Every damn piece of wackyness is turned off by default in this kernel, just the way I like it. About time things stoped getting defaulted on just cause they were some developers baby.
On a lighter note, I went and bought the "Linux Core Kernel Comentary." I think this makes me a slashwhore, for running out to by it right after reading the review.
But it means that I will hopefully be adding to the kernel by the fall. Will you?
"And so it came that one day I asked my Master, and how shall I design the user interface, shall I make it objects? shall I make it text? Shall there be menus or shall there be keystrokes, or shall I use voice?
And he raised an eyebrow, and then snapped a finger, and then wiggled his fingers, and then waved his hands, and only after all this di he speak, and I was enlightened." - From The Tao of UI
It is so very important to remeber that the phrase "User Friendly" does Not mean "Instant Usability", or "Simple Commands". When designing UI, one must take into account the number of core commands that must be represented, and the speed, not complexitiy, with which the truly core commands can be executed. I do NOT want a UI that makes me speak ever time a basic command is used, I would have a sore throat before lunch time. So make the core fast to execute, a key-combo perhaps, make the next level out a command of the form of a menu or typed command, and use things like voice to call up third teir commands, which you use infrequently, but want to execute quickly.
Something I have spent a good deal of time (but not much code 'cause, well, um, I'm Lazy?) thinking about is the idea of a distributed archive transfer protocol.
The way I see it, you would have some program, say 'datp', which would connect to a datp server, and make a file request. the server would return a list of secondary servers which contained the file requested, and the datp client would poll some of these servers, initializing a conection to the fastest of them, and concurently downloading digests of the file (the first X megs from server A, the second X megs from server B, etc.) and reasembling them localy. Add some check suming or hashing, and you could just let anyone that wanted to hook into the archive and provide you with mirrors, all nice and secure.
The concurent aproach sounds weird, but it is really the Right Thing in terms of arbitrary network topography.
Anyway, maybee some day I'll write something like this, or maybee I won't. Why Don't you, and make me happy?
I have to put this in, cause I ain't no troll. I sent a letter (the letter) to Rob, and he fixxed the article, and that's how it should be. And then some boob comes along that didn't pay attentiion to the first posting of the Article (which referred to "crackers" as "hackers") and marked me as a Troll.
Why not use the code to write a GPL'd sound server, and have your game link up with the server? In fact, this is probably the best design anyway, as the game can take the server down and reinitialize it without affecting game state (if you changed your sound settings, for instance).
I don't understand everyones love for turning really complex things into libraries, but dread of making them deamons running in their own thread, where they belong. It is usually simpler to do it right.
This is probably a redundant post, but I have to put it up.
Shame, Shame on Cliff for letting this through, shame, shame on the AC for posting this to slashdot.
It is "Cracker" not "Hacker" in this context, and for this nonsense to show up on slashdot, I suggest we do what we have been told to do over the years, send esr's letter available form here to slashdot.
We had "HEAVY" lift capacity decades ago, not in chemical but in nuclear rockects. Capacity which never got past early tests (despite the simplicity and robustness of the drives) because of the Neuclear Test Ban Treaty that Kennedy signed. (They Qualified)
With those babys, we could have gone to Mars in the '80s, but you'd have a hard time even lifting one, let alone launching one, in the current political climate.
The treaty also stopped Project Orion, which was REALLY cool, but probably impractical for lift/landing, though it'd be great for interplanetary thrust.
not who gets the remote control, but who gets the rocket launcher.
Seriously, though, this is right on the line that some people claim as 'Internet Addiction' while others claim it as a valid new lifestyle. I wonder if playing on someone else's team is grounds for an eDivorce?
It doesn't matter if the correlation that Katz 'sees' was actualy there to see, for we the readers, or for Katz the 'author' to use the term in a loose sense.
Because we just read it, and since most of us hadn't ever tried to classifiy these things, his classification will stick to us, and we as users, and Katz as an author will begin to deal with the net conceptual as though these classifications held.
Which will enforce them.
So by writing this, Katz might have just planted a virulent meme, if it sticks.
On a lighter note: Have any of you seen the window$ based virtual pet games 'Catz' and 'Dogz'? I if 'Katz' is just a test market case for a virtual pundit game.
>> Long term, I see 'code morphing' as a basic part of software development, >> but it would be insane for Transmeta to dump that much cash into a >> development project and then just 'give' it to Intel. > >Isn't this the founding theory behind Open Source? Write software and release it without any cost to the consumer in the hope that they will >A) Use it >B) Take the source and improve upon it > >The amount of time and development that goes into some open source projects has been staggering. It has been proved that a company can survive, not off of the revenues of its software sales, but off of other services such as support or advertising.
