Debian is the leading edge of free software distributions. It's not a contender for proprietary distributions such as Red Hat or Suse. Far from it. Debian is an immense proof that free development always produces things at better quality than non-free development.
The sheer size of software on potato and the stability it displays is incredible. Debian has managed to be the distribution for a variety of tasks, including development, and on many architectures.
Okay, I had this idea when I first read Transmeta's patents. In fact, it's all old hat. The challenge is in the real processor, VLIW, EPIC or whatever.
If you have some device like a FPGA, reconfig is going to take some time. Although there have been advances in that field, I have a very cheap solution to it.
All that the hardware must assume is the quantum of the pre-emptive task scheduler in OS. I think you can make a translator chip that reconfigs within a quantum. Then just double buffer the translators. Since the next quantum can be known beforehand, reconfig the idle translator while the other is operating. Then switch translators when the quantum is done. The instruction set for the upcoming code stream will be ready. Voila!
That way, I think you could do all sorts of emulation tricks, plus an array of DSP, 3d, etc. features easily. I won't elaborate further, but the implementation should be obvious, (you need a *bit* of software support to take advantage of this design...)
Let aside the few mistakes here and there, and Matrix does have those points. Actually, those points have been made much better than, for instance eXistenZ.. whatever, that movie quite didn't make it.
In Matrix, you're subject to some fundamental questions of epistemology, so what is it that you might know? That is, what knowledge is available to you and what is real? Anyway, the total immersion through that "neuro-active simulation", actually a total VR, is interesting in its own right. Noting that the term "VR" is not used in the movie, but "AI" actually worded.
Of course, the major hit there is about the philosophy of mind which I see everybody around tries to avoid. Mind is mechanical, folks! I am not an eliminative materialist, but still we're all materialists right? The proposition that a piece of software can attain human-like, or perhaps super-human intelligence, as Agent Smith in the movie is striking to many. Not in the AI community though, in which the word 'agent' having ultimately more technical references, however aimed decidedly at producing stuff as decent as Agent Smith. Some drop the strong AI claim, but you know, strong AI is the real thing.
Well, I sometimes like the idea that our descendents, of metal and fibers, take over the world, but that's not really what I'm working on...:)
Okay, getting on with the blurb, the dark side of AI concept is a bit fishy in fact. You know, AI creatures would be just rational, thus the principle of charity would operate, and therefore we would come to understand and appreciate each other. In case they are superior, at least some of us would acknowledge, whatever... But sci-fi writers always hope for the worst, so we have some dramatic moments, and have some story right? I recall John McCarthy claiming that fiction is impossible without some mischief.
Getting back to the computational view of the mind, in Matrix, you have a lot of good assessments of "cyberspace". Take the tracking device placed by the agents in the beginning of the movie. One of the best scenes in the movie, but beyond that. The tracking device is a piece of software, autonomous and pertains to a particular interaction with the simulator environment. Indeed, you would think that the agents would be able to track down Neo wherever he went since it's all software, but that's not the case. The complexity of simulation, well I have no idea how it could be achieved since the granularity of simulation would undermine any attempt at doing so, nevertheless decorates the virtual environment with qualities of real life.
Now this may sound strange, but it is the case. The Matrix is not a passive database, it's a software system that's full of processes and interaction among them, like a big multiuser system.In fact the system is so complex that you would need a tracking device to track down someone. The tracking device plugs right into the body simulation process of the host, and signals a daemon over there about the inputs, like a satellite. The transformation of its shape is also very clever in the movie. Think of it as a sort of interface, in cyberspace you'd need to make some kind of "human interface" for your software. Recall that it's just like a Bond gadget that the agents activate. Very familiar interface, a fairly mechanical device, however assuming an organic form once easily activated, has some sort of safety cap and a button I guess.The organic form is appropriate because it probably has the subsystems that will enable it to attach to host "organism"
On the other hand, some of the interpretations in "The Matrix" are not very convincing. In addition to the desperate "battery" thingy, there is the case of dying in the real world when you're killed in the Matrix. Hmm, let's come to think of it. Now it would be certainly persuasive for the corps in fields to really die when they die in the simulation. But for our team of hackers engaged to alleviate the ultimately evil AI, there should be no such thing. Death would be a side effect of the neuro-plug, you could imagine that the body simulation software detects death, and instructs the cell software to kill the corp.
if (dead()) cell.kill();
Whatever. Now a second way is possible as implied in the movie. The brain is so convinced that the Matrix is the real world that when the body in Matrix dies, the brain believes that it is dead, and therefore terminates all life functions. But, that's not persuasive. You could say that the person may die because of the shock caused by death, but that's rather psychological and is not guaranteed to kill the person. The person might have the kind of psychological strength that would hold him back from death in such a case. Anyhow, these guys are hackers, and they would have fixed that bug in the simulator, not all neural signals are overridden by the neuro-plug. You'd not let the device control your breathing, anyway. Some of the physical effects of strain, excitement, could be enforced by the cell, but the hackers don't need it. All they need to do is to sit there silently, and work with their minds. So, your mind wouldn't actually be uploaded to the matrix, that's costly, instead you'd only interface with it. So here's a question of implicit dualism, you see.
