I've been loving the show this season. Great characters, a focus on the kind of culture clash stories that TOS specialized in..
It sounds like they're not getting the ratings that they want, but I hope they don't change the show too much. An alien probe coming to earth which wreaks havoc? Haven't we seenthat before?
Anyone could have predicted this. Gee, everyone's going nuts downloading music, burning it to their own CD's.. I wonder what would happen if we gave them an opportunity to give us money for this?
Now it's a huge race to provide a service like this on Windows.
What a bunch of dumbasses.. why the hell did it take Steve Jobs to twist the recording industry's arm to make this happen?
It's nice that we paid subscribers can see stories 10-15 minutes before they become part of the page, but when it's such an incredibly (incredibly) obvious dupe, it sure would be nice to be able to add a comment to the story. I understand that the process of a story moving from the mysterious future to the main page is probably automated, but it sure would be nice to have some way of helping out with this.
The Unix Hater's Handbook is a classic, and should be read especially by UNIX/Linux fans. I always used to force my minions^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hstudents to read it (until one of my students kept it) so they would have a better understanding of where UNIX had been, and what aspects of it were suboptimal.
A lot of what TUHH rags on has long since been improved.. who mucks around with/bin/sh, sed and awk now that we have Perl and Python, after all?
Other things haven't been improved much on the UNIX side, and TUHH includes some important lessons about why that is, and what the real world benefits and costs of that are.
I'm glad that this is available in some form again now, but it's not the same without the friendly UNIX Barf Bag bound into the back cover.
No, they didn't. The chose Firebird because it was close to Phoenix, which they had been using for the browser-only component for sometime, before the Phoenix BIOS people made an issue out of it, due to their plans to produce a browser themselves.
But yes, 128k is too small for a regular Linux kernel, but other UNIX-like systems do work in space that small. The question arises still whether Palm's quick-time-to-market and corporate success is worth the years and years of backwards compatibility woes for developers. I don't think so: Palm has to take the blame for what they did.
Backwards compatibility is the only reason that Palm has the market share they do. Same thing with IA32 processors and all flavors of Windows. Windows kicked the Mac's ass because it could run DOS apps on old-school PC hardware. No one cares about that now, but Windows couldn't have succeeded as well as it did if it weren't compatible when it counted.
But Linux is generally tuned for a more capable class of hardware. Current Palm devices devote most of their RAM to long term storage.. stack and heap are extremely limited. A full-up Linux system with shared libraries, multitasking, graphics, etc., etc., wouldn't fit comfortably in a system with 2, 8, or even 16 megs combined heap, stack, and long-term storage.
When you're talking about a handheld with 32, 64, or 128 megabytes of RAM, you really can start to do those things with Linux well, but Palm started out with 128k of combined heap, stack, and long-term storage..
If you pay full retail for a boxed copy, you can use it as long as you want, so long as you only use it on one machine at a time.
I wonder if that's really true. I thought that even when you paid for it at retail you only got to run it on one computer, ever. That's what the whole Windows XP activation scheme is about.
It's certainly true that the earth has been warmer in the past. The concern that I've been reading about is whether the present rise is happening at such a high rate of speed as to cause problems. Problems like destabilizing the planet's negative feedback loops, or leaving vegetation without enough time to adjust their range to match the changing climate.
It doesn't sound like this article/study specifically treats such questions.
Re:Refactoring does not depend on Eclipse: Emacs!
on
Eclipse 2.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
I think you missed the point. Basically, what the poster was trying to say is that learning emacs is a full-time job. Of course you have to learn the tools you want/need to use, and if there's a new tool or set of tools you need to learn to do a job, then that should be factored into your estimate and charged appropriately. The problem is that emacs takes damned long to learn all of the ins and outs. Sure, you can fire it up and start using it by only knowing a few commands, but it's highly unlikely you'll be as productive as you would with a less-featureful but more-intuitive tool.
But the point is that emacs has more ins and outs than other tools. Yes, things like Eclipse or VS have some fancy compiler integration tools, but there is so much more to emacs as an editor, and while one may not need to use all that power, try telling that to those who do.
