No one's writing Doom III in C#, Java, Perl, Python or Pascal either, Cap'n, those are all relatively horrible languages to write graphics intensive apps on. It sounds like you don't know what you're talking about with VisualBasic either. Update your analogy or update your list of what's '1337'.
C&D's are worse than lawyers. They allow large companies with political and monetary clout to bully around smaller companies at the low, low price of not a lawsuit, not a subpoena, but you guessed it: a piece of paper and a 29 cent stamp!
You got me on the cycles/sec, I really didn't mean 5,000 cycles/sec.
Beyond that though, I disagree. Yes, when you are comparing processors, IPC is quite important, as an AMD that performs 9 instructions/cycle vs. an Intel that performs 6 (cited here) would be optimal. However, there certainly are instructions in the set which take a larger amount of time to execute than say increment. Certain instructions by mathematical definition need more time to execute than loading a register, IPC is an aggregate average (see here).
Furthermore, those figures are only to measure the performance of processors, instructions, etc. (as you said, CPU-level functions), and my intent was not to compare processors or instructions, rather to give an arbitrary, static time to a canonical language feature in two different languages. In that case, I needn't back up my data with hard, empirical evidence. My point was simply that the difference between the execution times of a simple operation in two languages is small and static, when the machine they operate on becomes faster and faster, the difference between the speed of the two is minimal at best.
If you can only name one(it's not as fast as C++), then you really don't know the language.
You didn't name any either, cap'n. Beyond that, (and for the last time, Jesus) the entire concept of Java is that it is implemented on an imaginary computer, which is then emulated by a real one. While this was not an original concept by 1996, conceptually it DOESN'T EVEN MAKE SENSE that Java could be faster than a small language that compiles directly into native code. That is, however the beauty of the application of Moore's law, as we can fit more transistors on a chip, the more memory we fit on a chip and the faster our processors become.
If it takes 2 cycles to increment an integer variable in memory in C, and it takes 4 to increment an integer in memory in Java, suddenly a difference of two clock cycles doesn't appear so appalling when you're running a system with a clock speed of 5000 cycles/sec. Granted that's not today, but I seriously would not expect that as processors become faster and faster that we continue writing general purpose code in vi. Granted there will ALWAYS be a place for very efficient, lower-level languages (the K&R book does describe C as a low-level language, though obviously C++ is a further abstraction), they just may not be at the forefront of computation.
Alright, this is just off the top of my head, and I haven't read the entire GPL or LGPL (I did read 'Free As In Freedom' though!;-) ). One major possible implication of the DMCA not allowing us to reverse engineer binaries for even educational purposes is this: It's possible that say even Microsoft may one day put out GPL software (it's a stretch, but follow me here..), in which case they are not (I believe) restricted in selling their software, but as such are required to fork over the source code with the binaries. Said large company then proceeds to sell software bundled with absolute garbage code. Not necessarily pure garbage, but perhaps leaving out certain key code regions. By the contract, they've provided us code, and by the DMCA, we can't explicitly prove that the code run on their machines with their compilers with their compiler flags does not produce the binary? Legally, where does that leave the consumer (also don't forget that a majority of people buying said product would not notice the code chunks missing, if they read any of it at all)?br. Even better, what if they're writing code (and distributing it with commercial binaries) for a compiler which doesn't exist outside of their company? Or that uses magic syntactic sugar to hide large portions of code? It's still "source".
Not that this is a justification of my downloading mp3s, but I wouldn't have bought probably 3/4 of the mp3s I have because I simply want one song off of the CD.
Trust me, they know this. Decades ago, they realized that they could make much more money by pushing LPs (Long Play) instead of 2-4 song 7" records. Early recordings were generally the artists' best songs, those which the record companies knew you'd gobble up. But for a few a little more investment on their part, they could throw in 10 or more songs on one record at double (or more!) the cost. Now you were being hooked into buying a whole LP just to hear your favorite songs. The record companies have had us by the cajones since then, it's either buy the single for $6, or buy the whole shebang for ~$12.
There are VERY few mainstream artists today who can pull off a full cd of killer material, but a few are actually out there.
