...of vibrating a small sliver of sand 10 billion times per second? Would this thing be throwing off particles like mad? Would the half-life of the processor be 30 seconds?
What's funny is when I got my 800MHz Athlon, I committed myself to keeping the case cover on all the time for fear of rads.:-) One of my friends and I discussed this, but neither of us know much about atomic physics.
Will processors running at that speed require shielding?
Are the Russians going to plan the construction of a station to replace MIR? I think splashing down MIR without a replacement in progress/inorbit is a serious injury to the collective progress of space exploration for the human species in general.
The Internet is massive. I covers the globe. It is owned largely by private institutions and other counrtries altogether.
Considering also the incredibly vast variety of resources and information available on the Net, how could it ever be possible for the government to achieve any sort of wide-scale regulation? Intelligent software controlling the Net doesn't seem like a viable solution - it couldn't possibly cover all cases. You'd need trained humans at the helm. I don't imagine the government will sit agents on every router, watching the transactions. *chuckle*
Let's look at other forms of Internet regulation that have been enactled. No agency has yet to successfully stop the trade of pirated software, movies, and MP3's. The MPAA is no where NEAR stopping the proliferation of DeCSS. Just about all web blocking software can still be circumvented by merely typing in the decimal value of IP address octets. They keep failing.
It may be very imprudent of me to brush this off, but Internet regulation *still* seems pretty far-fetched.
I read the FAQ, but I don't quite see what the point was. First of all, 'Helix Code' was a much cooler name. Second of all, what have they done lately that's ground shaking? Not a whole lot. I think this name change is simply to draw attention to themselves (and away from KDE?). This is a poor way to clear out the cobwebs and it mostly adds confusion.
...to implode Jupiter into a sun. During the process, millions of metric tons of C60 will be thrown throughout our galaxy, which we can then collect to use for building processors.
Then those silly diamonds won't cost so much! Muwahahahah...
This moves us closer to the possibility of never having to leave our computer desks. Does anyone foresee a model that provides food intake and handles human waste products?
So now, we have virtual machines for pretty much all mainstream consumer platforms on Linux.
So, I say again, "Bear in mind that other than pretty windows with shadows, fading menus, and stretchy...uhm, things... what can MacOS X do that Linux can't?"
MacOS X looks like it's a real winner. The high quality, well polished system is excellent for those of us who love *nix but also want to have more fun with their system than the average Sid.
But, there's more to this than the quality and vender of the OS. You can't forget those who want to run Linux on their boxen in large part because it is open source and they want to support free software. Although Darwin is open, many parts (the most obvious being Quartz) of OS X are not free and are very proprietary. You can replace it (Quartz) with X, but then what would be the point of running OS X (other than to say you run BSD instead of Linux)? It's a highly commercial operating system and in a few ways, defeats a number of interests of the free software proponent.
Bear in mind that other than pretty windows with shadows, fading menus, and stretchy...uhm, things... what can MacOS X do that Linux can't? (And if you're looking for eye candy, count on the fact that X and wm hackers are going to get jealous of Quartz real quick and build something similar. Hell, the hooks for it are already in Qt.)
Consider this comparison: would a Linux user switch to Xenix (the Unix varient Microsoft created a while back) if it were suddenly updated and released?
It's incredible how humble and easy-going Linus is. How many of us would be able to maintain Linus' attitude while receiving deep admiration and respect of perhaps hundreds of thousands of people? The man doesn't shrug his shoulders, straighten his collar, and fix his tie when the reporters come along. He smacks them around, and doesn't worry about his image. Tells it how it is - especially when it comes to his project. It's true... 2.4.x doesn't revolutionize the industry like the media junkies want him to say. He keeps his feet on the ground, reminding us that while it's a big improvement, it's just a step.
*shrug* Call me weird, but I'm just impressed overall. Linus Torvalds is a genuine human being and his qualities haven't diminished.
Those are AA'ed fonts I see...
on
GTK+ without X!
·
· Score: 1
How on earth is it that they've managed to get TT fonts (with AA no less) working with this when my friend and I spent the last two days hacking around with X, trying to do the same thing?
I'm wondering if the artists had the technology to increase the dimentions of this object beyond three. The dimentions of this thing should actually be:
I know it sounds kind of cheesy, but I was actually putting away funds to buy a G4 Mac this summer so I could play with MacOS X. I thought Apple was actually becoming a serious innovator. I thought Apple placed technology advancement as the #1 priority item on their list. I really thought that they were trying to change from their closed, dead-end ways.
But as we clearly see, any company that sues a non-profit organization over a technology related patent issue doesn't have technology as their top priority. The priorities in this case simply go from money to just being assholes.
In closing, I want to say "Great going, Mr. Jobs". I'd also like to encourage everyone else who was considering becoming an Apple customer in the near future to reconsider. FreeType is one of the more important projects in the Linux community right now (I've been pulling my hair out over X fonts for years). How could any of us possibly support a company like Apple after they do something like this?