The founding theory behind 'Open Source' development is NOT commercial at all, and I can't stand the idea that it might be. The idea is: A) I want your code so I can play with it. B) You give it to me because you EXPECT to get something out of it, not because "Code should be free", though that might be what you expect out of it.
In this case the only people who can 'Play' with it are (currently) Chip makers. Who are in direct competition with Transmeta.
Or, more to the point, Open Source assumes their are no 'Consumers' as such, but merely other users. Transmeta's product IS a product, the software infrastructure does NOT currently include this sort of thing, and so Transmeta selling 'suport' to 'users' who would all be competing chimp makers is silly. Admit it.
I support 'Open Source' software because where it works, it works beautifuly. But it should not be a religion, thats just stupid.
Yeah, He's a fool, we know that, but the solid argument against his craziness is:
1) Open Source development is cool (read: cost effective and resource efficient) when it allows a previously existing pool of inhouse support staff accross industry to become the primary development source for a peice of software, breaking the cost up to tinny bits everyone can swallow.
2) Chip design is NOT such scenario, their are no developers which could aid Transmetta in this field that do not work for their direct competetors.
Long term, I see 'code morphing' as becoming a basic part of software development, but it would be insane for Transmeta to dump that much cash into a development project and then just 'give' it to Intel.
The important thing is that they have proved this software 'CAN' exist, and work well. So lets get the CS theorists to figure out the general case, and then you can have your open source code morphing.
Okay, this is a cool concept and all, but I bet most of ya'll dont realize quite HOW cool.
You see, we have in cognitive science the idea of 'pigeonholeing'; that if I build houses all day, I see everything in terms of building houses (which is not entirely true, when was the last time you used duct tape on a duct).
So if this application was thought up by MOLECULAR BIOLOGISTS AND CHEMISTS, what happens when some good hardcore Computer Scientists and Hackers get their minds into the functions of the system?
I think the technology is much further in capability along than we realize, but we dont fully understand how to apply it, so we are maybe not as impressed as we should be.
A Wrinkle in Time, Starman Jones, Farmer in the Sky, and of course The Time Machine. Start in the past, work to the present. If you do it the other way around the classics seem cliched.
Since everyone else is making them, here are mine:
1: Linux will be everywhere, period. 3rd world countrys will pick it up and run with it, and many embeded devices will use it and all the development will drive it like a rocket.
2: Microsoft won't see it comming in time, but will eventualy release office for linux, because they like being rich more than they like being in charge.
3: Steve Jobs will do something insane with apple, which will destroy their current market share, and then blam it on his underlings.
4: Transmeta will come out, Qualcom stock will plumet, and I wont be able to afford their devices.
5: Corel will give up on their linux distro, and just sell their damn software optimized for Red hat.
6: People who stayed home out of fear on new years will slowly convince themselves that Us academics were right about the real start of the new decade/century/newyear and REALLY party next new years.
Java promised us a compile once, run anywhere solution, and for a few years, it looked like we would get it.
Well, we didn't; and we aren't going to out of java, not for a long time.
I think its time that we consider abandoning java, and starting up a new program. The real wonder of Java is, and should have remained, its virtual machine, and if Sun had developed a robust VM, and kept it seperate from the language, then developing for the VM would be just like developing for any other computer archetecture, and we could have used our languages of choice and cross-compiled to the VM.
In addition, an independant VM would have less security issues than a merged language/VM, and it would become easier to maintain the sandbox.
In conclusion, we need an OS VM, and you can write C, I will write C++, and my buddy will write Fortran and Assembler, and they will all run on it.
You do EVERYTHING through a feedback loop, you direct your body to do X, and your senses tell you that Y happened, and you adjust the directions you give. A million times a minute. The feedback loop is vital for you to learn how to do it, not for the machine on the other end.
And with implanted hardware, that's the same as saying "If someone figgures out how to control my heart, they control me", while technicaly true, I'm going to put up a hell of a fight trying to stop them from straping me down and hooking up the invasive electrodes.
