From what I understand, the PS3 hypervisor actually blocks calls to the GPU, outside of framebuffer calls. Sony did this with the PS2 linux kit as well, and said it was to prevent piracy, and to keep people from just running free linux games on the console (because they sell the consoles at a loss, if a bunch of people buy them up and then play free games, it would be a money losing venture for sony)
That said, I think it's kinda dumb, especially since microsoft provides an extremely low cost way to develop Xbox360 games that use all the bells and whistles.
While it's true that internally x86 breaks CISC instructions down to RISC instructions, compilers still have to target the CISC architechture. Whether or not it's easier to do that or not is a matter of application.
Ask the GAIM developers how much fun they've had with the IM protocol that AOL was forced to open. "Oh, you want to use new features? yeah, we're not opening _that_ protocol"
People expiring is much worse. I'm fortunate enough to be blessed with the means to provide for (hypothetically) any medical care that I would need, but if I had to sit around and hope I didn't die in the 7 years it takes for a medical patent to expire, I'd be kindof upset about it.
Why doesn't the iPod publish audio specs? Because it under performs compared to every other player in the market.
Not trying to be difficult, but what does that mean? I mean, granted, I don't listen to music on great headphones or anything, but every CD player or mp3 player I've tried has sounded fine to me. And why would they need to release the specs? Can't people just test it themselves?
Look, whatever dude. Let me directly quote the entire post again:
The PS3 doesn't have motion-sensing technology. It has gyros that can sense the controller's tilt. No MEMS accelerometers, and no position sensitivity.
It's a cheap knockoff, and everybody knows it except idiot Sony fanboys.
He says that there is no motion-sensing and then states that the gyros can detect the tilt. He's clearly drawing a distinction between the two types of motion. Yes, you're right, the controller detects rotation, but a lot of the cool uses of these controllers comes from detecting linear accelearations and getting spatial information.
This argument is dumb. We're arguing about what an AC said. Good day to you, sir!
No, the GP said it did not detect motion if he was complaining about the lack of linear motion sensing, he would have said that it did not sense linear motion. Does rotational movement somehow not count as motion? Why are you reading things into the GP post that weren't actually written?
From the grandparent:
The PS3 doesn't have motion-sensing technology. It has gyros that can sense the controller's tilt. No MEMS accelerometers, and no position sensitivity.
When he was talking about the lack of MEMS accelerometers, he was complaining about the lack of linear motion sensing because MEMS accelerometers detect linear acceleration. The technology behind them is pretty neat, and the physics is completely unintuitive, but that's neither here nor there.
The PS3 can only detect rotation, while the Wii detects rotation, linear acceleration and can detect position using the sensor bar. That is the difference the (now) GGP was trying to make about how the PS3 controller isn't as neat as the Wii.
For the same reason that arms dealers sell weapons, spammers send spam or drug dealers sell drugs. It's morally reprehensible, but the money clouds that.
Now, I know someone already tried to write an anti-botnet botnet for code red, but couldn't someone start hijacking computers that would monitor honeypot spam addresses for spam, then by reading the headers, see what exploited machines were spewing spam, then hack into them, patching the security holes and shutting off the spam trojans?
Of course, with as much money as there is in hacking type stuff, I'd be afraid of the enemies I'd be making.
I'd argue that it's a lot different, actually. In fact, the only similarity is that the government makes you go somewhere you don't want to be for a predetermined amount of time.
Absolutely not. It's true for trademarks, but patents don't have the requirement that the holder defends it. That's why companies have been able to have 'submarine patents' where they patent something, wait untill its usage becomes widespread, then sues everyone for tons of money.
SF6 is a neat chemical and it's density displaces O2. At ORNL they use it within one of their accelerators to protect against arcing. Weird thing is, the accelerator is on top of the offices, so there are SF6 sensors everywhere. When you take a tour of it, they tell you, "If this alarm goes off, hold your breath and run"
If he feels a moral obligation to provide for the hungry to the point that he feels like other expenditures are wasteful, then he should be willing to practice what he preaches. Taking a stand on an issue and then saying, "Well, someone else should do it" is somewhat...it's early, I can't think of the word.