The article says that the sum of money sought by the RIAA is 120,000 times the amount of revenue that the RIAA together pulled in last year. Hopefully, this will open peoples' eyes why one should NOT continue stuffing money in the dragon's mouth.
A google search looks for all of the occurrences of "Office", not filenames on searched servers. "office" is a common word in the English language, while filenames with "office" in them would seem upon first glance to be infintessimal by comparison.
A net spider would appeal to me, but you can be damn sure i wouldn't be mailing out legal threats the moment the spider caught the word "office" in the filenames. Why wouldn't they just plop the server name and file name into a database where human eyes can check it out before mailing threats?
Why does the RIAA not get it that entertainment is something that the general public does not NEED, just WANTS. The US, home of the RIAA, is dead smack in the middle of the largest recession in recent years; why will they not finally admit that the items that bring home their bread are simply frivolous, inessential goods? We don't have money to buy $20 cds, and frankly most of us are fed up with their incessant marketing ploys, and release after release of cacophonous trash. Segway knows that their recreational product won't fare well in this market, why can't the RIAA own up to the same fate?
...so I am to gather here that prices are falling for one release at one store from one record label that happens to specialize in releasing "classic" pop music. If you go to Circuit City, Best Buy, Record Town, FYE, etc. you'll find that any new release is anywhere from $14 to $22 still, depending on the area and which stores.
One issue to think about is with any new cd, it could be a flop or a success, yet the music industry does need to recoup recording expenses, promotion costs and such. However, that usually comes out of the band's cut, and so the company makes back almost everything that it paid for the release. There is an inherent danger in releasing a record though, the company may actually lose money if the record dies, however with say, the Rolling Stones, they are almost guaranteed a certain number of record sales.
All in all, the whole paradigm of a record company is out of date. With the rise of digital equipment, one can put together a great studio for medium grade recording (oh, say like the latest No Doubt cd..though that's being a bit generous) for under $15k. In addition, with the level of promotion that the Internet provides, you can release stuff on your own for virtually nothing. Granted, you won't get neato pressed and painted cds, but you can work your way up to that yourself as well...it's better than owing a local label money for pressing your cd that didn't sell.
Hmm..ok, I'm about to start the process, but I'm a little confused. Step 2 is remove my floppy drive, and step 4 is shut down...ok let's se here...*BZZZT*
Ah, that article was good for a pretty good quote: "The IBM Selectric was a lousy typewriter compared to the TiT Hummer!"..I want a tit hummer. Also of note was the "TiT Swinger", but I can't imagine that particular model would have much appeal.
I probably clicked the slashdot and google V6 links 3 or 4 times a piece thinking there was no possible way slashdot or google had been/.'d;)
Even so, it's not Google or Slashdot being Slashdotted, it's the sixxs.org gateway that has to facilitate the transfer. As of right now, they probably didn't foresee or get ready to handle a good Slashdotting, as the intersection of people using IPv6 and people who know about the sixxs.org rerouting would be a lot slimmer, at least for the moment.
1.) The act of employing to the greatest possible advantage: exploitation of copper deposits.
2.) Utilization of another person or group for selfish purposes
Because you and I both know that it's not about stimulating economies. The only reason that the companies are moving the jobs to that particular area is because the relative cost of living IS so low. They simply want to employ the greatest possible advantage by utilizing others for selfish purposes. Simply put, that's the definition of exploitation. I can't see how to make that any more lucid. As soon as say the Laotian workforce is cheap enough and technologically advanced enough, perhaps they'll take over all the Indian jobs and leave that area desolate as well.
Slashdot Mirror
No one's writing Doom III in C#, Java, Perl, Python or Pascal either, Cap'n, those are all relatively horrible languages to write graphics intensive apps on. It sounds like you don't know what you're talking about with VisualBasic either. Update your analogy or update your list of what's '1337'.
Computers are just like liquor...the less his parents drink vodka, the less likely they'll be to notice a difference.