I mean, I'm sure I could live without the ability to instantly center the displayed text on the line my cursor is on, and that I could live without the ability to do arbitrarily complex searches on a shell buffer, and that I could live without the ability to do artificial intelligence logic in my editor, but why should I?
Except that all a cable operator has to do is declare in their terms and conditions that you may not run NAT and that you may not hook multiple computers up to your network connection without paying a fee for the extra computers. Bada-bing, bada-bam, your NAT hookup is now not just against the T&C's, it's a criminal offense.
In the specific case of NAT, this law has the effect of permitting cable operators to maintain a cable-tv-like fee plan, rather than simply setting reasonable charge schedules for the actual bits transferred. There's no reason why the law should be molded to enable cable companies to avoid rational pricing according to the nature of the technology at hand.
The whole point of this is to prevent cable modem users from sharing their internet access over wi-fi and the like with neighbors. That's a laudable goal from the cable companies' view, but it ignores the fact that what really costs the cable company is the number of bits transferred. If I am NAT'ing to a neighbor and my neighbor uses 1% of the Internet bandwidth that is going over my cable modem, the incremental cost of that is 1%. The cost to the cable companies profit, though, is 50% across our two domiciles.
That's what this law is for, and it's not legitimate.
Re:Refactoring does not depend on Eclipse: Emacs!
on
Eclipse 2.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
What other editor is powerful enough to keep giving you things to learn, ten years after you start using it?
I mean, sure, that's a downside if you don't like learning things..
This kind of legislation could easily pass. If something like this is proposed in your state, you need to write your legislators and let them know that this language could potentially criminalize a lot of straight-forward Internet gear, if a communications provider decides to require a per-CPU charge, or the like.
I went TV shopping a couple of weeks ago, after I had filed for my tax refund. Went to Circuit City here in Austin and took a look at the 27" sets, as I watch TV in a very small space.. anything bigger would be a waste.
They had the Zenith C27V22 there for $700.. originally went for $1200 or so. The picture quality was far better than the high-end 27" non-HDTV Sony's. Got it home, set it up, and it's just great. It's a nice, flat screen 27" set that can do a fantastic job when playing anamorphic DVD's through the component inputs.
That's only at 480p, of course, which is one of the HDTV modes this set can handle, along with 1080i. It can unfortunately take only one high-def input at a time, so if I ever get an HD tuner or cable box I'd need to get a component video switcher, but it's great for now.
With HDTV sets available starting at such a low price, there's no point in paying for a high end standard tube anymore, if you ask me.
Palm's in the middle of a technology transition.. PalmOS 5 runs on ARM, and PalmOS 6 is due to have a whole new code infrastructure for new software development.
I like my PalmOS Sony with LauncherX far better than the PocketPC systems I've seen. Light, fast, cheap, better screen than many PPC's, easier interface. What's not to like?
So? The SJ30 uses the same cradle connector as the new ones do, the same memory stick.. what's the problem? The SJ30 even has a li-ion battery that can be removed and replaced if need be. Far more supportable than Palm's rechargeables, if the battery needs changing.
I've had my SJ30 for several months now and I just love it. I don't mind at all that Sony is selling a better one now.. the more they sell, the better for PalmOS and all.
If you hold the copyright in a piece of work, you maintain full rights to treat that work in any way you like. If I GPL something that I own, that doesn't mean that I can't sell it under more (or less) restrictive terms if I so choose. The GPL is a grant of right to allow others to copy the covered work under the terms of the GPL. I, as the author and owner of the work, have absolutely no obligation to follow the GPL in my own usage or distribution of the work, as my rights to the work are not gained through the GPL's grant.
In other words, Richard Stallman could choose to do f*ck all with his EMACS if he wanted to, and he'd be perfectly in the right to do so.
Microsoft's position has been that unbundling Media Player would tear an irreparable hole in Windows and stifle future innovation.
This is one of the more blatant examples of Microsoft's attempts to monopolize through bundling.
