Actually, I'd rather have a huge load of Meccano - Erector to Americans. Y'see, I enjoy engineering as well as computers and you can do _so_ much with Meccano that isn't possible with Lego. Seriously, I've seen some absolutely stunning models that simply aren't possible in Lego. Unfortunately, I'm currently reliant on nicking my Dad's when he's not looking and I should be moving out soon - well, as soon as anyone notices my sig and replies;)
The other thing I'd have to say I'd want is old computers or components. One thing I'd love to be able to do when I move out is set up a couple of networked MP3 & net radio terminals, which would run happily enough on 3-4 year old parts. Well, if I slammed in a big HDD;) Definitely below PS2 prices, far cooler to me.
If we're being unlimited and unrealistic, an idea from JWZ last time this came up attracted me. Imagine a model helicopter with computers controlling the avionics so you can fly it safely without a long training course, long range and a video relay so you can fly it outside visual range. Totally impractical as it'd probably cost more than my car, but I want one.
I have to agree that part of the S/N problem is pretty inevitable on a system of any size.
We can improve on moderation though - make Karma relative to posting volume. I'm currently somewhere near the karma cap (was on it, until an IE bug moderated the wrong commented and I rightly slapped down in M2...) but I don't get modded up that often. I'm there as I've been here a long time. And, let's be honest, it's not too difficult to get 50 positive moderations in a year or two.
Let's say we make karma degrade. Say 1 point lost per month, one lost per 10 posts (or whatever). I need to remain a good poster to keep high karma. Yes, I can see that that _could_ encourage more karma whoring as to keep a +1 you'd need to do so continually, but I genuinely don't think it's as much of a problem as some people make out.
The other thing to look at is whether it's sensible for posting and moderation karma to remain unified. I'd argue not.
By keeping them together, we unnecessarily reduce the quality of both.
Hypothetical situation. Let's say I'm a troll. Does that mean I'd be a bad moderator? No, not necessarily. There's a strong case to be put for not giving trolls mod points as to withold them may deter trolling on some level, but that's about it.
Now, let's imagine I can't spell and am hopelessly inarticulate. Some might say that was the case now;) Anyway. I'd be extremely unlikely to ever get modded up for my posts, but that doesn't imply that I wouldn't be a fantastic moderator.
Ultimately, I'd go for a fundamental overhaul of these things. Rate posts in percentage terms, make sure almost anyone can mod pretty much constantly. Posts then get modded with much more precision - so we don't have the current problem that the first post to hit +5 gets a huge boost over the second, thus encouraging whoring as opposed to well thought-through comments. M2 wouldn't really work so if we want the current style, you do effective M2 by comparing ratings given to posts. Peaks on the chart count as a fair, blips as unfair.
None of this addresses the fundamental problem with moderation as a concept, though - tyranny of the majority. The comment which works for most will almost certainly win. It may be wrong on careful analysis, but the gut call is that it's correct. Whereas the more thoughtful post with more actual understanding may lose out as less can understand it. Also, what do you do if the trolls win? If the system is entirely automated, it's possible that the trolls could get in on the ground floor and, thanks to all systems being fundamentally based on the approval of peer groups, take over. If they mod each other up and good comments down, you're stuffed...
If you really want to maintain perceived quality, restrict moderation to a central clique of the great and the good. It's the only way of ensuring that it's good - but it does make the assumption that whoever does the choosing is right, and impose their viewpoint(s) on the group. It takes a very strong individual to be fair and even-handed with that level of power...
I agree about simplicity winning as a rule, but that battle was closer than you made out.
Y'see, if you make a floating crane it has to be _very_ stable and well balanced, or it'll capsize. Theirs wasn't, and very nearly did.
I'd actually contend that the buoyancy tank system would have worked better _if_ we had intelligent people running it. As it was, if you remember the challenge, they panicked and took a stupid decision for how to maneuver the tanks. Meant they had to pump for ages, slowing them down and breaking the pump... Stupid, as they had ballast on the tanks which they could have gently released to raise them as opposed to pumping extra air in.