C&D's are worse than lawyers. They allow large companies with political and monetary clout to bully around smaller companies at the low, low price of not a lawsuit, not a subpoena, but you guessed it: a piece of paper and a 29 cent stamp!
You got me on the cycles/sec, I really didn't mean 5,000 cycles/sec.
Beyond that though, I disagree. Yes, when you are comparing processors, IPC is quite important, as an AMD that performs 9 instructions/cycle vs. an Intel that performs 6 (cited here) would be optimal. However, there certainly are instructions in the set which take a larger amount of time to execute than say increment. Certain instructions by mathematical definition need more time to execute than loading a register, IPC is an aggregate average (see here).
Furthermore, those figures are only to measure the performance of processors, instructions, etc. (as you said, CPU-level functions), and my intent was not to compare processors or instructions, rather to give an arbitrary, static time to a canonical language feature in two different languages. In that case, I needn't back up my data with hard, empirical evidence. My point was simply that the difference between the execution times of a simple operation in two languages is small and static, when the machine they operate on becomes faster and faster, the difference between the speed of the two is minimal at best.
Yes, it sure would be ridiculous to think that emacs has crept into typical Linux distributions.
If you can only name one(it's not as fast as C++), then you really don't know the language.
You didn't name any either, cap'n. Beyond that, (and for the last time, Jesus) the entire concept of Java is that it is implemented on an imaginary computer, which is then emulated by a real one. While this was not an original concept by 1996, conceptually it DOESN'T EVEN MAKE SENSE that Java could be faster than a small language that compiles directly into native code. That is, however the beauty of the application of Moore's law, as we can fit more transistors on a chip, the more memory we fit on a chip and the faster our processors become.
If it takes 2 cycles to increment an integer variable in memory in C, and it takes 4 to increment an integer in memory in Java, suddenly a difference of two clock cycles doesn't appear so appalling when you're running a system with a clock speed of 5000 cycles/sec. Granted that's not today, but I seriously would not expect that as processors become faster and faster that we continue writing general purpose code in vi. Granted there will ALWAYS be a place for very efficient, lower-level languages (the K&R book does describe C as a low-level language, though obviously C++ is a further abstraction), they just may not be at the forefront of computation.
Alright, this is just off the top of my head, and I haven't read the entire GPL or LGPL (I did read 'Free As In Freedom' though! ;-) ). One major possible implication of the DMCA not allowing us to reverse engineer binaries for even educational purposes is this: It's possible that say even Microsoft may one day put out GPL software (it's a stretch, but follow me here..), in which case they are not (I believe) restricted in selling their software, but as such are required to fork over the source code with the binaries. Said large company then proceeds to sell software bundled with absolute garbage code. Not necessarily pure garbage, but perhaps leaving out certain key code regions. By the contract, they've provided us code, and by the DMCA, we can't explicitly prove that the code run on their machines with their compilers with their compiler flags does not produce the binary? Legally, where does that leave the consumer (also don't forget that a majority of people buying said product would not notice the code chunks missing, if they read any of it at all)?br.
Even better, what if they're writing code (and distributing it with commercial binaries) for a compiler which doesn't exist outside of their company? Or that uses magic syntactic sugar to hide large portions of code? It's still "source".
But sadly (to some), most of the people here that will download it are excited because it's free as in beer.
That's not that funny and you spelled "loser" wrong, captain.
Not that this is a justification of my downloading mp3s, but I wouldn't have bought probably 3/4 of the mp3s I have because I simply want one song off of the CD.
Trust me, they know this. Decades ago, they realized that they could make much more money by pushing LPs (Long Play) instead of 2-4 song 7" records. Early recordings were generally the artists' best songs, those which the record companies knew you'd gobble up. But for a few a little more investment on their part, they could throw in 10 or more songs on one record at double (or more!) the cost. Now you were being hooked into buying a whole LP just to hear your favorite songs. The record companies have had us by the cajones since then, it's either buy the single for $6, or buy the whole shebang for ~$12.
There are VERY few mainstream artists today who can pull off a full cd of killer material, but a few are actually out there.
