2) How hard can it possibly be to generate a random number, even for a simple OS installed in a router?
Yes, it's incredibly difficult to generate random numbers. Isn't it impossible? Consider this. ALL events can theoretically be traced back to a specific cause. If you ask a human to give a random number between 1 and 10, the outcome is a result of many psychological factors that predisposed that person to respond with a certain number. Likewise, if you were to go back to the beginning of the universe, and move a few molecules, you'd change the outcome. Therefore, how can anything be truly random. We can have unexpected outcomes, but if you look at the big picture, you can trace results back to causes.
So, to put this on topic, in reference to your second point... it's difficult to generate random numbers - especially on computers.:-) However, we CAN generate psuedo-random numbers. *chuckle*
Has anybody ever really sat down and realized exactly how amazing KDE and GNOME are? Think about it. They work VERY well for their development lives so far. I think a lot of Linux criticism is generated by the fact that these two desktop environments do not work *exactly* like Windows does. After using KDE 2.1 for some time now, I've come to the conclusion that it's better... and yet, people complain.
RedHat have done an excellent job with Rh7.0 (except for the kernel upgrades.. those are hell). I've seen people who've never used Linux before install Rh7 like a breeze. And, they get right up to using it immediately - like they were mavens.
Granted, there's a lot of polishing to be done, but have you ever used, say, Windows95 without any enhancement? MS had a LOT of clean-up to do to make the interface perfect. Well, I think we have a faster running start.
So, editors who have nothing better to write about than to criticize Linux: you can just go ahead and writing about what you don't understand. We know what needs done and we're quickly getting there.
And of course, with the plethora of Linux distros, everyone is happy! My Debian distro gives me something of a challenge (not as easy to use as Rh), but mom can easily use Rh or Corel (which isn't dead yet:). You get the idea. I think pretty much everyone who isn't a Windows zealot is happy. We're on the right track.
My friend and I have spent weekends hacking away at this. Here's what we've come up with:
1. Get X 4.0.2 source or the snapshot. 4.0.2 has the rendering extention necessary for AA'ed and RGB decimated fonts. Also get all the other software - KDE 2.1, Qt 2.3.0, etc. You get the picture. Also, you MUST get Freetype 2.0 source!
2. Build Freetype2. There's a little hack you must do here on some systems for X to compile properly. In your/usr/local/include/freetype2 directory (which is the default location for Ft2's headers), symlink ft2build.h to freetype/config/ft2build.h. This many not be necessary on all systems... it was for me. Minor problem.
3. THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT (HARD) PART! X configures itself rather stupidly in most cases as far as we have seen. hosts.def overrides all these annoying settings and lets you tweak precisely for your needs... so, let's make sure it does it right. Create a new config/cf/hosts.def file in your XFree86 source directory (commonly/usr/src/xc) - note that commented out items are detected at compile time specifically for your platform:
#define DebuggableLibraries NO
#define SharedLibXdmGreet YES
#define LinkGLToUsrInclude YES
#define LinkGLToUsrLib YES
#define SharedLibFont YES
#define SharedLibXft YES
#define SharedLibXrender YES
#define HasZlib YES /*#define SharedLibGlu NO*/ /*#define NormalLibGlu NO*/ /*#define FSUseSyslog YES */ /*#define HasKatmaiSupport NO */
#define HasAgpGart YES
#define HasMMXSupport YES
#define Has3DNowSupport YES
#define BuildGLULibrary YES
#define BuildXF86DRM YES /* Tweak for your system or remove altogether.*/
#define DefaultGcc2i386Opt -O2 -fno-strength-reduce -mpentiumpro
#define JoystickSupport NO/* this appears to be broken */
#define XF86XAA YES
#define BuildFontServer YES
#define BuildFreeType YES
#define BuildXTrueType YES
#define BuildGlxExt YES /*#define BuildDebug NO */ /*#define BuildXF86DRI NO*/ /*#define BuildXF86DRIDriverSupport NO*/
# define BuildRender YES
# define BuildGLXLibrary YES
# define BuildXvLibrary YES
# define BuildXF86DGALibrary YES
# define BuildXF86DGA YES
# define BuildXvExt YES
# define UsbMouseSupport NO/* this seems to be broken too */ /* Use this if we're going to use external Freetype2 libs instead..*/
#define Freetype2Dir/usr/local
4. Build X using a make World and make install (you can make logs of course if you want). You may have some problems... they're usually pretty easy to iron out - and I won't go into how here. Make sure you back up your existing X11 binary tree.