Fundamentally, though, simplicity and bikers will normally win. Simplcity gives you less to build and less to break, while bikers are used to building strange contraptions from scrap and the like. Look at any trike for proof;)
No, that's far from true. Anything where product placement is possible could work. Sitcoms, for example, are very easy to do that way. Sports can work, too - subscriptions there are well established, while getting sponsors to stick banner ads in the coverage - or pay either to replace or retain ad hoardings in the stadia in the coverage.
Good documentaries would become difficult, to say the least though. Ditto good drama. If we want either, we may have to pay directly...
There was a very interesting article about this sort of problem - well, funding commercial TV in general - in a post-TiVO world in the Guardian (UK) a while back. Sorry, no URL:(
The ultimate conclusion - massive product placement was about all that's viable. When the advert can be so easily bypassed, the only real way to pay for it all is to make the ad and the program inseparable.
Makes me queasy too, but the logic does seem inescapable.
One little thing, though. You're spending $600 on a stereo component, designed component-by-component. Why integrated sound, then? Seems to stuff it up to me, as the quality isn't exactly going to be fantastic now is it?
Distributing DeCSS itself is good - especially with a good argument as to why you're distributing it alongside. It's still civil disobediance (well, for Americans) but it's directly usable as DeCSS and hopefully informs people, too.
Distributing a song, a T-shirt, image file headers - anything of that form - just makes this issue look like it's only supported by a bunch of kids trying to annoy people without any good reason. I don't want them to be able to paint this dispute in that way and I suspect you don't, either.
On one side, there's the censorship angle. We can have this argument until the cows come home, talking about whether restricting speech is right under certain circumstances. I'm not coming down on either side of the fence - but notice I'm in the UK not the USA.
On the other side, there's the issue of DVD control. I don't think you're going to find many people who will argue that it's legitimate that the studios can control who makes DVD players, recorders - or even _movies_. Which is really what CSS is about, after all, so DeCSS is (amongst other things) a way of stopping them from exerting this unfair influence.
Pick your battles. I'd have to say I think the second one is more likely to get people to agree with you that it's a Good Thing. The censorship argument is more open to personal opinions so harder to win.
Sorry, but this smacks of immaturity. Saying 'Nyaah nyaah nyaah nyaah nyaah you can't stop us!!!' doesn't help the studios, the lawyers, the media at large or the general public to take this seriously. In fact, it probably does the reverse.
DeCSS should be legal and the studio's attempts to control manufacture, use and hardware related to DVDs should be recognised for the abuse of cartel power that it is. But doing this doesn't help.
What we need are eloquent defenders explaining this one and justifying the existence of this sort of software - along with explaining why the MPAA members are abusing their position here. They help, they change people's opinions. Playing whack-a-mole like this and saying that it doesn't matter how illegal they make it because they'll never get rid of it anyway only harms the cause and convinces others that it's only supported by silly kids who want a toy without having to pay for it.
In other words, this plays right into their hands. We shouldn't do it, we shouldn't encourage it. Distribute DeCSS by all means - but do it openly and explain why it's good that this program exists, and why the current situation is wrong. If you can't provide a good enough explanation yourself, link to someone else's. That helps our cause, this harms it.
I've thought about this, too. I've got a Psion 5 - which covers a lot of the functionality - but every now and then, something bigger and hairier would be nice.
I'm sorry if this is going to annoy people, but look at Windows CE here. You can get nice little boxes with 100-200ish MHz CPUs - seem to be normally StrongARM or MIPS - 32-64MB or RAM, 800*600 screens. Light weight, long battery life. And a big enough screen and keyboard that you're not feeling significantly cramped. Well, I'm not anyway;) If you want a bit more space, sling in a microdrive.
If you don't want to buy anything associated with MS at all, look at a Psion 7. A bit larger and a lower screen resolution, but still a nice box. And if you want to stick with the standard software rather than converting it all to Linux or BSD, EPOC32 is rather nice.
Not too expensive, either. I've seen them going for 5-600 UKP and remember the standard tech exchange rate of £1 = $1 US...
The old IBM Workpad z50 was one of these, and got some decent enough reactions when they were being remaindered and someone worked out how to stick Linux or BSD on them. Well, they're better boxes now. Higher screen resolutions, more RAM. Heck, WinCE 3 is rather better than 2, by all accounts. Not that that's especially difficult;)
I can't see anything better for that sort of functionality.
