This is one of the things that Popper raises in his book "The logic of scientific discovery".
As a one time physicist it seems to me that the current theories are still in an early stage of development. I don't see the current attempts as ad hoc attempts to include extensions, rather as an exploration what the theories imply.
"However, they also provide contradictory results. for instance, relativity is deterministic (1 set of conditions produces 1 outcome) whereas quantum mechanics only predicts the probablility of events."
Not so, quantum mechanics is determistic too. It is only when one makes a measurement that one gets into probabilities.
Anybody remember the MCC distribution, when Linux was around about version 0.9? Put together by Adrian Le Blanc at the Manchester Computer Centre in Manchester.
"A reasonable man adapts himself to suit his environment. An unreasonable man persists in attempting to adapt his environment to suit himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
Think of the number of enormous changes the have been promulgated by one man, from Isaac Newton, to Karl Marx, to Linus Torvalds.
The EFF should look closely at the documents in this case. The DeCSS case is almost exactly the same.
Opening a libel case against the MPAA should be fun. And before anybody says it can't be done, look at the McLibel case. The defendent didn't win, but they cost McDonalds a slew of money, and opened up a lot of information that McDonalds didn't want publicised.
> The more you layer GUI on top of the system, the > more you clutter its ability to process > efficiently
Not true, if you layer it and have well defined access points between the GUI, application and OS layers. Absolutely true if you lump everything into a single space, like certain other operating systems produced by a company in Redmond.
> Properly designed software should have a generic > interface that provides hooks for both scripting > (including command line parameters) and GUIs
Already exists, and has done for a long, long time. What you are talking about is the basic Model/View/Controller paradigm of Smalltalk.
One of the things I do besides fencing is to juggle.
Sometime ago I bought a set of clubs from a particular manufacturer. They were beautiful, lots of glitter on them, laser stripes etc. The unfortunate thing was that they were useless as juggling clubs, the balance was wrong, the spin wasn't even and they tended to land on their side and break.
Apple use 3rd generation graphics you say, so what. If the human factors are bad (which I doubt they will be), or the UI is just a glossy overlay on crappy applications then what is the point. It is just a triumph of presentation over content.
Aqua has a beautiful appearance. Is that beauty skin deep?
Unless the GUI overlays some real functionality then one has to question its usefulness. I certainly don't believe that "Presentation is everything, content is mere ephemera". (Can't find a reference to this quote, which is almost certainly by Oscar Wilde).
IIRC the majority of MS profits come from the Office division.
In the case of a break up would the operating systems division be able to generate sufficient cash to be able to maintain and develop the multiple OS base that MS has? Has anybody any clue as to the cost overun on W2K (2-3 years late, with how many people at what salary working on it)? I suspect that a pure OS division wouldn't be able to fund this.
We don't need Linux on a PDA. But from a vendor's point of view it makes life a lot easier. They don't have to build an O/S, or buy one and then adapt the front end to fit. They have the source for the O/S, they can modify this to fit the requirements of their application.
We are already starting to see the Linux/UNIX as a basis for appliances, think of the Cobalt servers, Macintosh O/S etc. I suspect we will be seeing a lot more of them appearing, hence Linus's interest in embedded Linux.
I heard an interview with a surgeon after seat belts were made mandatory in the UK.
He was asked what the major change was since the law was implemented. His response was that he no longer had to spend hours picking pieces of glass out of peoples faces.
I am not keen on the speed governors (though they are fitted in lorries/trucks in the UK), but seat belts have proved a great boon to a number of people.
Rational produce a nice OOA/D package which uses the Unified Modeling Language. It will generate C, C++, Java (and possibly Ada). The generated Java is standard (if slightly behind the times).
I saw an interesting article recently about a plant used for generations in India as an analgesic. There was some trade in the plant, enough to employ a significant number of people.
An American company (I am not being anti-American here, insert the name of any developed country) had taken the plant, extracted the active ingredient and patented it.
The company had no intention of paying the native Indians, who presumably had prior art and would be made unemployed by the action of the company.
But trade doesn't exist in isolation, it exists in a social, moral, and environmental milieu.
The large corporations, who exert most influence at the WTO, don't care about these things. After all they don't contribute to profits and may in fact reduce them.
Last week I suggested that we would go from "Pouring grits down my trousers" to "Naked, Petrified Natalie Portman". I was moderated down (really ruined my karma).
Now we get this dross - don't say you weren't warned.
The thing about the WTO and similar organisations is the pathological secrecy that they operate under.
Rather than close down the limited information flow it would be better to distribute the sub rosa stuff that they keep secret. The McLibel sites are a good example of this working (to some extent at least).
It is hypethetico-deductive. Read Karl Popper "The Logic of Scientific Discovery".
In it he argues that one cannot prove any scientific theorem true, since this would require an infinite number of tests. However one can prove a theory false with a single (critical) test.
Slashdot Mirror
This is one of the things that Popper raises in his book "The logic of scientific discovery".
As a one time physicist it seems to me that the current theories are still in an early stage of development. I don't see the current attempts as ad hoc attempts to include extensions, rather as an exploration what the theories imply.