SCENARIO: Thug 1: Excuse me sir, whats that over there? Me: What, Where? Thug 2: Quick lets perform invasive brain surgery while he's not looking. Thug 1: I'm done. Sir, would you like to buy our product? Me: Yes, I want to buy.... -Crutcher
If you think you can't build a machine to hoe some beets. The question is can you currently make a machine that has a total cost of ownership less than the cost of employing the humans it replaces hoing beets. I say probably, oh, and who let it get filled with weeds in the first place? -Crutcher
I don't understand the problem people have with the idea of brain controlled machinery. Doesn't anyone remember being a kid and honestly trying out your *psychic* powers? Trying to make people here your thoughts, or change the channel, or drive an RC car? I mean, cummon! I want interfaces that let me have all the functionality of a digital phone, but without any handset. I want to just will the damn channel to change, I want my car to unlock and turn itself on because I wanted it to from halfway accross the parking lot. I want to never have to wonder about dates or appointments or where someone is (that is in mutal contact with me, and thus is letting me have such info) again. I dont want to drive my car, I want to *BE* my car, and my plane, and my boat, and the surgical impliments that I use to work on a patient (IANAD), I want to walk the web internaly, not muck arround with a damn mouse and keyboard. And every kid on the planet is born wanting that, but some forget it as the grow up. Some one needs to remind this uptight doctor that he's not to old to fly, give him some fairy dust, and lock him in a room with the Hawaiian Tropic Swimsuit Team until he can come up with some happy thoughts. -Crutcher
because post modernism is a self reflective art, and you cant evolve past it, it is the top.
The same thing applies to the open source software movement, you can't have a new underdog if the domminant group is FREE, it doesn't make sense. A ne OS, sure fine; a new language? No Problem, about time for D anywhay, but where could you go after open source? -Crutcher
I know a few people who have Rob's Autograph. The view the things as prize possesions. But they also run Be in a VMWare window on a windows box, so you can't really judge from that. -Crutcher
The most contrived, unbelievable plot I have EVER seen, 90 minutes to reset the system clock? The machine thought the tank hadn't been filled so wouldn't open? A man survives a pump explosion in a small enclosure and GETS NOT ONE SCRATCH, this movie was crap, start to finnish, top to bottom. -Crutcher
Slashdot Mirror
Every damn piece of wackyness is turned off by default in this kernel, just the way I like it. About time things stoped getting defaulted on just cause they were some developers baby.
On a lighter note, I went and bought the "Linux Core Kernel Comentary." I think this makes me a slashwhore, for running out to by it right after reading the review.
But it means that I will hopefully be adding to the kernel by the fall. Will you?
---
"Elegant, Commented, On Time; Pick any Two"
"And so it came that one day I asked my Master, and how shall I design the user interface, shall I make it objects? shall I make it text? Shall there be menus or shall there be keystrokes, or shall I use voice?
And he raised an eyebrow, and then snapped a finger, and then wiggled his fingers, and then waved his hands, and only after all this di he speak, and I was enlightened."
- From The Tao of UI
It is so very important to remeber that the phrase "User Friendly" does Not mean "Instant Usability", or "Simple Commands". When designing UI, one must take into account the number of core commands that must be represented, and the speed, not complexitiy, with which the truly core commands can be executed. I do NOT want a UI that makes me speak ever time a basic command is used, I would have a sore throat before lunch time. So make the core fast to execute, a key-combo perhaps, make the next level out a command of the form of a menu or typed command, and use things like voice to call up third teir commands, which you use infrequently, but want to execute quickly.
---
"Elegant, Commented, On Time; Pick any Two"
Something I have spent a good deal of time (but not much code 'cause, well, um, I'm Lazy?) thinking about is the idea of a distributed archive transfer protocol.
The way I see it, you would have some program, say 'datp', which would connect to a datp server, and make a file request. the server would return a list of secondary servers which contained the file requested, and the datp client would poll some of these servers, initializing a conection to the fastest of them, and concurently downloading digests of the file (the first X megs from server A, the second X megs from server B, etc.) and reasembling them localy. Add some check suming or hashing, and you could just let anyone that wanted to hook into the archive and provide you with mirrors, all nice and secure.
The concurent aproach sounds weird, but it is really the Right Thing in terms of arbitrary network topography.
Anyway, maybee some day I'll write something like this, or maybee I won't. Why Don't you, and make me happy?
---
"Elegant, Commented, On Time; Pick any Two"
I have to put this in, cause I ain't no troll. I sent a letter (the letter) to Rob, and he fixxed the article, and that's how it should be. And then some boob comes along that didn't pay attentiion to the first posting of the Article (which referred to "crackers" as "hackers") and marked me as a Troll.
I am offended.
Just setting the record less crocked.
Why build it in?
Why not use the code to write a GPL'd sound server, and have your game link up with the server? In fact, this is probably the best design anyway, as the game can take the server down and reinitialize it without affecting game state (if you changed your sound settings, for instance).