I can't say I find IE5 anything other than buggy. And I'm using it right here, right now, under Windows 98, to post this.
Let's use slashdot itself as an example. It cuts off most stories part-way through. If I have mod points, it smears the comboboxes all over the screen when I scroll, misplaces them and then finally gives up rendering them altogether. Still, not very relevant as I can't use them - when it cut off early, it took that 'Moderate' button with it...
It frequently screws up so badly it won't let me swap windows properly. It will intermittently refuse to follow links. And it eats resources like nothing else you can imagine. It's just horrendous what it can do to your system and it'll fall over with a fraction of the number of windows I can open from Netscape.
Communicator 4.0x was a lovely, stable, feature-packed browser. 4.5 was atrocious and could reliably crash the machine totally. They've been getting slowly better since and it's now mostly usable again. Unfortunately, IE has been getting steadily worse for some time...
I remember a while back someone came up with a navigation system which, rather than using GPS sattelites, tuned into AM radio and gained its position by triangulation of the data combined with a database of transmitter locations. Needed a heck of a lot of signals - 10ish IIRC - to get an accurate enough position, but it did work. And for quite a bit less cost, too. Never did hear more about it, which is a pity. Struck me as a nice hack and would probably work better in that sort of environment.
Anyway, back onto the original. One thing some designers seem to forget, though, is that it isn't practical to assume a constant GPS signal. I heard a rather funny story a little while back where a system was being tested by one of the UK car mags (Autocar) but wasn't telling them to come off a roundabout. See, the exit was under a flyover and it couldn't get the signal as it hit the junction, which it required. Oops...
Someone soon wrote in and pointed out that the system on their Rover 75 could successfully navigate through a tunnel. Apparently, it was using the speedo and power steering to provide secondary location information. Not so accurate, but it worked well enough to clear the obstruction and could probably help with this sort of problem.
Might explain the odd behaviour that appeared a while ago. Modding up wasn't being added to my Karma, modding down was reducing it.
They really have had better iedas than that one, haven't they? Oh well...
Must admit I've long thought that the best thing to do with karma is to make it fade. Partially related to time, partially to posting volume. That way, it becomes a more accurate measure of an individual's worth to the slashdot community.
IMO:)
I'm not asking Phil Zimmerman whether he knows about Slashdot interviews, as that really wouldn't make much sense now, would it? What I was wondering was whether any of the slashdot community knew what was going on. Entirely legit.
Slashdot-hosted interviews used to be, what, weekly? And yet when was the last one? Or have I simply had them filtered out of my homepage with a new bug?;)
I actually much prefer coding in Pascal to C. Partly as I find Pascal a very clear syntax whereas even C fans will admit it can look like line noise. Not as bad as Perl but still... Partly, too, that because it's very picky, it's very easy to bugfix. The compiler will catch so many little gotchas which would cause something weird to happen with a C program, as the problem doesn't show up until later... Example: in Pascal, if I try and write past the end of an array it crashes. I can find that _very_ easily by stepping through the code. Do the same in C and it'll normally corrupt the memory. Now, which is easier to track down and sort out?
I've often thought that C's success is at least partially cultural. I remember when I was first getting into Amigas, everything had to be hand-coded in assembler (or so it sometimes looked, anyway) or you weren't a real coder. Now, C is (in many ways) a platform-independent assembly language. Yes, it's higher level, but there's still a fair bit in common. Anyway. The point is that coding in C there was still enough metal-bashing to make the coder look like a real man. Pascal, OTOH, is just too easy.
If you're writing an OS or a driver or something else at that sort of level, C makes sense in many ways while Pascal (or most Pascal-derived languages) would have clear limitations. If I'm writing a normal user-space application, though - such as a web browser, considering where this message is being posted - IMO you just don't need the level of control C gives you. If you don't need the control, why should you pay the cost of having the little gotchas to catch? I've just got better things to do with my time, and appreciate the easier debugging. The apps users would, too - same debugging effort produces better quality. What more could you want?;)
You're thinking of something unnecessarily complex with your skating robot. Watch robotic Football (I'm British, OK?) and you'll see they don't normally have legs or kick the ball. They use wheels or tracks and push.