Then, surely, our hackers wouldn't need an exit, they can just exit anytime.. just unplug, and you're gone from the matrix, ha, of course you'd have some robust code like
while (plugged()) { run_simulation_step() } clean_up()
void clean_up() { if (self_image) { self_image->flash_sequence();// funky exit sequence delete self_image;// clean up so that people just see a miracle. } }
You see, that easy. In such a world, hackers are gods anyway. You need a plasma gun, download from www.weapons.resistance.org, no problem! Arm yourself with all kinds of plug-ins. What do you need? Speed? Let the software handle it. Go ahead, and become an X-Men, it's allowed.
That's just the gadgetry though, only the interface between the mind and the world. There's of course more to it. From the movie, it would seem that reality is what you perceive. Morpheus makes it clear in his statement "Do you think it(this?) is the air you breathe?" Then you'd think what is Agent Smith. From our discussions, I think a consensus was reached that Agent Smith is only a process, it has no physical extensions in the real world, it is only an instance of a program. That is, he isn't a robot that plugs into the matrix, he exists in the matrix, or rather their network. Exactly, Agent Smith inherits some of the human characteristics with which it was not designed, from the his dwellings in a world populated by human minds. His despise for humans and his struggle for escape is not by chance. He conceives of himself as absolutely superior to humans. The purity which it was endowed, the mental power he possesses, and his independence from a false set of beliefs make him think that these creatures with dependence on a history of organic filth, are worthless, and the Matrix is what they deserve. He hates them so profoundly, that he wishes that his job is done, and steps outside the Matrix, to some other part of the system which can serve his goals better. Agent Smith, is not a simple goal planning agent that processses straightforward inferences towards a logical goal. He is as decent as a human being, perhaps far better than one, stressed by his excellence in speaking and his acts in perfection. Though, a capable human being, hacker Neo, defeats him by virtue of his mental skills. A friend of mine argued that the following happened when Neo did away with Agent Smith.
But can a process be intelligent? That is the thing you'd like to ask in philosophy class. Screw free will. You'd want to know the problem of representation, the mind-body problem, intentionality - Brentano's thesis, syntax/semantics - linguistic representation, the theory of computation and how it relates to representation and processing of representations, knowledge representation, logic, and all that:)
Whether consumers in US can change this proposed new law or not, it will have echoes everywhere in the world. The states constitute the biggest proportion in all of computer usage, and a defense of user rights there is a significant one.
Now, this case will only emphasize backers' position. It will mark a clear distinction between the people who would like to take your freedom away from you and the people who would like you to preserve them. This, I believe, is a great opportunity for free software to claim its cause.
Not only the Linux kernel and the GNU project but the totality of programs with a free software license, for instance the Debian distribution which I use on a daily basis, will provoke the users' enthusiasm for their own freedom. They will see that free software is designed to protect their rights and "The Industry"'s licenses and laws are made to destroy those rights.
Evidently, this will only be a proof recurring. As free software is heard and used, computer users will be even more aware of their rights and they will demand the thing free software grants them: freedom. I hope this legal assault is prevented, but even if it is not free software can help.
SAL9000, in a later post it is said to stand for Syllogistic ALgorithmic. I really liked it, A.C. Clarke has great imagination. The way Dr. Chandra works in 2010 is admirable, I was really influenced by that. Anyway, it was a great novel, let aside the 2069 and 3001, though 3001 is probably not as good.
Actually, while I was studying our parallel programming textbook, I came across a reference to a Dr. Chandra working on a supercomputer. Of course Chandra is a common name, but I think it would be coincident with the development of a supercomputer prior to 1997 at a national lab. So it could be HAL9000;)
Heuristic ALgorithmic has a twin operating back on Earth in the movie. Do you recall its name, HAL 8000 perhaps ? Also, I guess in 2010 (or in 2069?), Dr. Chandra comes along with an improved version... well HAL 10000? You know we just have to make sure we know all the versions. HAL is a computing system from the ground up, dedicated hardware, OS, software.. the IBM way.. but don't confuse the 'HAL' acronym with IBM..:) (Can OSS build HAL?)