The article says that the sum of money sought by the RIAA is 120,000 times the amount of revenue that the RIAA together pulled in last year. Hopefully, this will open peoples' eyes why one should NOT continue stuffing money in the dragon's mouth.
A google search looks for all of the occurrences of "Office", not filenames on searched servers. "office" is a common word in the English language, while filenames with "office" in them would seem upon first glance to be infintessimal by comparison.
Sega's Frogger? Isn't that owned by Atari?
A net spider would appeal to me, but you can be damn sure i wouldn't be mailing out legal threats the moment the spider caught the word "office" in the filenames. Why wouldn't they just plop the server name and file name into a database where human eyes can check it out before mailing threats?
Nothing, I was IRCing..
oo..You mean a Nintendo Entertainment System? Me too! We're like brothers! ;)
Why does the RIAA not get it that entertainment is something that the general public does not NEED, just WANTS. The US, home of the RIAA, is dead smack in the middle of the largest recession in recent years; why will they not finally admit that the items that bring home their bread are simply frivolous, inessential goods? We don't have money to buy $20 cds, and frankly most of us are fed up with their incessant marketing ploys, and release after release of cacophonous trash. Segway knows that their recreational product won't fare well in this market, why can't the RIAA own up to the same fate?
...so I am to gather here that prices are falling for one release at one store from one record label that happens to specialize in releasing "classic" pop music. If you go to Circuit City, Best Buy, Record Town, FYE, etc. you'll find that any new release is anywhere from $14 to $22 still, depending on the area and which stores.
One issue to think about is with any new cd, it could be a flop or a success, yet the music industry does need to recoup recording expenses, promotion costs and such. However, that usually comes out of the band's cut, and so the company makes back almost everything that it paid for the release. There is an inherent danger in releasing a record though, the company may actually lose money if the record dies, however with say, the Rolling Stones, they are almost guaranteed a certain number of record sales.
All in all, the whole paradigm of a record company is out of date. With the rise of digital equipment, one can put together a great studio for medium grade recording (oh, say like the latest No Doubt cd..though that's being a bit generous) for under $15k. In addition, with the level of promotion that the Internet provides, you can release stuff on your own for virtually nothing. Granted, you won't get neato pressed and painted cds, but you can work your way up to that yourself as well...it's better than owing a local label money for pressing your cd that didn't sell.
It may not have a crisper, but if you could turn off the cooling on both systems on demand, you'd have one HELL of a toaster oven.
Man...you know what...there was a gaming "system" that came out in the early 90's that could do this.
I think it was called...Leisure Suit Larry 1.
Well, maybe you need an infinite amount then.
Hmm..ok, I'm about to start the process, but I'm a little confused. Step 2 is remove my floppy drive, and step 4 is shut down...ok let's se here...*BZZZT*
Ah, that article was good for a pretty good quote: "The IBM Selectric was a lousy typewriter compared to the TiT Hummer!" ..I want a tit hummer.
Also of note was the "TiT Swinger", but I can't imagine that particular model would have much appeal.
I probably clicked the slashdot and google V6 links 3 or 4 times a piece thinking there was no possible way slashdot or google had been /.'d ;)
Even so, it's not Google or Slashdot being Slashdotted, it's the sixxs.org gateway that has to facilitate the transfer. As of right now, they probably didn't foresee or get ready to handle a good Slashdotting, as the intersection of people using IPv6 and people who know about the sixxs.org rerouting would be a lot slimmer, at least for the moment.
How is offering a good job at a high wage (relative to the local economy) exploitation?
From Dictionary.com: exploitationn.
1.) The act of employing to the greatest possible advantage: exploitation of copper deposits.
2.) Utilization of another person or group for selfish purposes
Because you and I both know that it's not about stimulating economies. The only reason that the companies are moving the jobs to that particular area is because the relative cost of living IS so low. They simply want to employ the greatest possible advantage by utilizing others for selfish purposes. Simply put, that's the definition of exploitation. I can't see how to make that any more lucid. As soon as say the Laotian workforce is cheap enough and technologically advanced enough, perhaps they'll take over all the Indian jobs and leave that area desolate as well.