I'd be interested to see an Ice Hockey robot too, but I can't see why you should make it skate. My instinct would say rubber tank tracks would be best.
As an aside, I can't see it'd be too difficult to convert a Football robot to Ice Hockey, as the games as they'd be played by the robots are pretty similar.
Anyway. If you want a more interesting challenge, robotic table tennis has been attempted for years, with varying degrees of success. You might be able to manage a simplified form of volleyball.
Vechicle sports - car, bike, boat, plane racing - aren't too hard, TBH. Collision avoidance is a pretty big challenge, though;)
If we want to go for individual sports, ski-ing in its various forms would be interesting. Slalom racing would require precision of movement, downhill speed of reactions and stability like little else. Cross-country would be an interesting test of flexibility and (potentially) endurance. Jumping would be interesting, but the potential for someone to simply build a hang-glider and rather spoil the whole event is there... You'd probably need to limit it to humnanoid robots. Still, the speed and precision of reaction needed would make it interesting.
I thought it was interesting. I thought it was fun. I thought the effects were good. I was pleased to see SF getting that sort of attention.
I didn't think it was at all deep. In fact, on a particularly objectionable day, I might go so far as to say I thought it was shallow. They had some good ideas and a good story, but didn't want to go for that extra edge in the storytelling. A mistake, IMO - Mission: Impossible and the first two Batman films would seem a fair indication that its target audience will still enjoy a (relatively) complex film and that they can make good money. Heck, wasn't Batman breaking records at the time?
I'll be interested to see what they do with the sequels but I'm not expecting works of genius.
Splitting hairs here, but I'm not sure I'd agree. What you'd actually have would be the fourth system itself running as the default (if extremely minimal) OS and _all_ user-space OSs running as tasks of it.
Y'know, I think we could be reading too much into this to be honest.
If I were making print server appliances like the JetDirect, I'd definitely consider Linux. It's already out there, it's free. Almost zero effort gets you something which will do the job. Performance isn't really an issue I'd guess - as long as it's not terrible, the price means it'll win pretty much every time.
If I was thinking of what client OSs to support, I can't say I'd support Linux, though. Too little market share to justify the cost and effort of testing and supporting it all to a standard that wouldn't be counterproductive. Doesn't help that we're not talking about a single, coherent system but hundreds of small variants. It's not zero market share but it's close enough that I can see how they cuold choose not to support it.
The point I was making though (which seems to have been missed...) is that there is a _claim_ and a (theoretically genuine) belief that the moral code is being handed down from some higher power. They aren't saying 'I think we should all adhere to these rules because I like them', but 'I adhere to these rules as I believe a higher power has told me they're right'.
Whether you recognise the authority is another question, but there is a _claim_ to a higher authority than man.
Surely any moral code in an atheistic society is a bit dodgy on human rights grounds? If we have an agreed religion in the society, we have a higher power whose teachings we can follow and use them as the base of our moral code. Without that, it's just people imposing their views on one another - which sounds like a breach of human rights to me.
This then leads on to the question of whether a society with a state religion is itself a breach of human rights, of course, but that's a separate question.
I'm online right now via Unlimited Freeserve Time, available to anyone with a BT line. This costs me 10 UKP per month, which I can (effectively) reduce by prefixing national rate calls with a dialler code. See, that £10 is technically buying that amount of national rate calls over Energis.
I've had some problems with a badly setup cache box on their system sending my firewall mad - and a POP server doing the same thing on a smaller scale - but in other respects they're good. No discernable difference in performance from normal Freeserve (perfectly good), but no phone bill.
I'm very happy with them and could recommend them to anyone else. Except, as a warning, that they're only taking 10,000 new users per week - took me 2-3 weeks IIRC to get added to the system.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I'd rather have a huge load of Meccano - Erector to Americans. Y'see, I enjoy engineering as well as computers and you can do _so_ much with Meccano that isn't possible with Lego. Seriously, I've seen some absolutely stunning models that simply aren't possible in Lego. Unfortunately, I'm currently reliant on nicking my Dad's when he's not looking and I should be moving out soon - well, as soon as anyone notices my sig and replies ;)
;) Definitely below PS2 prices, far cooler to me.
