At this point, if you enjoy it, take it. I have never used my minor and I have never regretted it. You will probably actually use yours given that it is more useful than your major.:)
I encourage every college student I know to take as many courses as they can in CS. Not because they will use them, but because almost any job these days requires interacting not only with computers but with computer people and it is good to have some clue as to what the computer is really doing and what the computer people are doing as well.
You are assuming that abstaining has a meaning that you can define as "do nothing". You know better than that. You don't know why people are abstaining. Don't presume to put words in their mouths.
33% minimum for validating an election is not arbitrary: it ensures that "abstain" isn't the #1 choice.
How? I don't follow the math here. Why not 37% or 29%?
I agree that the method of switching is another topic. But I think that the fact that it would be difficult to switch to this method (for the reasons I have outlined) speaks to its merits.
People are making a rational decision not to vote. Good for them, that's more voting for me.
What is the rationale for 33%? That is arbitrary, significantly more arbitrary than a simple majority of those that vote. What would be the benefit of leaving an office vacant?
Again, I don't see the need for this idea, and I don't see a practical way to ever switch to this system. Why? Those that vote don't want it, so they won't vote for it, and those that don't vote won't vote for it, even if they want it. Both groups are pretty happy with the current system. Broken as it is.
Voting is its own incentive. I've lived in countries where it is forced. The populace isn't pleased with that idea.
Please respond to the comment on whether you think this could pass if you had to follow the rules of it to get it to pass. I'm a bit surprised that you had nothing to say to it.
This has got to be the dumbest thing I've seen on/. for a while. Speaking of the dead, why not dig up Jefferson and ask him what he thinks of this idea? If somebody doesn't care enough to vote then I don't want them to vote, and obviously they don't want to vote either. What good purpose would your idea achieve?
I would hope that if your idea ever gets any serious consideration that those pushing for it will be unhypocritical enough to insist that their method of voting be used to pass such a law. Put it up for a vote and see if 50% of the eligible population thinks it is a good idea. That way it would never happen.
One need only to look at the smart card world to see all sorts of side-channel attacks that are harder to execute than this. First there was power analysis, then when countermeasures were implemented there was differential power analysis, then more countermeasures, now the use RF leakage, so there are countermeasures against that.
If a process is leaking information somewhere, then there will be people clever enough to pull that information out.
That said, it seems that this is more of a library problem than a Linux problem.
If you need any real security you should be doing your private-key operations in an HSM anyhow, not on your CPU.
I have seen enough people struggle with bringing in a third party to create a conference call that now it is hardly ever suggested. Instead we all have a personal 800 number with a passcode to call in to if we need to conference.
I can only imagine how much worse video conferencing is.
The most useful live-streaming tech I've ever seen was in 1997. We could watch class from our rooms over the net. The audio was a live stream and the video only updated once every few seconds. That way we could see who was speaking and see diagrams, but no full-motion video. I could see something similar being useful today in an enviroment with a whiteboard. Send high-res jpegs once a second.
At this point I am just excited to be able to buy bluetooth controlers. I assume that they will be normal bluetooth and compatible with PCs. Maybe this will spur the development of bluetooth devices the way the original iMac made USB ubiquitous.
You are right, I do not know the details of the performance of these chips. I will say that I expect the cell to be able crunch a lot of the numbers needed for physics. I would be pretty shocked if the xbox cpu isn't at least equivalent to current high-end cpus in terms of what needs to be done for games. I am probably biased given that I work for the company that makes both of the chips.
Thanks for the link, that is an interesting article. Note that the article itself says that this is just going to be used for eye candy and not influence gameplay itself for a while until these things are widespread. Again, we see how the fragmentation of the PC market can take away some of the advantages of superior hardware.
Another option would be to steal a reason from BSG: highly computerized ships were vulnerable to viruses or other attacks, so during TOS they had gone with gauges and dials for a while. In Enterprise they just hadn't been attacked electronically yet.
shit you are right. Of the two of us, who has written PC games? Ones that utilize 3d hardware?