There has to be a practical reason...
on
Going Up?
·
· Score: 3
Sure, Arthur Clarke's vision of an artificial ring around the earth is a great idea, but it's a bit far off.
And this wouldn't really be a step in the right direction. Sure, research into new materials/engineering techniques would be fruitful, but what is this really?
An elevator to nowhere. Imagine how silly it'd look.:-)
...but you've missed the point of XML (yes, it IS a standard and yes, it IS a format - I think you'll find that all tools for working with XML are very consistent) and an important mention in my post.
Certainly, you have to assign meaning to tags in order for data to be formatted correctly. The whole point of XML is that data carry traits and structure (which of course, can be inherited).
This is where the concept of a template would come in. I had mentioned this but you must have looked over it.
You have a set of rules defined that determine what certain tags do. Very similar to HTML now (table, p, b, div, etc. are all assigned functionality). With XML, these templates can even be a part of the document with tags that flag them as such. The trick is to put as little of this in the hands of the word processor itself.
I never said "XML! XML!" all by itself. XML is fairly abstract. Obviously we need everything that works along side of it and I'm talking about all supporting technologies if I'm talking about XML. If you read the article again, you'll notice the question was about document formats, not whether or not we'll need templates to go along with our XML formatted data.
...but I think XML is the clear answer here. XML is already very mature, can be used in a number of situations, and can incorporate more than just text.
You can even embed binary data in an XML document (with a tiny bit of creativity) for all those people who like to populate their files with custom fonts, clipart, graphs, etc. (This is accomplished through something, say... <BINARY CLIPART><DATA>[image data]</DATA></BINARY CLIPART>. You get the idea.)
How about special configuration parameters? You could incorporate tags that would handle the way a document is viewed by different people ("are you a techie, marketing drone, webbie, etc" -> certain data becomes visible).
The biggest advantages here are obviously the standards provided by XML (thank you W3C). It's uses are broad. It's got high quality interpreters on ALL platforms (especially JAXP for Java - it's a joy to work with *g*).
The only standards we'd really have to focus on would be which tags would be considered "key" tags.
What else do you need? Doesn't OpenOffice already use XML as it's standard document type?
Sure I could be wrong on this, so don't berate me too much. I've just had a lot of positive experience working with XML for sooo many different applications.
...of why 3dfx did not survive. Look at this. Is it true innovation? Does it serve to improve gameplay without sacrificing other important performance aspects?
The "motion blur" in these scenes is not actually motion blur... it's the same thing as pixel memory (remember those old phosphorous screens and my favorite xscreensaver). It buffers the previous frame then additively disolves it overtop of the new frame. (You can't even call it bluring.) It's poor and if you'll notice, is it really worth losing 40-50 frames/sec?
It's technology hype. Sure, it's kind of neato, but it's used where it doesn't apply (notice the walls get blurred? wtf?) and it only serves to muddy up the images. You wouldn't even *need* a Voodoo chipset to do this if you were willing to sacrifice enough video memory. Think about it. Gimp does this same effect real time too.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
What's funny is when I got my 800MHz Athlon, I committed myself to keeping the case cover on all the time for fear of rads. :-) One of my friends and I discussed this, but neither of us know much about atomic physics.
Will processors running at that speed require shielding?
Are the Russians going to plan the construction of a station to replace MIR? I think splashing down MIR without a replacement in progress/inorbit is a serious injury to the collective progress of space exploration for the human species in general.
Considering also the incredibly vast variety of resources and information available on the Net, how could it ever be possible for the government to achieve any sort of wide-scale regulation? Intelligent software controlling the Net doesn't seem like a viable solution - it couldn't possibly cover all cases. You'd need trained humans at the helm. I don't imagine the government will sit agents on every router, watching the transactions. *chuckle*
Let's look at other forms of Internet regulation that have been enactled. No agency has yet to successfully stop the trade of pirated software, movies, and MP3's. The MPAA is no where NEAR stopping the proliferation of DeCSS. Just about all web blocking software can still be circumvented by merely typing in the decimal value of IP address octets. They keep failing.
It may be very imprudent of me to brush this off, but Internet regulation *still* seems pretty far-fetched.
From the FAQ...
Has anything else changed?
No
Then those silly diamonds won't cost so much! Muwahahahah...
This moves us closer to the possibility of never having to leave our computer desks. Does anyone foresee a model that provides food intake and handles human waste products?
So now, we have virtual machines for pretty much all mainstream consumer platforms on Linux.
So, I say again, "Bear in mind that other than pretty windows with shadows, fading menus, and stretchy...uhm, things... what can MacOS X do that Linux can't?"
But, there's more to this than the quality and vender of the OS. You can't forget those who want to run Linux on their boxen in large part because it is open source and they want to support free software. Although Darwin is open, many parts (the most obvious being Quartz) of OS X are not free and are very proprietary. You can replace it (Quartz) with X, but then what would be the point of running OS X (other than to say you run BSD instead of Linux)? It's a highly commercial operating system and in a few ways, defeats a number of interests of the free software proponent.