And besides, if this works as well as hoped, then SK will be able to reallocate some resources previously used on putting human beings on its border to other places.
The point was, "Well, we shouldn't do X because there is still Y" is unworkable. We should try to solve Y's problems, but in the meantime, developments like X provide a living for a lot of people who need careers and raise the standard of living for everyone.
So, you propose that instead of what we're doing now, we should've tried to cause the North Korean populace flee the country, then invaded NK?
I think what we're doing isn't the best solution possible, but what you're advocating is sheer lunacy. For no other reason than the fact that NK is capable of putting hundreds of thousands of artillery shells PER HOUR into Seoul. They would lose hundreds of thousands of people in a day, and the SK economy would be destroyed.
Fair enough, there's been more than enough misinformation about NN, but it doesn't change the reality of what ISPs and companies like google are arguing for.
That would be really ironic and funny if that was the argument against NN at all.
The argument about NN isn't about whether or not ISPs should be able to give certain type of traffic greater priority over the others (I.E. making VOIP take higher priority over HTTP)
The argument about NN is whether or not ISPs should be allowed to give certain organizations higher priority than others. What the submitter is talking about is prioritising HTTP over Bittorrent, which most wouldn't disagree about. What NN supporters are talking about is whether or not Comcast should be allowed to throttle back Vonage or Skype connections and give preference to their own VOIP service.
It's a small point, but significant, if you run it through your head.
Slashdot Mirror
From what I understand, the PS3 hypervisor actually blocks calls to the GPU, outside of framebuffer calls. Sony did this with the PS2 linux kit as well, and said it was to prevent piracy, and to keep people from just running free linux games on the console (because they sell the consoles at a loss, if a bunch of people buy them up and then play free games, it would be a money losing venture for sony)
That said, I think it's kinda dumb, especially since microsoft provides an extremely low cost way to develop Xbox360 games that use all the bells and whistles.
While it's true that internally x86 breaks CISC instructions down to RISC instructions, compilers still have to target the CISC architechture. Whether or not it's easier to do that or not is a matter of application.
Ask the GAIM developers how much fun they've had with the IM protocol that AOL was forced to open. "Oh, you want to use new features? yeah, we're not opening _that_ protocol"
Patents expire, but so do people.
People expiring is much worse. I'm fortunate enough to be blessed with the means to provide for (hypothetically) any medical care that I would need, but if I had to sit around and hope I didn't die in the 7 years it takes for a medical patent to expire, I'd be kindof upset about it.
I'm going to go ahead and refer you to the other guy that posted.
Have a pedantic day, good sir!
Why doesn't the iPod publish audio specs? Because it under performs compared to every other player in the market.
Not trying to be difficult, but what does that mean? I mean, granted, I don't listen to music on great headphones or anything, but every CD player or mp3 player I've tried has sounded fine to me. And why would they need to release the specs? Can't people just test it themselves?
Look, whatever dude. Let me directly quote the entire post again:
The PS3 doesn't have motion-sensing technology. It has gyros that can sense the controller's tilt. No MEMS accelerometers, and no position sensitivity.
It's a cheap knockoff, and everybody knows it except idiot Sony fanboys.
He says that there is no motion-sensing and then states that the gyros can detect the tilt. He's clearly drawing a distinction between the two types of motion. Yes, you're right, the controller detects rotation, but a lot of the cool uses of these controllers comes from detecting linear accelearations and getting spatial information.
This argument is dumb. We're arguing about what an AC said. Good day to you, sir!