"However, they also provide contradictory results. for instance, relativity is deterministic (1 set of conditions produces 1 outcome) whereas quantum mechanics only predicts the probablility of events."
Not so, quantum mechanics is determistic too. It is only when one makes a measurement that one gets into probabilities.
So who benefits from taking up trade disputes with them
Anybody remember the MCC distribution, when Linux was around about version 0.9? Put together by Adrian Le Blanc at the Manchester Computer Centre in Manchester.
To quote Bernard Shaw
"A reasonable man adapts himself to suit his environment. An unreasonable man persists in attempting to adapt his environment to suit himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
Think of the number of enormous changes the have been promulgated by one man, from Isaac Newton, to Karl Marx, to Linus Torvalds.
There was an interesting snippet on the BBC recently, talking about the incomes that governments and corporations have.
It would seem that the ranking list for the top incomes now has 51 companies and only 49 governments. So who do you think holds the power?
The EFF should look closely at the documents in this case. The DeCSS case is almost exactly the same.
Opening a libel case against the MPAA should be fun. And before anybody says it can't be done, look at the McLibel case. The defendent didn't win, but they cost McDonalds a slew of money, and opened up a lot of information that McDonalds didn't want publicised.
And close this discussion forthwith
> The more you layer GUI on top of the system, the
> more you clutter its ability to process
> efficiently
Not true, if you layer it and have well defined access points between the GUI, application and OS layers. Absolutely true if you lump everything into a single space, like certain other operating systems produced by a company in Redmond.
> Properly designed software should have a generic
> interface that provides hooks for both scripting
> (including command line parameters) and GUIs
Already exists, and has done for a long, long time. What you are talking about is the basic Model/View/Controller paradigm of Smalltalk.
The 11th November, 3111
One of the things I do besides fencing is to juggle.
Sometime ago I bought a set of clubs from a particular manufacturer. They were beautiful, lots of glitter on them, laser stripes etc. The unfortunate thing was that they were useless as juggling clubs, the balance was wrong, the spin wasn't even and they tended to land on their side and break.
Apple use 3rd generation graphics you say, so what. If the human factors are bad (which I doubt they will be), or the UI is just a glossy overlay on crappy applications then what is the point. It is just a triumph of presentation over content.
Aqua has a beautiful appearance. Is that beauty skin deep?
Unless the GUI overlays some real functionality then one has to question its usefulness. I certainly don't believe that "Presentation is everything, content is mere ephemera". (Can't find a reference to this quote, which is almost certainly by Oscar Wilde).
IIRC the majority of MS profits come from the Office division.
In the case of a break up would the operating systems division be able to generate sufficient cash to be able to maintain and develop the multiple OS base that MS has? Has anybody any clue as to the cost overun on W2K (2-3 years late, with how many people at what salary working on it)? I suspect that a pure OS division wouldn't be able to fund this.
We are already starting to see the Linux/UNIX as a basis for appliances, think of the Cobalt servers, Macintosh O/S etc. I suspect we will be seeing a lot more of them appearing, hence Linus's interest in embedded Linux.
You are right - there is no constitutional right to free speech in the UK. Largely because we don't have a written constitution.
However, there is a common law right to free speech.
And yes, the idea is to stop people speeding rather than restricting their speed for no reason.
I heard an interview with a surgeon after seat belts were made mandatory in the UK.
He was asked what the major change was since the law was implemented. His response was that he no longer had to spend hours picking pieces of glass out of peoples faces.
I am not keen on the speed governors (though they are fitted in lorries/trucks in the UK), but seat belts have proved a great boon to a number of people.
A recent poll showed that 45% of Britons would be happy to get in their car, set the destination and let the car get on with it.
Interestingly enough the people who were most in favour were the geeks.
Rational produce a nice OOA/D package which uses the Unified Modeling Language. It will generate C, C++, Java (and possibly Ada). The generated Java is standard (if slightly behind the times).
After all this showed how good a Web server NT is for static pages ;-)
They are licencees of Solaris from Sun, so what are they going to do on that front?
I saw an interesting article recently about a plant used for generations in India as an analgesic. There was some trade in the plant, enough to employ a significant number of people.
An American company (I am not being anti-American here, insert the name of any developed country) had taken the plant, extracted the active ingredient and patented it.
The company had no intention of paying the native Indians, who presumably had prior art and would be made unemployed by the action of the company.
But trade doesn't exist in isolation, it exists in a social, moral, and environmental milieu.
The large corporations, who exert most influence at the WTO, don't care about these things. After all they don't contribute to profits and may in fact reduce them.
Last week I suggested that we would go from "Pouring grits down my trousers" to "Naked, Petrified Natalie Portman". I was moderated down (really ruined my karma).
Now we get this dross - don't say you weren't warned.
The thing about the WTO and similar organisations is the pathological secrecy that they operate under.
Rather than close down the limited information flow it would be better to distribute the sub rosa stuff that they keep secret. The McLibel sites are a good example of this working (to some extent at least).
It is hypethetico-deductive. Read Karl Popper "The Logic of Scientific Discovery".
In it he argues that one cannot prove any scientific theorem true, since this would require an infinite number of tests. However one can prove a theory false with a single (critical) test.