The other thing I'd have to say I'd want is old computers or components. One thing I'd love to be able to do when I move out is set up a couple of networked MP3 & net radio terminals, which would run happily enough on 3-4 year old parts. Well, if I slammed in a big HDD
If we're being unlimited and unrealistic, an idea from JWZ last time this came up attracted me. Imagine a model helicopter with computers controlling the avionics so you can fly it safely without a long training course, long range and a video relay so you can fly it outside visual range. Totally impractical as it'd probably cost more than my car, but I want one.
I have to agree that part of the S/N problem is pretty inevitable on a system of any size.
;) Anyway. I'd be extremely unlikely to ever get modded up for my posts, but that doesn't imply that I wouldn't be a fantastic moderator.
We can improve on moderation though - make Karma relative to posting volume. I'm currently somewhere near the karma cap (was on it, until an IE bug moderated the wrong commented and I rightly slapped down in M2...) but I don't get modded up that often. I'm there as I've been here a long time. And, let's be honest, it's not too difficult to get 50 positive moderations in a year or two.
Let's say we make karma degrade. Say 1 point lost per month, one lost per 10 posts (or whatever). I need to remain a good poster to keep high karma. Yes, I can see that that _could_ encourage more karma whoring as to keep a +1 you'd need to do so continually, but I genuinely don't think it's as much of a problem as some people make out.
The other thing to look at is whether it's sensible for posting and moderation karma to remain unified. I'd argue not.
By keeping them together, we unnecessarily reduce the quality of both.
Hypothetical situation. Let's say I'm a troll. Does that mean I'd be a bad moderator? No, not necessarily. There's a strong case to be put for not giving trolls mod points as to withold them may deter trolling on some level, but that's about it.
Now, let's imagine I can't spell and am hopelessly inarticulate. Some might say that was the case now
Ultimately, I'd go for a fundamental overhaul of these things. Rate posts in percentage terms, make sure almost anyone can mod pretty much constantly. Posts then get modded with much more precision - so we don't have the current problem that the first post to hit +5 gets a huge boost over the second, thus encouraging whoring as opposed to well thought-through comments. M2 wouldn't really work so if we want the current style, you do effective M2 by comparing ratings given to posts. Peaks on the chart count as a fair, blips as unfair.
None of this addresses the fundamental problem with moderation as a concept, though - tyranny of the majority. The comment which works for most will almost certainly win. It may be wrong on careful analysis, but the gut call is that it's correct. Whereas the more thoughtful post with more actual understanding may lose out as less can understand it. Also, what do you do if the trolls win? If the system is entirely automated, it's possible that the trolls could get in on the ground floor and, thanks to all systems being fundamentally based on the approval of peer groups, take over. If they mod each other up and good comments down, you're stuffed...
If you really want to maintain perceived quality, restrict moderation to a central clique of the great and the good. It's the only way of ensuring that it's good - but it does make the assumption that whoever does the choosing is right, and impose their viewpoint(s) on the group. It takes a very strong individual to be fair and even-handed with that level of power...
One other thing to add to that - last time I checked, Somalia was the one country in the world without a government, after the war.
In other words, the US is effectively isolated on that one. The only other country couldn't sign if it tried.
I agree about simplicity winning as a rule, but that battle was closer than you made out.
;)
Y'see, if you make a floating crane it has to be _very_ stable and well balanced, or it'll capsize. Theirs wasn't, and very nearly did.
I'd actually contend that the buoyancy tank system would have worked better _if_ we had intelligent people running it. As it was, if you remember the challenge, they panicked and took a stupid decision for how to maneuver the tanks. Meant they had to pump for ages, slowing them down and breaking the pump... Stupid, as they had ballast on the tanks which they could have gently released to raise them as opposed to pumping extra air in.
Fundamentally, though, simplicity and bikers will normally win. Simplcity gives you less to build and less to break, while bikers are used to building strange contraptions from scrap and the like. Look at any trike for proof
No, that's far from true. Anything where product placement is possible could work. Sitcoms, for example, are very easy to do that way. Sports can work, too - subscriptions there are well established, while getting sponsors to stick banner ads in the coverage - or pay either to replace or retain ad hoardings in the stadia in the coverage.