My point is that the 3d stuff scales (I agree with you there, so drop it!), the AI and physics do not. If you are processor-bound on those with high-end PC hardware then you are screwed. You have to write the physics and AI so they can run on the lowest common denominator hardware.
Is anybody else impressed that Minter has posted movie files of his xbox 360 lightsynth in quicktime format? I'm sure someone at MS is having a fit about this right now.
You don't get it either. How long is it going to take high-end PCs to be substaintially better than this xbox? This isn't like the last one, which would have made a so-so PC when it was first released. I don't see any three-core PPC 3.2 GHz machines on the horizon. Now what about mid-range PCs, which is what game developers target? How long until the avergare PC is better than the new xbox?
The minimum reqs do influence how the top end scales when you are talking about physics and AI, which is the point of this discussion, not pushing polygons. If the physics engine won't run without a 4 GHz hyperthreaded Intel chip, then the game will play differently on a slower computer. This isn't just visual quality that is being discussed. As for AI, what if your enemies (and friends) were dumber because your machine was slow? Now on a console the devs know exactly what they have to work with, and they can exploit it all. Not so on PC games. High-end hardward won't be fully utilized for physics and AI until it becomes common.
I think you've missed my point, which is that multi-core PCs are not yet mainstream. A multi-core console will be mainstream well before the tech is in wide enough use in desktop PCs to be widely leveraed for games.
Are you telling me that you already have a hardware accelerator for game physics in your PC? If not, when do you plan on getting one? Do you think such a thing will be widespread before the new xbox is?
Expect games released for Xbox360 *and* PC to perform damn well on a multi-core PC:)
Similarly, the reason Apple selected KHTML as its base was that it was so well written. If the KHTML guys hadn't been so anal about doing things "correctly" Apple might never have used the project in the first place.
In the short term, a hack will get a feature out the door more quickly. In the long term, a pile of hacks doesn't hold up as well as a properly engineered soltution. Notice how some browsers (Netscape, ie) had to be rewritten from scratch a few times.
It seems to me that each project should feel free to proceed as they see fit. Who knows, maybe in the future Apple will come back to KHTML in order to get that stable base again.
I think that your prediction about the system being quikcly outstipped by new PC games might be inaccurate. Remember that the great advantage of a console is that it gives developers a single, stable target. They can write engines that utilize its full potential. Even so, it will take some time before anybody puts together AI and physics systems complex enough to really tax this thing.
PC games on the other hand, have to target a wider audience. It will probably be some time before PC games are designed with a multi-proc/core system in mind
Slashdot Mirror
I encourage every college student I know to take as many courses as they can in CS. Not because they will use them, but because almost any job these days requires interacting not only with computers but with computer people and it is good to have some clue as to what the computer is really doing and what the computer people are doing as well.
I saw a file claiming to be a Spanish version of it two days ago. I don't download movies so I left it alone.
You are assuming that abstaining has a meaning that you can define as "do nothing". You know better than that. You don't know why people are abstaining. Don't presume to put words in their mouths.
How? I don't follow the math here. Why not 37% or 29%?
I agree that the method of switching is another topic. But I think that the fact that it would be difficult to switch to this method (for the reasons I have outlined) speaks to its merits.
What is the rationale for 33%? That is arbitrary, significantly more arbitrary than a simple majority of those that vote. What would be the benefit of leaving an office vacant?
Again, I don't see the need for this idea, and I don't see a practical way to ever switch to this system. Why? Those that vote don't want it, so they won't vote for it, and those that don't vote won't vote for it, even if they want it. Both groups are pretty happy with the current system. Broken as it is.
Please respond to the comment on whether you think this could pass if you had to follow the rules of it to get it to pass. I'm a bit surprised that you had nothing to say to it.
If you are doing anything important you can afford an HSM. If you can't afford an HSM to protect your keys, then your keys aren't worth much.