I don't understand everyones love for turning really complex things into libraries, but dread of making them deamons running in their own thread, where they belong. It is usually simpler to do it right.
"Elegant, Commented, On Time; Pick any Two"
Glad to see CmdrTaco on the ball looking for stuff like this. It felt odd sending "the letter" to slashdot.
This is probably a redundant post, but I have to put it up.
Shame, Shame on Cliff for letting this through, shame, shame on the AC for posting this to slashdot.
It is "Cracker" not "Hacker" in this context, and for this nonsense to show up on slashdot, I suggest we do what we have been told to do over the years, send esr's letter available form here to slashdot.
Oh, like wow. Not.
We had "HEAVY" lift capacity decades ago, not in chemical but in nuclear rockects. Capacity which never got past early tests (despite the simplicity and robustness of the drives) because of the Neuclear Test Ban Treaty that Kennedy signed. (They Qualified)
With those babys, we could have gone to Mars in the '80s, but you'd have a hard time even lifting one, let alone launching one, in the current political climate.
The treaty also stopped Project Orion, which was REALLY cool, but probably impractical for lift/landing, though it'd be great for interplanetary thrust.
Never attribute to malice what can be accounted for by stupidity.
It would be nice to believe that the buggy security was deliberate, but I just don't.
not who gets the remote control, but who gets the rocket launcher.
Seriously, though, this is right on the line that some people claim as 'Internet Addiction' while others claim it as a valid new lifestyle. I wonder if playing on someone else's team is grounds for an eDivorce?
It doesn't matter if the correlation that Katz 'sees' was actualy there to see, for we the readers, or for Katz the 'author' to use the term in a loose sense.
Because we just read it, and since most of us hadn't ever tried to classifiy these things, his classification will stick to us, and we as users, and Katz as an author will begin to deal with the net conceptual as though these classifications held.
Which will enforce them.
So by writing this, Katz might have just planted a virulent meme, if it sticks.
On a lighter note: Have any of you seen the window$ based virtual pet games 'Catz' and 'Dogz'? I if 'Katz' is just a test market case for a virtual pundit game.
>> Long term, I see 'code morphing' as a basic part of software development,
>> but it would be insane for Transmeta to dump that much cash into a
>> development project and then just 'give' it to Intel.
>
>Isn't this the founding theory behind Open Source? Write software and release it without any cost to the consumer in the hope that they will
>A) Use it
>B) Take the source and improve upon it
>
>The amount of time and development that goes into some open source projects has been staggering. It has been proved that a company can survive, not off of the revenues of its software sales, but off of other services such as support or advertising.
The founding theory behind 'Open Source' development is NOT commercial at all, and I can't stand the idea that it might be. The idea is:
A) I want your code so I can play with it.
B) You give it to me because you EXPECT to get something out of it, not because "Code should be free", though that might be what you expect out of it.
In this case the only people who can 'Play' with it are (currently) Chip makers. Who are in direct competition with Transmeta.
Or, more to the point, Open Source assumes their are no 'Consumers' as such, but merely other users. Transmeta's product IS a product, the software infrastructure does NOT currently include this sort of thing, and so Transmeta selling 'suport' to 'users' who would all be competing chimp makers is silly. Admit it.
I support 'Open Source' software because where it works, it works beautifuly. But it should not be a religion, thats just stupid.
Yeah, He's a fool, we know that, but the solid argument against his craziness is:
1) Open Source development is cool (read: cost effective and resource efficient) when it allows a previously existing pool of inhouse support staff accross industry to become the primary development source for a peice of software, breaking the cost up to tinny bits everyone can swallow.
2) Chip design is NOT such scenario, their are no developers which could aid Transmetta in this field that do not work for their direct competetors.
Long term, I see 'code morphing' as becoming a basic part of software development, but it would be insane for Transmeta to dump that much cash into a development project and then just 'give' it to Intel.
The important thing is that they have proved this software 'CAN' exist, and work well. So lets get the CS theorists to figure out the general case, and then you can have your open source code morphing.
Okay, this is a cool concept and all, but I bet most of ya'll dont realize quite HOW cool.
You see, we have in cognitive science the idea of 'pigeonholeing'; that if I build houses all day, I see everything in terms of building houses (which is not entirely true, when was the last time you used duct tape on a duct).
So if this application was thought up by MOLECULAR BIOLOGISTS AND CHEMISTS, what happens when some good hardcore Computer Scientists and Hackers get their minds into the functions of the system?
I think the technology is much further in capability along than we realize, but we dont fully understand how to apply it, so we are maybe not as impressed as we should be.