No, the GP said it did not detect motion if he was complaining about the lack of linear motion sensing, he would have said that it did not sense linear motion. Does rotational movement somehow not count as motion? Why are you reading things into the GP post that weren't actually written? From the grandparent: The PS3 doesn't have motion-sensing technology. It has gyros that can sense the controller's tilt. No MEMS accelerometers, and no position sensitivity. When he was talking about the lack of MEMS accelerometers, he was complaining about the lack of linear motion sensing because MEMS accelerometers detect linear acceleration. The technology behind them is pretty neat, and the physics is completely unintuitive, but that's neither here nor there. The PS3 can only detect rotation, while the Wii detects rotation, linear acceleration and can detect position using the sensor bar. That is the difference the (now) GGP was trying to make about how the PS3 controller isn't as neat as the Wii.
For the same reason that arms dealers sell weapons, spammers send spam or drug dealers sell drugs. It's morally reprehensible, but the money clouds that.
But it can't detect linear motion, which is what GP was complaining about.
Now, I know someone already tried to write an anti-botnet botnet for code red, but couldn't someone start hijacking computers that would monitor honeypot spam addresses for spam, then by reading the headers, see what exploited machines were spewing spam, then hack into them, patching the security holes and shutting off the spam trojans?
Of course, with as much money as there is in hacking type stuff, I'd be afraid of the enemies I'd be making.
I'd argue that it's a lot different, actually. In fact, the only similarity is that the government makes you go somewhere you don't want to be for a predetermined amount of time.
Don't mix science and religion. It breaks it.
Absolutely not. It's true for trademarks, but patents don't have the requirement that the holder defends it. That's why companies have been able to have 'submarine patents' where they patent something, wait untill its usage becomes widespread, then sues everyone for tons of money.
SF6 is a neat chemical and it's density displaces O2. At ORNL they use it within one of their accelerators to protect against arcing. Weird thing is, the accelerator is on top of the offices, so there are SF6 sensors everywhere. When you take a tour of it, they tell you, "If this alarm goes off, hold your breath and run"
And?
If he feels a moral obligation to provide for the hungry to the point that he feels like other expenditures are wasteful, then he should be willing to practice what he preaches. Taking a stand on an issue and then saying, "Well, someone else should do it" is somewhat...it's early, I can't think of the word.
And besides, if this works as well as hoped, then SK will be able to reallocate some resources previously used on putting human beings on its border to other places.
The point was, "Well, we shouldn't do X because there is still Y" is unworkable. We should try to solve Y's problems, but in the meantime, developments like X provide a living for a lot of people who need careers and raise the standard of living for everyone.
I was more poking fun at the parent poster for making the same argument.
- fact that military-industrial complex can waste money on shit like this when there are people starving on the same planet
And you're wasting money on a computer + internet access while people, probably in your own city, are starving. What's the difference?
Here here. If I had points, I'd mod that up.
So, you propose that instead of what we're doing now, we should've tried to cause the North Korean populace flee the country, then invaded NK?
I think what we're doing isn't the best solution possible, but what you're advocating is sheer lunacy. For no other reason than the fact that NK is capable of putting hundreds of thousands of artillery shells PER HOUR into Seoul. They would lose hundreds of thousands of people in a day, and the SK economy would be destroyed.
You're right, iPod/iTunes have the ability to import/export lossless files (i.e. AAC->CD->MP3), but that's another drop in quality.
Besides, you paid for it, you should be able to play it on whatever device you choose.
Fair enough, there's been more than enough misinformation about NN, but it doesn't change the reality of what ISPs and companies like google are arguing for.
That would be really ironic and funny if that was the argument against NN at all.
The argument about NN isn't about whether or not ISPs should be able to give certain type of traffic greater priority over the others (I.E. making VOIP take higher priority over HTTP)
The argument about NN is whether or not ISPs should be allowed to give certain organizations higher priority than others. What the submitter is talking about is prioritising HTTP over Bittorrent, which most wouldn't disagree about. What NN supporters are talking about is whether or not Comcast should be allowed to throttle back Vonage or Skype connections and give preference to their own VOIP service.
It's a small point, but significant, if you run it through your head.
-cheers
gotcha. My sarcasm detector worked fine, it's directional detectors was goofed up.
Okay, I'm naive, but could you explain the sarcasm? Are you saying linux does that or OSX? I just don't get it...