They made a similar case with IE.. "if we rip out IE, all the programs that have been written to include web page display functionality will break. <heavy sigh/> we could hide the icon, maybe."
The thing is, if they ripped out media player, what it would break would be the ability of software written for windows to display.. some Microsoft proprietary data formats.
Of course, this is one of those areas where you have a tipping point.. get enough users to write 'software' in your media player, and pretty soon you can't have new competition, because your new competition will be legally prohibited from playing your content, either through copyright law, patent law, or DRM/DMCA.
The problem is that the standard that Microsoft most cares about is the User Agent reports Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1).
Microsoft, being a marketing company, has always cared more about the standardization and value of their brand than about any technical standard, no matter where it comes from.
I'm not sure if i'm reading this wrong, and if i am, let me know. But that sounds like your contradicting yourself a bit. You _understand_ that the act of smoking is reinforced by the nicotine. Yet, you _don't find_ people who say that they'd still smoke even without the nicotine credible?
Not when they try to claim that the act of smoking is itself so intrinsically appealing that they would do it even if there had never been any nicotine there. I understand that there is a transfer of reinforcement to the act itself, but that's an effect of the nicotine, not an independent variable.
Who said I was kidding myself into thinking that Nicotine is incidental? I wasn't trying to downplay the role nicotine plays in smoking. All I was trying to get across is that the chemical additives are far, far, worse then the nicotine itself. That and what I said about the actual smoking part being roughly 50% of the addiction is true. Granted, Nicotine keeps you coming back, but i'm not talking about people who haven't smoked or smoked rarely. I'm talking about people who smoke on a regular basis.
My apologies, I jumped on your post to respond to a point that others have made to me. I understand that what gets reinforced is the act of smoking, but I've had people tell me that they would be habituated to the act even if there was no nicotine, which I don't find credible.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been loving the show this season. Great characters, a focus on the kind of culture clash stories that TOS specialized in..
It sounds like they're not getting the ratings that they want, but I hope they don't change the show too much. An alien probe coming to earth which wreaks havoc? Haven't we seen that before?
Anyone could have predicted this. Gee, everyone's going nuts downloading music, burning it to their own CD's.. I wonder what would happen if we gave them an opportunity to give us money for this? Now it's a huge race to provide a service like this on Windows. What a bunch of dumbasses.. why the hell did it take Steve Jobs to twist the recording industry's arm to make this happen?
It's nice that we paid subscribers can see stories 10-15 minutes before they become part of the page, but when it's such an incredibly (incredibly) obvious dupe, it sure would be nice to be able to add a comment to the story. I understand that the process of a story moving from the mysterious future to the main page is probably automated, but it sure would be nice to have some way of helping out with this.
The Unix Hater's Handbook is a classic, and should be read especially by UNIX/Linux fans. I always used to force my minions^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hstudents to read it (until one of my students kept it) so they would have a better understanding of where UNIX had been, and what aspects of it were suboptimal.
A lot of what TUHH rags on has long since been improved.. who mucks around with /bin/sh, sed and awk now that we have Perl and Python, after all?
Other things haven't been improved much on the UNIX side, and TUHH includes some important lessons about why that is, and what the real world benefits and costs of that are.
I'm glad that this is available in some form again now, but it's not the same without the friendly UNIX Barf Bag bound into the back cover.
No, they didn't. The chose Firebird because it was close to Phoenix, which they had been using for the browser-only component for sometime, before the Phoenix BIOS people made an issue out of it, due to their plans to produce a browser themselves.
But yes, 128k is too small for a regular Linux kernel, but other UNIX-like systems do work in space that small. The question arises still whether Palm's quick-time-to-market and corporate success is worth the years and years of backwards compatibility woes for developers. I don't think so: Palm has to take the blame for what they did.
Backwards compatibility is the only reason that Palm has the market share they do. Same thing with IA32 processors and all flavors of Windows. Windows kicked the Mac's ass because it could run DOS apps on old-school PC hardware. No one cares about that now, but Windows couldn't have succeeded as well as it did if it weren't compatible when it counted.