5. Configure X... do the whole thing. Try starting X with the bare basics. (Duh-step.:-)
There are many technologies that you pay for that you didn't approve of or necessarily reap benefits from - at least not immediately. Eventually, these things get moved out into the open (like tracking code from GPS satelites) whether the inventors want it to or not. This particular piece of technology from the CIA is incredibly cool and very powerful. This alone will make people eager to get it...and it will be gotten. Then all sorts of interesting things will be done. Be patient. Information/technology wants to be free (and open of course). It'll find its way into the mainstream.:-)
During my average week at college, the majority of my time is spent working on my own projects. Maybe you can gain some insight from my own ideas on the matter.
When dealing with my own tasks, I know they'll be more valuable to me in the short and long terms than, say, the busy-work my professors give me. I learn better on my own and I feel that I can accomplish more on an independent basis than what others want me to do. So, I will often neglect studying to do my own thing - only to end up learning class material in the process since well, what I'm doing exceeds the status-quo of my average class mate.
You should look at it in terms of working harder on your personal endeavors and delaying your clients (assuming that's possible). If you do it for yourself first, you'll gain more out of it (rights included I suppose). *shrug* Just a few thoughts.
Well, clearly you don't have any practical purpose to invest in an Omnisky. Personally, I find mine to be one of the most useful hi-tech devices I've ever purchased - second of course, only to my PalmVx itself. So, if that's all you can think of to use it for, then don't spend your money on it. There's no sense of bitching at us about it. Sheesh. Just because you're too myopic to see a use for something doesn't mean everyone else is too.
Yes, I think we're all sick of seeing concept devices. Especially the ones we happen to be looking at right now. If you'll remember, in the big picture, computers were only a fantasy. At their dawn, all we had were "concept devices".
So, if you're sick of seeing concept devices, drop your interest in computers. Everything starts off as a concept. The whole point of conceptualizing is to see if the market is ready/wants whatever you've conceived.
Microsoft has certainly done a great deal of good. They've brought the computer industry far. They're charitable. They produce a number of excellent products and services (IE, research, etc.). They strive to make computers more accessible to the disabled (Linux UI's aren't quite usable by blind users yet where as MS have blind programmers on Windows).
However, there are two sides to ever coin. Behind the nice facade they put up, there is a ruthless company that's pretty much willing to engage in any nasty business practice they want to defeat competition. We can never forget that. And while it's true that we bash M$ religiously here, that kind of opposition is important. There always has to be a strong or at least existent counter-force to any entity (everyone needs a nemesis). What better and more willing people to do that than us?...or the government?
I'm getting to the point... almost there.
The "Slashdot Community" as we call ourselves, should stick to our ideals. If we identify something as being bad, be it MS, AOL, Starbucks, or any other big corporate entity with a monopoly on their market delivering shady products and engaging in shady practices... we should not hesitate to bash them - provided we've thought about why we're doing it.
The rest of the world will look at our words and make up their own minds. No lynchings will occurr - we're not going to accidently wrongly sour the minds of the whole population with our ideas if they're too rash. We have our point of view. Everyone else has theirs. Everyone acts for their own reasons.
Okay! I'm at the point!
If the government has alterior motives for their cause, but their ideals are parallel to ours, we should not hesitate to 'take advantage of it' so to speak. It may be a little disturbing that the government can get its way, but we need to look at their acts as a step in the right direction. I stated earlier that MS are a ruthless company. Being that this is the case - my belief as well as others' - then I think it's acceptable for the government to be equally ruthless in dealing with them. It's the Golden Rule. By principle, Microsoft has done Bad Things to other corporations - unfairly playing hardball, and stifling them. They had to know that sometime, a bigger fish was going to come along and do the same to them.
It's been argued that the government is stepping out of its bounds in decided what's right, regardless of the law. Well, Microsoft have broken the law - repeatedly. And we shouldn't feel sorry for them. They'll get whatever they deserve, and on top of that, I assure you they'll be alright. They have deep pockets and large spheres of influence. The buying and selling of politicians will enter. They'll convince others to aid them. You get the idea. All and all, they're just being tripped up a little.
Is Corel no longer involved in the.NET crap? Are they going to back to more intense Linux development? This'd probably be the best move for them since they're kind of orphaned now. Question is: can we trust them? *squints*
Just a few things here. The article was pulled. NVIDIA is becoming more and more childish with it's business practices. Is this a result of being so closely tied to Microsoft? Also, a few things I've read indicate that their latest consumer chipset is DX8 optimized - and doesn't produce equal performance results with OpenGL. Obviously, they're running on MacOS X - which means OpenGL... but are they currently working to appease the company currently lining their pockets? I've got a bad feeling about this. I really hope NVIDIA doesn't become a big evil corporate entity made arrogant and stupid by its massive success.
