things like seeing through walls, aimbots etc. which still affect client server architecture anyway. Any attempt to modify the game (if it is designed right) would throw the whole game out of sync.
The original doom used a peer to peer networking system too. In a peer to peer game, every player has their own copy of the game running on their machine. The multiple games are kept "in sync" by exchanging data about inputs (which keys are pressed, mouse movements etc). As long as the games all have the same exact inputs they should stay in sync.
Most modern games (Quake and above) have adopted a client-server system. In client-server systems, there is only one copy of the game running, on the server. The clients send their inputs to this server, and the server sends information about the changing state of the game world to the clients. This has the advantage of being more flexible: you can do things like in-game joining (join a game while it is running) and it is not possible for the game to go out of sync (in peer to peer if things differ slightly they go out of sync).
id have obviously decided to do this because it is the easiest solution. They want there to be some kind of Multiplayer available but they dont want to spend too much time on it. P2P multiplayer systems in general are easier to write. They have already stated they will be concentrating on Single Player for Doom 3.
Whoops, my mistake. Lindemann proved Pi is transcendental but Johann Lambert proved earlier (1768) that Pi is irrational, enough to show that the digits will never repeat
It seems to me that this is the wrong kind of approach to this problem. They would be much better trying to find a generalised proof. You can search as high as you want but you can never prove that the next iteration will not yield a palindromic number otherwise. The difficult part to me seems to be to describe the problem in a simple mathematical form that can be analysed.
Re:How is this different from the Perl Foundation?
on
#debian & IRC Politics
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
> The Perl Foundation does about the exact same thing and no one really bitches are around here.
There really isnt any comparison here. The perl people are working on something [b]worthwhile[/b]. Thousands of people around the world depend on perl to get their job done. Freenode(OPN) is nowhere near as important and certainly not unique: there are hundreds of IRC networks around the globe providing exactly the same services, including OFTC which provides an excellent alternative. He doesnt pay the server hosting bills. He doesnt even work on the IRC server code - at least Rusty from kuro5hin contributes in his work on Scoop. Lilo literally wants to be paid to sit on IRC all day.
The documentation with my Archos explicitely states that you should not use it while jogging as it may damage the hard drive. They're resilient things but I doubt they could withstand sustained shaking.
I have an Archos jukebox as well and love it. However, I remember reading somewhere that they are not recommended for joggers as the constant movement can damage the hard drive inside. This would probably not be a good suggestion here as he is asking for something to use during 8 mile runs.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes Microsoft, Open Standards really are kind of cool, arent they?
This is getting older than the "Al Gore invented the internet! Haha, LOL, ROTFL!" crap.
1. Create GNU/ meme
2. ???
3. Profit!
Kind of ironic how slashdot links to burnallgifs.org while practically every image on here is in gif format as well..
For the less radical EvilWM is a similarly "minimalist" window manager. There are no menus or icons, the only window decoration is a 1 pixel border.
Seriously though, what were they thinking? AOL _is_ a trademark. Dont get me wrong, I generally agree with a lot of the anti-megacorp stuff (software patents, the evils of the DMCA etc) but in this case they are clearly using AOLs trademark. It seems pretty justified to me.
Actually, Wine has been ported to Windows already.
Whether or not your system is built using GNU components, you still owe the FSF a debt of gratitude for promoting free software.
I am grateful to the FSF for providing excellent Free Software which I use daily. But there is no GNU software in Revol. The FSF arent the only people who have contributed to promoting Free Software.
Or did you put your system together from scratch? You did not: you're using busybox, for example, which is licenced under the GPL.
But its not part of the GNU system. That is the point here. Linux is under the GPL but it is not GNU software: it was not developed for the GNU Operating System. Distros such as Redhat, Debian etc. are modified versions of the GNU system with Linux as the kernel: hence the name GNU/Linux. I use GPLed software in my distribution but none of it is part of the GNU system, so it is not a modified version of GNU. I am therefore right in calling it just "Linux".
There is a big difference between GPLed software and GNU software.
Also remember - it's just a request . Not a demand. Not a EULA. Not a law. Nothing to lose sleep over.
I agree, infact I said this in an earlier comment.
Well to be fair they arent really demanding anything, just asking for equal credit, but you have a valid point.
This idea of restrictions is probably one of the reasons the Linux kernel has been more successful than Hurd. Hurd is part of the GNU system and to contribute to it you have to sign over the copyright for your code to the FSF. Linux has a mixed copyright with no such restriction. People obviously like being able to do things and contribute to things with less restrictions. Also see XEmacs which is streets ahead of GNU Emacs.
I used gcc but it was cross-compiled: gcc is not part of the system itself. The standard OS on the Psion Revo is EPOC which is also crosscompiled using gcc. Should this be GNU/EPOC?