A Wrinkle in Time, Starman Jones, Farmer in the Sky, and of course The Time Machine. Start in the past, work to the present. If you do it the other way around the classics seem cliched.
Read a book entitled "Murder in the Solid State".
it is Near term SciFi about abuses of exactly this kind of technology.
1: Linux will be everywhere, period. 3rd world countrys will pick it up and run with it, and many embeded devices will use it and all the development will drive it like a rocket.
2: Microsoft won't see it comming in time, but will eventualy release office for linux, because they like being rich more than they like being in charge.
3: Steve Jobs will do something insane with apple, which will destroy their current market share, and then blam it on his underlings.
4: Transmeta will come out, Qualcom stock will plumet, and I wont be able to afford their devices.
5: Corel will give up on their linux distro, and just sell their damn software optimized for Red hat.
6: People who stayed home out of fear on new years will slowly convince themselves that Us academics were right about the real start of the new decade/century/newyear and REALLY party next new years.
7: Milk will spoil, because it always does.
Java promised us a compile once, run anywhere solution, and for a few years, it looked like we would get it.
Well, we didn't; and we aren't going to out of java, not for a long time.
I think its time that we consider abandoning java, and starting up a new program. The real wonder of Java is, and should have remained, its virtual machine, and if Sun had developed a robust VM, and kept it seperate from the language, then developing for the VM would be just like developing for any other computer archetecture, and we could have used our languages of choice and cross-compiled to the VM.
In addition, an independant VM would have less security issues than a merged language/VM, and it would become easier to maintain the sandbox.
In conclusion, we need an OS VM, and you can write C, I will write C++, and my buddy will write Fortran and Assembler, and they will all run on it.
-Crutcher
was the monkeying about that SGI did when they made a big deal about their search for a new name, and changed to ... SGI
-Crutcher
You do EVERYTHING through a feedback loop, you direct your body to do X, and your senses tell you that Y happened, and you adjust the directions you give. A million times a minute. The feedback loop is vital for you to learn how to do it, not for the machine on the other end.
....
And with implanted hardware, that's the same as saying "If someone figgures out how to control my heart, they control me", while technicaly true, I'm going to put up a hell of a fight trying to stop them from straping me down and hooking up the invasive electrodes.
SCENARIO:
Thug 1: Excuse me sir, whats that over there?
Me: What, Where?
Thug 2: Quick lets perform invasive brain surgery while he's not looking.
Thug 1: I'm done. Sir, would you like to buy our product?
Me: Yes, I want to buy
-Crutcher
If you think you can't build a machine to hoe some beets. The question is can you currently make a machine that has a total cost of ownership less than the cost of employing the humans it replaces hoing beets. I say probably, oh, and who let it get filled with weeds in the first place?
-Crutcher
I don't understand the problem people have with the idea of brain controlled machinery. Doesn't anyone remember being a kid and honestly trying out your *psychic* powers? Trying to make people here your thoughts, or change the channel, or drive an RC car? I mean, cummon! I want interfaces that let me have all the functionality of a digital phone, but without any handset. I want to just will the damn channel to change, I want my car to unlock and turn itself on because I wanted it to from halfway accross the parking lot. I want to never have to wonder about dates or appointments or where someone is (that is in mutal contact with me, and thus is letting me have such info) again. I dont want to drive my car, I want to *BE* my car, and my plane, and my boat, and the surgical impliments that I use to work on a patient (IANAD), I want to walk the web internaly, not muck arround with a damn mouse and keyboard. And every kid on the planet is born wanting that, but some forget it as the grow up. Some one needs to remind this uptight doctor that he's not to old to fly, give him some fairy dust, and lock him in a room with the Hawaiian Tropic Swimsuit Team until he can come up with some happy thoughts.
-Crutcher
because post modernism is a self reflective art, and you cant evolve past it, it is the top.
The same thing applies to the open source software movement, you can't have a new underdog if the domminant group is FREE, it doesn't make sense. A ne OS, sure fine; a new language? No Problem, about time for D anywhay, but where could you go after open source?
-Crutcher
I know a few people who have Rob's Autograph. The view the things as prize possesions. But they also run Be in a VMWare window on a windows box, so you can't really judge from that.
-Crutcher
The most contrived, unbelievable plot I have EVER seen, 90 minutes to reset the system clock? The machine thought the tank hadn't been filled so wouldn't open? A man survives a pump explosion in a small enclosure and GETS NOT ONE SCRATCH, this movie was crap, start to finnish, top to bottom.
-Crutcher