Bear in mind that other than pretty windows with shadows, fading menus, and stretchy...uhm, things... what can MacOS X do that Linux can't? (And if you're looking for eye candy, count on the fact that X and wm hackers are going to get jealous of Quartz real quick and build something similar. Hell, the hooks for it are already in Qt.)
Consider this comparison: would a Linux user switch to Xenix (the Unix varient Microsoft created a while back) if it were suddenly updated and released?
This really, really needs to stop. Alright?
*shrug* Call me weird, but I'm just impressed overall. Linus Torvalds is a genuine human being and his qualities haven't diminished.
How on earth is it that they've managed to get TT fonts (with AA no less) working with this when my friend and I spent the last two days hacking around with X, trying to do the same thing?
As if you've never spelled dimension with a 't' before. :-P
1 : 2^2 : 3^3 : ... : (n-2)^2 : (n-1)^2 : n^2
But as we clearly see, any company that sues a non-profit organization over a technology related patent issue doesn't have technology as their top priority. The priorities in this case simply go from money to just being assholes.
In closing, I want to say "Great going, Mr. Jobs". I'd also like to encourage everyone else who was considering becoming an Apple customer in the near future to reconsider. FreeType is one of the more important projects in the Linux community right now (I've been pulling my hair out over X fonts for years). How could any of us possibly support a company like Apple after they do something like this?
Net Profits.....................: $0.00
Net Expenses....................: $0.00
Net Products & Services Rendered: $5,000,000,000.00
I think so, definitely. I'm holding the DVD for it right now and I am drooling; about to load up XINE. :-)
3001: A Final Odyssey
And this wouldn't really be a step in the right direction. Sure, research into new materials/engineering techniques would be fruitful, but what is this really?
An elevator to nowhere. Imagine how silly it'd look. :-)
Certainly, you have to assign meaning to tags in order for data to be formatted correctly. The whole point of XML is that data carry traits and structure (which of course, can be inherited).
This is where the concept of a template would come in. I had mentioned this but you must have looked over it.
You have a set of rules defined that determine what certain tags do. Very similar to HTML now (table, p, b, div, etc. are all assigned functionality). With XML, these templates can even be a part of the document with tags that flag them as such. The trick is to put as little of this in the hands of the word processor itself.
I never said "XML! XML!" all by itself. XML is fairly abstract. Obviously we need everything that works along side of it and I'm talking about all supporting technologies if I'm talking about XML. If you read the article again, you'll notice the question was about document formats, not whether or not we'll need templates to go along with our XML formatted data.
...but I think XML is the clear answer here. XML is already very mature, can be used in a number of situations, and can incorporate more than just text.
You can even embed binary data in an XML document (with a tiny bit of creativity) for all those people who like to populate their files with custom fonts, clipart, graphs, etc. (This is accomplished through something, say... <BINARY CLIPART><DATA>[image data]</DATA></BINARY CLIPART>. You get the idea.)
How about special configuration parameters? You could incorporate tags that would handle the way a document is viewed by different people ("are you a techie, marketing drone, webbie, etc" -> certain data becomes visible).
The biggest advantages here are obviously the standards provided by XML (thank you W3C). It's uses are broad. It's got high quality interpreters on ALL platforms (especially JAXP for Java - it's a joy to work with *g*).
The only standards we'd really have to focus on would be which tags would be considered "key" tags.
What else do you need? Doesn't OpenOffice already use XML as it's standard document type?
Sure I could be wrong on this, so don't berate me too much. I've just had a lot of positive experience working with XML for sooo many different applications.
The "motion blur" in these scenes is not actually motion blur... it's the same thing as pixel memory (remember those old phosphorous screens and my favorite xscreensaver). It buffers the previous frame then additively disolves it overtop of the new frame. (You can't even call it bluring.) It's poor and if you'll notice, is it really worth losing 40-50 frames/sec?
It's technology hype. Sure, it's kind of neato, but it's used where it doesn't apply (notice the walls get blurred? wtf?) and it only serves to muddy up the images. You wouldn't even *need* a Voodoo chipset to do this if you were willing to sacrifice enough video memory. Think about it. Gimp does this same effect real time too. :-)
NVIDIA's approach, is however, a bit more in the right direction. It uses a real blur, and maintains frame rate. I highly suggest that you check out http://www.nvidia.com/Marketing/Developer/DevRel.n sf/pages/64A26BA3A82A992188256993007AC623 if you want the real deal.
What more must we suffer from them?
It's nVidia. Quit shouting it please. :-)
Unix, I think it is...
Hey look! 2.2.18 is out! Here's the full kernel source! Copy and paste it from your web browser! Oh yeah, and I got first post.
That's lameness.