See Linus' Comments on this recently on the LKML.
But Linux is generally tuned for a more capable class of hardware. Current Palm devices devote most of their RAM to long term storage.. stack and heap are extremely limited. A full-up Linux system with shared libraries, multitasking, graphics, etc., etc., wouldn't fit comfortably in a system with 2, 8, or even 16 megs combined heap, stack, and long-term storage.
When you're talking about a handheld with 32, 64, or 128 megabytes of RAM, you really can start to do those things with Linux well, but Palm started out with 128k of combined heap, stack, and long-term storage..
EFF abandoned their lobbying effort some years ago, in favor of legal assistance/court challenge type efforts.
If you pay full retail for a boxed copy, you can use it as long as you want, so long as you only use it on one machine at a time.
I wonder if that's really true. I thought that even when you paid for it at retail you only got to run it on one computer, ever. That's what the whole Windows XP activation scheme is about.
It's certainly true that the earth has been warmer in the past. The concern that I've been reading about is whether the present rise is happening at such a high rate of speed as to cause problems. Problems like destabilizing the planet's negative feedback loops, or leaving vegetation without enough time to adjust their range to match the changing climate.
It doesn't sound like this article/study specifically treats such questions.
I think you missed the point. Basically, what the poster was trying to say is that learning emacs is a full-time job. Of course you have to learn the tools you want/need to use, and if there's a new tool or set of tools you need to learn to do a job, then that should be factored into your estimate and charged appropriately. The problem is that emacs takes damned long to learn all of the ins and outs. Sure, you can fire it up and start using it by only knowing a few commands, but it's highly unlikely you'll be as productive as you would with a less-featureful but more-intuitive tool.
But the point is that emacs has more ins and outs than other tools. Yes, things like Eclipse or VS have some fancy compiler integration tools, but there is so much more to emacs as an editor, and while one may not need to use all that power, try telling that to those who do.
I mean, I'm sure I could live without the ability to instantly center the displayed text on the line my cursor is on, and that I could live without the ability to do arbitrarily complex searches on a shell buffer, and that I could live without the ability to do artificial intelligence logic in my editor, but why should I?
Except that all a cable operator has to do is declare in their terms and conditions that you may not run NAT and that you may not hook multiple computers up to your network connection without paying a fee for the extra computers. Bada-bing, bada-bam, your NAT hookup is now not just against the T&C's, it's a criminal offense.
In the specific case of NAT, this law has the effect of permitting cable operators to maintain a cable-tv-like fee plan, rather than simply setting reasonable charge schedules for the actual bits transferred. There's no reason why the law should be molded to enable cable companies to avoid rational pricing according to the nature of the technology at hand.
The whole point of this is to prevent cable modem users from sharing their internet access over wi-fi and the like with neighbors. That's a laudable goal from the cable companies' view, but it ignores the fact that what really costs the cable company is the number of bits transferred. If I am NAT'ing to a neighbor and my neighbor uses 1% of the Internet bandwidth that is going over my cable modem, the incremental cost of that is 1%. The cost to the cable companies profit, though, is 50% across our two domiciles.
That's what this law is for, and it's not legitimate.
What other editor is powerful enough to keep giving you things to learn, ten years after you start using it?
I mean, sure, that's a downside if you don't like learning things..
Wow, is the weather very nice on your planet?
This kind of legislation could easily pass. If something like this is proposed in your state, you need to write your legislators and let them know that this language could potentially criminalize a lot of straight-forward Internet gear, if a communications provider decides to require a per-CPU charge, or the like.
So how is the patching up to 1.29 done?
Are there any pages anywhere that give detailed instructions on how to install NWN using nothing but Linux and WineX, say?
Groovy, I'll add a link to the collection on the opt_depot page.
See the opt_depot page for one, and for links to another dozen or so packages that do the same sort of thing in varying ways.
Stow is really a rather GNU-come-lately entry to the Depot arena.