Good documentaries would become difficult, to say the least though. Ditto good drama. If we want either, we may have to pay directly...
There was a very interesting article about this sort of problem - well, funding commercial TV in general - in a post-TiVO world in the Guardian (UK) a while back. Sorry, no URL :(
The ultimate conclusion - massive product placement was about all that's viable. When the advert can be so easily bypassed, the only real way to pay for it all is to make the ad and the program inseparable.
Makes me queasy too, but the logic does seem inescapable.
Interesting.
One little thing, though. You're spending $600 on a stereo component, designed component-by-component. Why integrated sound, then? Seems to stuff it up to me, as the quality isn't exactly going to be fantastic now is it?
Read on down my post.
Distributing DeCSS itself is good - especially with a good argument as to why you're distributing it alongside. It's still civil disobediance (well, for Americans) but it's directly usable as DeCSS and hopefully informs people, too.
Distributing a song, a T-shirt, image file headers - anything of that form - just makes this issue look like it's only supported by a bunch of kids trying to annoy people without any good reason. I don't want them to be able to paint this dispute in that way and I suspect you don't, either.
Y'see, there's two things here.
On one side, there's the censorship angle. We can have this argument until the cows come home, talking about whether restricting speech is right under certain circumstances. I'm not coming down on either side of the fence - but notice I'm in the UK not the USA.
On the other side, there's the issue of DVD control. I don't think you're going to find many people who will argue that it's legitimate that the studios can control who makes DVD players, recorders - or even _movies_. Which is really what CSS is about, after all, so DeCSS is (amongst other things) a way of stopping them from exerting this unfair influence.
Pick your battles. I'd have to say I think the second one is more likely to get people to agree with you that it's a Good Thing. The censorship argument is more open to personal opinions so harder to win.
Sorry, but this smacks of immaturity. Saying 'Nyaah nyaah nyaah nyaah nyaah you can't stop us!!!' doesn't help the studios, the lawyers, the media at large or the general public to take this seriously. In fact, it probably does the reverse.
DeCSS should be legal and the studio's attempts to control manufacture, use and hardware related to DVDs should be recognised for the abuse of cartel power that it is. But doing this doesn't help.
What we need are eloquent defenders explaining this one and justifying the existence of this sort of software - along with explaining why the MPAA members are abusing their position here. They help, they change people's opinions. Playing whack-a-mole like this and saying that it doesn't matter how illegal they make it because they'll never get rid of it anyway only harms the cause and convinces others that it's only supported by silly kids who want a toy without having to pay for it.
In other words, this plays right into their hands. We shouldn't do it, we shouldn't encourage it. Distribute DeCSS by all means - but do it openly and explain why it's good that this program exists, and why the current situation is wrong. If you can't provide a good enough explanation yourself, link to someone else's. That helps our cause, this harms it.
I've thought about this, too. I've got a Psion 5 - which covers a lot of the functionality - but every now and then, something bigger and hairier would be nice.
;) If you want a bit more space, sling in a microdrive.
;)
I'm sorry if this is going to annoy people, but look at Windows CE here. You can get nice little boxes with 100-200ish MHz CPUs - seem to be normally StrongARM or MIPS - 32-64MB or RAM, 800*600 screens. Light weight, long battery life. And a big enough screen and keyboard that you're not feeling significantly cramped. Well, I'm not anyway
If you don't want to buy anything associated with MS at all, look at a Psion 7. A bit larger and a lower screen resolution, but still a nice box. And if you want to stick with the standard software rather than converting it all to Linux or BSD, EPOC32 is rather nice.
Not too expensive, either. I've seen them going for 5-600 UKP and remember the standard tech exchange rate of £1 = $1 US...
The old IBM Workpad z50 was one of these, and got some decent enough reactions when they were being remaindered and someone worked out how to stick Linux or BSD on them. Well, they're better boxes now. Higher screen resolutions, more RAM. Heck, WinCE 3 is rather better than 2, by all accounts. Not that that's especially difficult
I can't see anything better for that sort of functionality.