Believed in a creator, but he did not believe in a personal one. This then defends your idea of:
God --> DNA --> bacteria --> fish --> mammals --> Human
But is this statement made in defense of religion and opposition to science? You'll notice that this recent discovery says nothing about religion. It tells us that evolution is fact, not theory. I don't know why you're getting upset.:-)
Not that I am one to deny science. I certainly have a great deal of trust in the scientific process and those that use it to bring about discovery. Science makes humans powerful. Science makes our lives better. Science enlightens us.
This is, however, one of the many topics that researchers have simply been too eager to come to a conclusion on. (Especially on the principle that science is much like a religion, and many religions innately work to disprove other religions.) They may be absolutely right, and I think they are. But, one thing we've learned in the history of science is that there is always another way of looking at problems or even solutions. I'm not discounting that evidence of evolution lies in our genes. But this sentence: "There is, as the scientists who cracked the genome all agreed, no other possible explanation." is vaguely disturbing. There *must* be conflict and debate amongst scientists for the correct ideas to be hammered out.
Discovery is not a group of people sitting around, patting eachother on the backs, congratulating one another on being right. Of course then again, I'm not a molecular biologist. I have not read the hard facts on this conclusion. Maybe it's so blatantly obvious that this post is just plain stupid.:-)
Sticking to old technologies is silly. There's nothing different from staying with an old browser than with staying with an old 486. Sure, both can still get some use out of them, but what's the point? Especially with software - the upgrade is painless! It's free! Come on!
Anybody who refuses to upgrade a browser should be just as resilient to, say, kernel upgrades. It's just plain stupid. USE MODERN VERSIONS.
Does Nike have the legal rights to put the word "Linux" on the shoes as the first poster demonstrates? What if I want shoes with the words "Slashdot" on them? Maybe we can get back at Nike by requesting shoes with "Slashdot" on them and have AndOver stick a lawsuit on them.:-)
As for the 'sweatshop' issue, would they reject a request to put the URL to the story mentioned in this article? What if I spelled 'sweatshop' in another language?
'weatshopsay'
Btw, did Cowboy Neal give Nike permission to use his name on the shoes?
Wow... the possibilities for pissing people off are practically endless! I've got to order my pair of/. (or Cowboy Neal) sneakers today!
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it's incredibly difficult to generate random numbers. Isn't it impossible? Consider this. ALL events can theoretically be traced back to a specific cause. If you ask a human to give a random number between 1 and 10, the outcome is a result of many psychological factors that predisposed that person to respond with a certain number. Likewise, if you were to go back to the beginning of the universe, and move a few molecules, you'd change the outcome. Therefore, how can anything be truly random. We can have unexpected outcomes, but if you look at the big picture, you can trace results back to causes.
So, to put this on topic, in reference to your second point... it's difficult to generate random numbers - especially on computers. :-) However, we CAN generate psuedo-random numbers. *chuckle*
One more thing. You must add the line to the [KDE] section of your ~/.kde/share/config/global...
AntiAliasing=true
RedHat have done an excellent job with Rh7.0 (except for the kernel upgrades.. those are hell). I've seen people who've never used Linux before install Rh7 like a breeze. And, they get right up to using it immediately - like they were mavens.
Granted, there's a lot of polishing to be done, but have you ever used, say, Windows95 without any enhancement? MS had a LOT of clean-up to do to make the interface perfect. Well, I think we have a faster running start.
So, editors who have nothing better to write about than to criticize Linux: you can just go ahead and writing about what you don't understand. We know what needs done and we're quickly getting there.
And of course, with the plethora of Linux distros, everyone is happy! My Debian distro gives me something of a challenge (not as easy to use as Rh), but mom can easily use Rh or Corel (which isn't dead yet :). You get the idea. I think pretty much everyone who isn't a Windows zealot is happy. We're on the right track.
Believe me, it makes a big difference and it gives you a lot of time that you can spend working on something other than you PC. :-)
1. Get X 4.0.2 source or the snapshot. 4.0.2 has the rendering extention necessary for AA'ed and RGB decimated fonts. Also get all the other software - KDE 2.1, Qt 2.3.0, etc. You get the picture. Also, you MUST get Freetype 2.0 source!
2. Build Freetype2. There's a little hack you must do here on some systems for X to compile properly. In your /usr/local/include/freetype2 directory (which is the default location for Ft2's headers), symlink ft2build.h to freetype/config/ft2build.h. This many not be necessary on all systems... it was for me. Minor problem.
3. THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT (HARD) PART! X configures itself rather stupidly in most cases as far as we have seen. hosts.def overrides all these annoying settings and lets you tweak precisely for your needs... so, let's make sure it does it right. Create a new config/cf/hosts.def file in your XFree86 source directory (commonly /usr/src/xc) - note that commented out items are detected at compile time specifically for your platform:
#define DebuggableLibraries NO
/*#define SharedLibGlu NO*/
/*#define NormalLibGlu NO*/
/*#define FSUseSyslog YES */
/*#define HasKatmaiSupport NO */
/* Tweak for your system or remove altogether.*/ /* this appears to be broken */
/*#define BuildDebug NO */
/*#define BuildXF86DRI NO*/
/*#define BuildXF86DRIDriverSupport NO*/ /* this seems to be broken too */
/* Use this if we're going to use external Freetype2 libs instead..*/ /usr/local
#define SharedLibXdmGreet YES
#define LinkGLToUsrInclude YES
#define LinkGLToUsrLib YES
#define SharedLibFont YES
#define SharedLibXft YES
#define SharedLibXrender YES
#define HasZlib YES
#define HasAgpGart YES
#define HasMMXSupport YES
#define Has3DNowSupport YES
#define BuildGLULibrary YES
#define BuildXF86DRM YES
#define DefaultGcc2i386Opt -O2 -fno-strength-reduce -mpentiumpro
#define JoystickSupport NO
#define XF86XAA YES
#define BuildFontServer YES
#define BuildFreeType YES
#define BuildXTrueType YES
#define BuildGlxExt YES
# define BuildRender YES
# define BuildGLXLibrary YES
# define BuildXvLibrary YES
# define BuildXF86DGALibrary YES
# define BuildXF86DGA YES
# define BuildXvExt YES
# define UsbMouseSupport NO
#define Freetype2Dir
4. Build X using a make World and make install (you can make logs of course if you want). You may have some problems... they're usually pretty easy to iron out - and I won't go into how here. Make sure you back up your existing X11 binary tree.
5. Configure X... do the whole thing. Try starting X with the bare basics. (Duh-step. :-)
6. If X is working, download this file...
...and extract it in /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts
http://keithp.com/~keithp/fonts/truetype.tar.gz
7. Download this file...
...edit it and copy it to /usr/X11R6/lib/X11
http://keithp.com/~keithp/fonts/XftConfig
8. Start X again... this time, try to open an Xterm with the command:
xterm -fa courier
If the font is AA'ed... then BINGO! It works!
9. If you succeeded at 8, build Qt 2.3.0 and KDE 2.1 as you normally would. Read the docs. And there you go! Have fun! AA'ed fonts. :-)
You'll notice that it's also under the LGPL. Sheesh.
There are many technologies that you pay for that you didn't approve of or necessarily reap benefits from - at least not immediately. Eventually, these things get moved out into the open (like tracking code from GPS satelites) whether the inventors want it to or not. This particular piece of technology from the CIA is incredibly cool and very powerful. This alone will make people eager to get it...and it will be gotten. Then all sorts of interesting things will be done. Be patient. Information/technology wants to be free (and open of course). It'll find its way into the mainstream. :-)
When dealing with my own tasks, I know they'll be more valuable to me in the short and long terms than, say, the busy-work my professors give me. I learn better on my own and I feel that I can accomplish more on an independent basis than what others want me to do. So, I will often neglect studying to do my own thing - only to end up learning class material in the process since well, what I'm doing exceeds the status-quo of my average class mate.
You should look at it in terms of working harder on your personal endeavors and delaying your clients (assuming that's possible). If you do it for yourself first, you'll gain more out of it (rights included I suppose). *shrug* Just a few thoughts.
Well, clearly you don't have any practical purpose to invest in an Omnisky. Personally, I find mine to be one of the most useful hi-tech devices I've ever purchased - second of course, only to my PalmVx itself. So, if that's all you can think of to use it for, then don't spend your money on it. There's no sense of bitching at us about it. Sheesh. Just because you're too myopic to see a use for something doesn't mean everyone else is too.
So, if you're sick of seeing concept devices, drop your interest in computers. Everything starts off as a concept. The whole point of conceptualizing is to see if the market is ready/wants whatever you've conceived.
Duh.
You sounded like Antiporn there. My God. I was worried that you were serious. :-)
If we take all the proceeds from the "ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US" merchandise, we could finance NASA enough to get a human on Pluto.
;-)
Sorry Ed.