I went TV shopping a couple of weeks ago, after I had filed for my tax refund. Went to Circuit City here in Austin and took a look at the 27" sets, as I watch TV in a very small space.. anything bigger would be a waste.
They had the Zenith C27V22 there for $700.. originally went for $1200 or so. The picture quality was far better than the high-end 27" non-HDTV Sony's. Got it home, set it up, and it's just great. It's a nice, flat screen 27" set that can do a fantastic job when playing anamorphic DVD's through the component inputs.
That's only at 480p, of course, which is one of the HDTV modes this set can handle, along with 1080i. It can unfortunately take only one high-def input at a time, so if I ever get an HD tuner or cable box I'd need to get a component video switcher, but it's great for now.
With HDTV sets available starting at such a low price, there's no point in paying for a high end standard tube anymore, if you ask me.
Palm's in the middle of a technology transition.. PalmOS 5 runs on ARM, and PalmOS 6 is due to have a whole new code infrastructure for new software development.
I like my PalmOS Sony with LauncherX far better than the PocketPC systems I've seen. Light, fast, cheap, better screen than many PPC's, easier interface. What's not to like?
So? The SJ30 uses the same cradle connector as the new ones do, the same memory stick.. what's the problem? The SJ30 even has a li-ion battery that can be removed and replaced if need be. Far more supportable than Palm's rechargeables, if the battery needs changing.
I've had my SJ30 for several months now and I just love it. I don't mind at all that Sony is selling a better one now.. the more they sell, the better for PalmOS and all.
If you hold the copyright in a piece of work, you maintain full rights to treat that work in any way you like. If I GPL something that I own, that doesn't mean that I can't sell it under more (or less) restrictive terms if I so choose. The GPL is a grant of right to allow others to copy the covered work under the terms of the GPL. I, as the author and owner of the work, have absolutely no obligation to follow the GPL in my own usage or distribution of the work, as my rights to the work are not gained through the GPL's grant.
In other words, Richard Stallman could choose to do f*ck all with his EMACS if he wanted to, and he'd be perfectly in the right to do so.
Microsoft's position has been that unbundling Media Player would tear an irreparable hole in Windows and stifle future innovation.
This is one of the more blatant examples of Microsoft's attempts to monopolize through bundling.
They made a similar case with IE.. "if we rip out IE, all the programs that have been written to include web page display functionality will break. <heavy sigh/> we could hide the icon, maybe."
The thing is, if they ripped out media player, what it would break would be the ability of software written for windows to display.. some Microsoft proprietary data formats.
Of course, this is one of those areas where you have a tipping point.. get enough users to write 'software' in your media player, and pretty soon you can't have new competition, because your new competition will be legally prohibited from playing your content, either through copyright law, patent law, or DRM/DMCA.
The EU is right to be looking at this.
The problem is that the standard that Microsoft most cares about is the User Agent reports Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1).
Microsoft, being a marketing company, has always cared more about the standardization and value of their brand than about any technical standard, no matter where it comes from.
I'm not sure if i'm reading this wrong, and if i am, let me know. But that sounds like your contradicting yourself a bit. You _understand_ that the act of smoking is reinforced by the nicotine. Yet, you _don't find_ people who say that they'd still smoke even without the nicotine credible?
Not when they try to claim that the act of smoking is itself so intrinsically appealing that they would do it even if there had never been any nicotine there. I understand that there is a transfer of reinforcement to the act itself, but that's an effect of the nicotine, not an independent variable.
Who said I was kidding myself into thinking that Nicotine is incidental? I wasn't trying to downplay the role nicotine plays in smoking. All I was trying to get across is that the chemical additives are far, far, worse then the nicotine itself. That and what I said about the actual smoking part being roughly 50% of the addiction is true. Granted, Nicotine keeps you coming back, but i'm not talking about people who haven't smoked or smoked rarely. I'm talking about people who smoke on a regular basis.
My apologies, I jumped on your post to respond to a point that others have made to me. I understand that what gets reinforced is the act of smoking, but I've had people tell me that they would be habituated to the act even if there was no nicotine, which I don't find credible.