I can't say I find IE5 anything other than buggy. And I'm using it right here, right now, under Windows 98, to post this.
Let's use slashdot itself as an example. It cuts off most stories part-way through. If I have mod points, it smears the comboboxes all over the screen when I scroll, misplaces them and then finally gives up rendering them altogether. Still, not very relevant as I can't use them - when it cut off early, it took that 'Moderate' button with it...
It frequently screws up so badly it won't let me swap windows properly. It will intermittently refuse to follow links. And it eats resources like nothing else you can imagine. It's just horrendous what it can do to your system and it'll fall over with a fraction of the number of windows I can open from Netscape.
Communicator 4.0x was a lovely, stable, feature-packed browser. 4.5 was atrocious and could reliably crash the machine totally. They've been getting slowly better since and it's now mostly usable again. Unfortunately, IE has been getting steadily worse for some time...
Roll on Mozilla.
I remember a while back someone came up with a navigation system which, rather than using GPS sattelites, tuned into AM radio and gained its position by triangulation of the data combined with a database of transmitter locations. Needed a heck of a lot of signals - 10ish IIRC - to get an accurate enough position, but it did work. And for quite a bit less cost, too. Never did hear more about it, which is a pity. Struck me as a nice hack and would probably work better in that sort of environment.
Anyway, back onto the original. One thing some designers seem to forget, though, is that it isn't practical to assume a constant GPS signal. I heard a rather funny story a little while back where a system was being tested by one of the UK car mags (Autocar) but wasn't telling them to come off a roundabout. See, the exit was under a flyover and it couldn't get the signal as it hit the junction, which it required. Oops...
Someone soon wrote in and pointed out that the system on their Rover 75 could successfully navigate through a tunnel. Apparently, it was using the speedo and power steering to provide secondary location information. Not so accurate, but it worked well enough to clear the obstruction and could probably help with this sort of problem.
There's a 50 cap on Karma now, is there?
:)
Might explain the odd behaviour that appeared a while ago. Modding up wasn't being added to my Karma, modding down was reducing it.
They really have had better iedas than that one, haven't they? Oh well...
Must admit I've long thought that the best thing to do with karma is to make it fade. Partially related to time, partially to posting volume. That way, it becomes a more accurate measure of an individual's worth to the slashdot community.
IMO
I didn't.
I'm not asking Phil Zimmerman whether he knows about Slashdot interviews, as that really wouldn't make much sense now, would it? What I was wondering was whether any of the slashdot community knew what was going on. Entirely legit.
Actually, I was thinking along those lines.
;)
Slashdot-hosted interviews used to be, what, weekly? And yet when was the last one? Or have I simply had them filtered out of my homepage with a new bug?
Interesting :)
;)
I actually much prefer coding in Pascal to C. Partly as I find Pascal a very clear syntax whereas even C fans will admit it can look like line noise. Not as bad as Perl but still... Partly, too, that because it's very picky, it's very easy to bugfix. The compiler will catch so many little gotchas which would cause something weird to happen with a C program, as the problem doesn't show up until later... Example: in Pascal, if I try and write past the end of an array it crashes. I can find that _very_ easily by stepping through the code. Do the same in C and it'll normally corrupt the memory. Now, which is easier to track down and sort out?
I've often thought that C's success is at least partially cultural. I remember when I was first getting into Amigas, everything had to be hand-coded in assembler (or so it sometimes looked, anyway) or you weren't a real coder. Now, C is (in many ways) a platform-independent assembly language. Yes, it's higher level, but there's still a fair bit in common. Anyway. The point is that coding in C there was still enough metal-bashing to make the coder look like a real man. Pascal, OTOH, is just too easy.
If you're writing an OS or a driver or something else at that sort of level, C makes sense in many ways while Pascal (or most Pascal-derived languages) would have clear limitations. If I'm writing a normal user-space application, though - such as a web browser, considering where this message is being posted - IMO you just don't need the level of control C gives you. If you don't need the control, why should you pay the cost of having the little gotchas to catch? I've just got better things to do with my time, and appreciate the easier debugging. The apps users would, too - same debugging effort produces better quality. What more could you want?