First of all, I'd like to mention that potato is a rock stable and incredibly rich distribution. Debian keeps its technical edge as an all-purpose multi-platform OS/software distribution. With about 4400 packages, we will be able to entertain any computing needs. Adding to that the configurability, consistency, reliability and support it offers together with its open software development model, Debian 2.2 may well be the ultimate GNU/Linux distribution. It would seem only a coincidence that Microsoft's competing product will be released around the same date.
Second, the new distribution is going to get update packages by timely intervals. I suppose that's what the mighty Debian Project Leader had said. The updates from now on are going to be regular, so that the usual antiquity of stable release won't be such a hunchback. Which was to my opinion the only drawback Debian really had...
I've been personally using potato for more than three months, and no distribution I see stands as a replacement for Debian. It is brilliant as the only distribution for the developer, a fully-armed internet server, a great environment for the scientist, and yet a fulfilling one for any user as a desktop/internet machine. [What's more, I suppose the one/. uses:) ]
I send greetings and wishes of happiness in the new year to all Debian users and developers.
Congratulations on your new business effort. However, there is a point that I'd like to make. This effort will of course not hinder Debian development at all. Or will it? I didn't quite understand the "which will produce a commercial version of Debian in cooperation with the Debian developers" phrase about Progeny Linux in the/. article.
I very much hope this will not damage the already stalled new maintainer process since I'd really like to be a Debian developer.
Just 32 Pii-450's, a great 3com switch, and a master node. Beowulf is the way to go. BTW, with that $500000, I could make a zillion-nodes cluster;) I just think our new cluster at CS dept. needs a name. Thinkin'
You should be first reading the Beowulf FAQ. (There are links in prev. posts), but my take for the/. readers here.
First of all, distributed/parallel computing is not an area in which there is consensus on hardware/software systems. Though, there is an accelerating trend towards building supercomputers comprised of clusters of commodity components. The fastest computer on Earth, last time that was ASCI RED (and I hear it's gotten an upgrade!), is built as such. That is vector computers and ultra-expensive parallel computers are being phased out in favor of cluster systems.
A cluster is basically a number of computers connected through a decent interconnection network. On each compute node a traditional OS runs. On top of the OS, a software interface that implements either a message-passing environment or a shared-memory environment sits. In some cases, it may be desirable to modify the OS itself for a better single-system image (such as MOSIX patches). Thus, a cluster is nothing but a number of connected machines. With proper software, it might be possible to run huge clusters on the internet (Check the Globus project!)
In the design of this system, a couple of parameters must obviously be determined. 1) Number of compute nodes 2) Processor/Memory configuration of each compute node. 3) The interconnection network: a) Network interface of each compute node b) The switch that is used to connect each machine.
An incorrect estimation of these parameters may give rise to a very sub-optimal hardware configuration. That is the network must be fasst enough to account for the messages being sent, the memory must be JUST large enought to support the granularity of processing, etc. I advise you to read some introductory text on parallel programming before embarking on a cluster effort.
Notice that there is no SINGLE piece of software that will magically parallelize and distribute your applications gracefully. You will find that explicitly parallel or distributed applications will run much more efficiently. While you can get a global process implementation, or even shared-mem implementations with some software, the real "speedup" is going to be observed for explicitly parallel programs, for instance linear algebra libraries designed to run on message passing architectures.
Finally, let me give you a list of component we're in the process of acquiring.
32 PII-450, 128 MByte compute nodes with 3COM Fast Etherlink 100Base-TX 1 master node, a plain PIII-450, Gigabit ethernet and another NIC to connect to internet, some megs of disk 1 devel workstation, plain PIII-450... 3COM SuperStack II 3900 36-port 100Base-TX, 1 1000Base-SX managed switch 32-port (hopefully) multi-port serial board (you use this for diagnostics)
The software will simply be the stable Debian release, on the compute nodes not much software will run. Of course the lam package will be resident since it is a pretty good MPI implementation. The server will be uplinked to the switch with 1000Base-SX so that it can act as a synchronizing source (you know, beowulf master node, file server, etc.) The multi-port serial board provides a shell over the serial cables to each compute nodes, that gives you a good chance for repair when a node goes down.
What are the major goals for the Potato, and the consequent releases? That is what architectures and features will you be supporting in the near future? Is the release process, for instance in favor of utilizing package pools for more up-to-date releases, likely to change?