However, there are two sides to ever coin. Behind the nice facade they put up, there is a ruthless company that's pretty much willing to engage in any nasty business practice they want to defeat competition. We can never forget that. And while it's true that we bash M$ religiously here, that kind of opposition is important. There always has to be a strong or at least existent counter-force to any entity (everyone needs a nemesis). What better and more willing people to do that than us? ...or the government?
I'm getting to the point... almost there.
The "Slashdot Community" as we call ourselves, should stick to our ideals. If we identify something as being bad, be it MS, AOL, Starbucks, or any other big corporate entity with a monopoly on their market delivering shady products and engaging in shady practices... we should not hesitate to bash them - provided we've thought about why we're doing it.
The rest of the world will look at our words and make up their own minds. No lynchings will occurr - we're not going to accidently wrongly sour the minds of the whole population with our ideas if they're too rash. We have our point of view. Everyone else has theirs. Everyone acts for their own reasons.
Okay! I'm at the point!
If the government has alterior motives for their cause, but their ideals are parallel to ours, we should not hesitate to 'take advantage of it' so to speak. It may be a little disturbing that the government can get its way, but we need to look at their acts as a step in the right direction. I stated earlier that MS are a ruthless company. Being that this is the case - my belief as well as others' - then I think it's acceptable for the government to be equally ruthless in dealing with them. It's the Golden Rule. By principle, Microsoft has done Bad Things to other corporations - unfairly playing hardball, and stifling them. They had to know that sometime, a bigger fish was going to come along and do the same to them.
It's been argued that the government is stepping out of its bounds in decided what's right, regardless of the law. Well, Microsoft have broken the law - repeatedly. And we shouldn't feel sorry for them. They'll get whatever they deserve, and on top of that, I assure you they'll be alright. They have deep pockets and large spheres of influence. The buying and selling of politicians will enter. They'll convince others to aid them. You get the idea. All and all, they're just being tripped up a little.
You never know. We could have a couple Tyler Durdens running around, each of which has decided that we need to STOP, RESET, and try again.
Is Corel no longer involved in the .NET crap? Are they going to back to more intense Linux development? This'd probably be the best move for them since they're kind of orphaned now. Question is: can we trust them? *squints*
Just a few things here. The article was pulled. NVIDIA is becoming more and more childish with it's business practices. Is this a result of being so closely tied to Microsoft? Also, a few things I've read indicate that their latest consumer chipset is DX8 optimized - and doesn't produce equal performance results with OpenGL. Obviously, they're running on MacOS X - which means OpenGL... but are they currently working to appease the company currently lining their pockets? I've got a bad feeling about this. I really hope NVIDIA doesn't become a big evil corporate entity made arrogant and stupid by its massive success.
God --> DNA --> bacteria --> fish --> mammals --> Human
But is this statement made in defense of religion and opposition to science? You'll notice that this recent discovery says nothing about religion. It tells us that evolution is fact, not theory. I don't know why you're getting upset. :-)
This is, however, one of the many topics that researchers have simply been too eager to come to a conclusion on. (Especially on the principle that science is much like a religion, and many religions innately work to disprove other religions.) They may be absolutely right, and I think they are. But, one thing we've learned in the history of science is that there is always another way of looking at problems or even solutions. I'm not discounting that evidence of evolution lies in our genes. But this sentence: "There is, as the scientists who cracked the genome all agreed, no other possible explanation." is vaguely disturbing. There *must* be conflict and debate amongst scientists for the correct ideas to be hammered out.
Discovery is not a group of people sitting around, patting eachother on the backs, congratulating one another on being right. Of course then again, I'm not a molecular biologist. I have not read the hard facts on this conclusion. Maybe it's so blatantly obvious that this post is just plain stupid. :-)
...but thank my friend Nuke Skyjumper for the site. Have you read the technical details? It's quite a unique set up, although largely hacky. :)
(or telnet to lord.nuklear.org port 31337)
You know you want to.
Will it be properly translated? For great justice?
Anybody who refuses to upgrade a browser should be just as resilient to, say, kernel upgrades. It's just plain stupid. USE MODERN VERSIONS.
As for the 'sweatshop' issue, would they reject a request to put the URL to the story mentioned in this article? What if I spelled 'sweatshop' in another language?
'weatshopsay'
Btw, did Cowboy Neal give Nike permission to use his name on the shoes?
Wow... the possibilities for pissing people off are practically endless! I've got to order my pair of /. (or Cowboy Neal) sneakers today!
Implies that they haven't yet done so. (Obviously) I love it.
Go ahead. Strike me down all you wish. I have more karma than you could possibly ever imagine.