You're thinking of something unnecessarily complex with your skating robot. Watch robotic Football (I'm British, OK?) and you'll see they don't normally have legs or kick the ball. They use wheels or tracks and push.
;)
I'd be interested to see an Ice Hockey robot too, but I can't see why you should make it skate. My instinct would say rubber tank tracks would be best.
As an aside, I can't see it'd be too difficult to convert a Football robot to Ice Hockey, as the games as they'd be played by the robots are pretty similar.
Anyway. If you want a more interesting challenge, robotic table tennis has been attempted for years, with varying degrees of success. You might be able to manage a simplified form of volleyball.
Vechicle sports - car, bike, boat, plane racing - aren't too hard, TBH. Collision avoidance is a pretty big challenge, though
If we want to go for individual sports, ski-ing in its various forms would be interesting. Slalom racing would require precision of movement, downhill speed of reactions and stability like little else. Cross-country would be an interesting test of flexibility and (potentially) endurance. Jumping would be interesting, but the potential for someone to simply build a hang-glider and rather spoil the whole event is there... You'd probably need to limit it to humnanoid robots. Still, the speed and precision of reaction needed would make it interesting.
My opinion here:
I thought it was interesting. I thought it was fun. I thought the effects were good. I was pleased to see SF getting that sort of attention.
I didn't think it was at all deep. In fact, on a particularly objectionable day, I might go so far as to say I thought it was shallow. They had some good ideas and a good story, but didn't want to go for that extra edge in the storytelling. A mistake, IMO - Mission: Impossible and the first two Batman films would seem a fair indication that its target audience will still enjoy a (relatively) complex film and that they can make good money. Heck, wasn't Batman breaking records at the time?
I'll be interested to see what they do with the sequels but I'm not expecting works of genius.
Splitting hairs here, but I'm not sure I'd agree. What you'd actually have would be the fourth system itself running as the default (if extremely minimal) OS and _all_ user-space OSs running as tasks of it.
Actually, Japan use NTSC...
I'm not suggesting the original guy was right but it is irritating that I can't just ship a TiVO or ReplayTV across the atlantic.
Y'know, I think we could be reading too much into this to be honest.
If I were making print server appliances like the JetDirect, I'd definitely consider Linux. It's already out there, it's free. Almost zero effort gets you something which will do the job. Performance isn't really an issue I'd guess - as long as it's not terrible, the price means it'll win pretty much every time.
If I was thinking of what client OSs to support, I can't say I'd support Linux, though. Too little market share to justify the cost and effort of testing and supporting it all to a standard that wouldn't be counterproductive. Doesn't help that we're not talking about a single, coherent system but hundreds of small variants. It's not zero market share but it's close enough that I can see how they cuold choose not to support it.
To you, I don't disagree with that.
The point I was making though (which seems to have been missed...) is that there is a _claim_ and a (theoretically genuine) belief that the moral code is being handed down from some higher power. They aren't saying 'I think we should all adhere to these rules because I like them', but 'I adhere to these rules as I believe a higher power has told me they're right'.
Whether you recognise the authority is another question, but there is a _claim_ to a higher authority than man.
Make sense yet?
Re: point 3, a thought.
Surely any moral code in an atheistic society is a bit dodgy on human rights grounds? If we have an agreed religion in the society, we have a higher power whose teachings we can follow and use them as the base of our moral code. Without that, it's just people imposing their views on one another - which sounds like a breach of human rights to me.
This then leads on to the question of whether a society with a state religion is itself a breach of human rights, of course, but that's a separate question.
Anyone?
They're not the only ones.
I'm online right now via Unlimited Freeserve Time, available to anyone with a BT line. This costs me 10 UKP per month, which I can (effectively) reduce by prefixing national rate calls with a dialler code. See, that £10 is technically buying that amount of national rate calls over Energis.
I've had some problems with a badly setup cache box on their system sending my firewall mad - and a POP server doing the same thing on a smaller scale - but in other respects they're good. No discernable difference in performance from normal Freeserve (perfectly good), but no phone bill.
I'm very happy with them and could recommend them to anyone else. Except, as a warning, that they're only taking 10,000 new users per week - took me 2-3 weeks IIRC to get added to the system.