I have a small linux distribution for the Psion Revo. Interestingly, I can name this just Linux (not GNU/Linux) because it contains no GNU software. All the normal GNU base utilities (glibc, gnu text/shellutils, bash) have been replaced with small embedded replacements (uclibc, busybox). So I can leave off "GNU/" and I am still correct.
BMK: RMS! The GPL software alarm! Someone somewhere is releasing GPL'ed software under a non-GPL compatible NDA!
RMS: I might have guessed.. my arch nemesis the greedy capitalist Ransom Love, now using the power of his UnitedLinux alliance. Quick, Bradley, to the GNU-mobile!
RMS: So, Ransom Love, still up to your old tricks eh? And still using names for products that dont properly reflect the GNU project's contribution as well!
RL: Theres nothing you can do this time, Stallman! I'm releasing this beta and theres nothing you can do to stop me!!
RMS: Not so fast, Love. You didnt reckon with my MAGIC BEARD!
RL: OH NO!!!!
**** ZAP ****
BK: Well, RMS, we certainly stopped that evil Ransom Love.
RMS: Yes Bradley, for the time being the world is safe again from the evil of Proprietory Software. But who knows when software hoarders will attack next?
Meanwhile, in the ruins of the UnitedLinux HQ..
RL: It's not over yet! I'll get you next time Stallman, next time!!!!
They are entirely different things. FreeBSD's emulation does translation of the system calls into the corresponding FreeBSD ones; UML is a full Linux kernel running in user space.
And now, more of "the best of slashdot"...
I am not disputing that they are a huge problem. The point of the original post was that using a P2P system would make the game more open to cheating. I am just showing that this is incorrect. Client side are a problem regardless of if you are using a Client Server or P2P architecture.
P2P multiplayer is much easier to write than Client Server: you simply exchange the status of the input devices. A Client Server system by contrast is a much bigger task - one that would probably take several months to complete. He cant neccesarily use the Quake netcode as from what I have seen of it, it is very integrated into the game itself.
In this situation, The Right Thing would probably be to use a simpler, albeit less powerful and flexible system rather than hacking something together from old code, which would likely lead to an awful mess.
Actually, if they do it right it should be possible for there to be little to no cheating at all. The only possible cheats would probably be client side things like seeing through walls, aimbots etc. which still affect client server architecture anyway. Any attempt to modify the game (if it is designed right) would throw the whole game out of sync.
This isnt better, its just easier to write.
The original doom used a peer to peer networking system too. In a peer to peer game, every player has their own copy of the game running on their machine. The multiple games are kept "in sync" by exchanging data about inputs (which keys are pressed, mouse movements etc). As long as the games all have the same exact inputs they should stay in sync.
Most modern games (Quake and above) have adopted a client-server system. In client-server systems, there is only one copy of the game running, on the server. The clients send their inputs to this server, and the server sends information about the changing state of the game world to the clients. This has the advantage of being more flexible: you can do things like in-game joining (join a game while it is running) and it is not possible for the game to go out of sync (in peer to peer if things differ slightly they go out of sync).
id have obviously decided to do this because it is the easiest solution. They want there to be some kind of Multiplayer available but they dont want to spend too much time on it. P2P multiplayer systems in general are easier to write. They have already stated they will be concentrating on Single Player for Doom 3.
Whoops, my mistake. Lindemann proved Pi is transcendental but Johann Lambert proved earlier (1768) that Pi is irrational, enough to show that the digits will never repeat
> Can you prove that Pi does not repeat at some
> point not yet calculated?
Yes, it was proved over a century ago by Ferdinand Lindemann.
It seems to me that this is the wrong kind of approach to this problem. They would be much better trying to find a generalised proof. You can search as high as you want but you can never prove that the next iteration will not yield a palindromic number otherwise. The difficult part to me seems to be to describe the problem in a simple mathematical form that can be analysed.
> The Perl Foundation does about the exact same thing and no one really bitches are around here.
There really isnt any comparison here. The perl
people are working on something [b]worthwhile[/b]. Thousands of people around the world depend on perl to get their job done. Freenode(OPN) is nowhere near as important and certainly not unique: there are hundreds of IRC networks around the globe providing exactly the same services, including OFTC which provides an excellent alternative. He doesnt pay the server hosting bills. He doesnt even work on the IRC server code - at least Rusty from kuro5hin contributes in his work on Scoop. Lilo literally wants to be paid to sit on IRC all day.
The documentation with my Archos explicitely states that you should not use it while jogging as it may damage the hard drive. They're resilient things but I doubt they could withstand sustained shaking.
I have an Archos jukebox as well and love it. However, I remember reading somewhere that they are not recommended for joggers as the constant movement can damage the hard drive inside. This would probably not be a good suggestion here as he is asking for something to use during 8 mile runs.
... but can it breakdance?
http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2001/deb