I would hope that if your idea ever gets any serious consideration that those pushing for it will be unhypocritical enough to insist that their method of voting be used to pass such a law. Put it up for a vote and see if 50% of the eligible population thinks it is a good idea. That way it would never happen.
If a process is leaking information somewhere, then there will be people clever enough to pull that information out.
That said, it seems that this is more of a library problem than a Linux problem.
If you need any real security you should be doing your private-key operations in an HSM anyhow, not on your CPU.
Try writing games. It is more fun than playing them. Even if you never finish. Yes, I am a nerd.
I have seen enough people struggle with bringing in a third party to create a conference call that now it is hardly ever suggested. Instead we all have a personal 800 number with a passcode to call in to if we need to conference.
I can only imagine how much worse video conferencing is.
The most useful live-streaming tech I've ever seen was in 1997. We could watch class from our rooms over the net. The audio was a live stream and the video only updated once every few seconds. That way we could see who was speaking and see diagrams, but no full-motion video. I could see something similar being useful today in an enviroment with a whiteboard. Send high-res jpegs once a second.
At this point I am just excited to be able to buy bluetooth controlers. I assume that they will be normal bluetooth and compatible with PCs. Maybe this will spur the development of bluetooth devices the way the original iMac made USB ubiquitous.
Is that Apple's official position on the issue? :)
You are right, I do not know the details of the performance of these chips. I will say that I expect the cell to be able crunch a lot of the numbers needed for physics. I would be pretty shocked if the xbox cpu isn't at least equivalent to current high-end cpus in terms of what needs to be done for games. I am probably biased given that I work for the company that makes both of the chips.
Thanks for the link, that is an interesting article. Note that the article itself says that this is just going to be used for eye candy and not influence gameplay itself for a while until these things are widespread. Again, we see how the fragmentation of the PC market can take away some of the advantages of superior hardware.
Another option would be to steal a reason from BSG: highly computerized ships were vulnerable to viruses or other attacks, so during TOS they had gone with gauges and dials for a while. In Enterprise they just hadn't been attacked electronically yet.
My point is that the 3d stuff scales (I agree with you there, so drop it!), the AI and physics do not. If you are processor-bound on those with high-end PC hardware then you are screwed. You have to write the physics and AI so they can run on the lowest common denominator hardware.
Is anybody else impressed that Minter has posted movie files of his xbox 360 lightsynth in quicktime format? I'm sure someone at MS is having a fit about this right now.
The minimum reqs do influence how the top end scales when you are talking about physics and AI, which is the point of this discussion, not pushing polygons. If the physics engine won't run without a 4 GHz hyperthreaded Intel chip, then the game will play differently on a slower computer. This isn't just visual quality that is being discussed. As for AI, what if your enemies (and friends) were dumber because your machine was slow? Now on a console the devs know exactly what they have to work with, and they can exploit it all. Not so on PC games. High-end hardward won't be fully utilized for physics and AI until it becomes common.
Are you telling me that you already have a hardware accelerator for game physics in your PC? If not, when do you plan on getting one? Do you think such a thing will be widespread before the new xbox is?
Expect games released for Xbox360 *and* PC to perform damn well on a multi-core PC :)
How will they perform on a normal PC?
In the short term, a hack will get a feature out the door more quickly. In the long term, a pile of hacks doesn't hold up as well as a properly engineered soltution. Notice how some browsers (Netscape, ie) had to be rewritten from scratch a few times.
It seems to me that each project should feel free to proceed as they see fit. Who knows, maybe in the future Apple will come back to KHTML in order to get that stable base again.
PC games on the other hand, have to target a wider audience. It will probably be some time before PC games are designed with a multi-proc/core system in mind
so does OTR work?
I was hoping that the growth rate would keep on growing forever...
I haven't received the memo on that yet. I hope it is true. The only reason I ever use ie is to use the travel tool.