I suppose that the GPL enforces the distributor to provide ALL the sources in a physical medium, for a nominal charge if they like. So all the debian packages MUST be _offered_ on CD. Does Corel do that?
Of course, no condition of being "minor" must be put in that license according to GPL.
Why is the KDevelop program and the whole KDE project in general trying to mimic MS libraries, technologies, concepts, and GUI?
Wouldn't we then carry over all the bugs and incapacities of many Windows applications written in VC? Also, will not the KDevelop carry the limitations of DevStudio IDE ? Do you think that the way MS programs and libraries have been designed is, at any rate, optimal, or at least highly satisfactory?
Are you assuming that MS is really going the right path, and all we should do is to copy, verbatim, what they do? Then, why not imitate every MS windows app out there and add 'K' suffix (Change KDevelop to KDevStudio perhaps) ?
I'm asking these questions as a programmer who has worked 1.5 years on NT4.0/VC50 so I really wonder what they think since my sufferings were incredible during that period of time.:)
The analogies made are a bit misleading. Try to think of programmers as music performers. RMS is like those rock stars that are not very very popular but still admired wildly by enthusiasts of music. Well, actually trying to build systems targeted primarily, if not only, at average users is like trying to become like a pop star, say Ricky Martin.
For the enthusiast your work will no more carry value. Sorry, I don't buy Ricky Martin crap. And I don't see why someone who is a "pop programmer" is really more likely to get a decent job.
After all, I've got an autograph from RMS. It reads "Happy Hacking!" and that's exactly what I want to do.
Read the GNU Coding standards some time, GNU proggys provide reasonable defaults and a basic usage but are highly flexible and contain advanced features. So... keep that in mind.
In the previous sections it's indicated that one must distribute the sources in a *physical medium* or offer distribution at a nominal charge.
What Cobalt does is a violation of this, and I think they must be warned immediately. Also, with the increasing number of distributions, there is a need to check whether ALL the source is really available in a physical medium. Probably FSF is working on this, sure we are going to aid them by reporting such violations, won't we? Let's e mail the nasty Qube guys and remind them to read the license!
That's the only way to ensure sanity. (and freedom)
Any of you interested in a C++ DICOM3.0 library? Medical Imaging area is mostly populated by proprietary software, so I just thought it needed a change. The library emerged from the "ashes" of a PACS project here at Bilkent, I wrote a quite extensive DICOM lib (because other sol'ns just didn't make it) on the damned NT, and I'm just porting that to the GNU platform. It's going to be a rather modern piece of medical imaging and communications package, so watch out for that! Thanks to a talk by RMS, I was able to convince our project supervisor of the greater good in free software.
If you're interested in such stuff, please let me know. Once I make the public release, there's gonna be need for discussions over how to cope with new versions of the standard and such... We're also planning to push some GNOME/GTK+ components for the lib as well, (even a volume visualization component). This's gonna be tasty. I'd like to see how those $million proprietary software systems are going to crash.
Wohooo, the next century belongs to a GNU generation!
No great news I suppose. Before the mem prices come down and the motherboard features are finally settled for a kinda stable chipset that would last for more than 6 months IS desirable. I care less about having a 5% faster CPU for zillion bucks right now.
Errr, I'm always confused about post x-ism so forgive me if I'm mistaken.;)
I just realized that I haven't read much of the works mentioned as exemplary of post-cyberpunk, but I feel it is a bit awkward to hail its arrival. It makes little sense to attribute cyberpunk "has its own universe" uniquely, and the distinction, or the relation between cyberpunk and post-cyberpunk doesn't seem very clear.
Indeed, I think people have been creating entire worlds for their books since long ago. Well, there are entire worlds in the ordinary sci-fi, and phantasy, etc. (No need to mention;) Now, what makes cyberpunk some special kind of sci-fi? Uh, I suppose those're the very attributes the critic would find not highly (hi-tech/low-life, etc.) Plus, that's the cool part of it;)
Secondly, I think trying to label a work as post-cyberpunk is only being excessively enthusiastic about cyberpunk. I personally don't like stuff that can be labelled that easily.
Besides, the shift to populism is a bit repulsive for some of the sci-fi audience. Saying that the future will be all too good for the common man, that's just too optimistic. After all, couldn't it be part of a shift to populism in all of literature, or all of sci-fi? Then it isn't so appropriate to call it post-cyberpunk.
John McCarthy once said that if you solve every problem in a scientific and optimal way, then there is no room for literature. How's the twist, the drama and tragedy are to occur in such a regular society and with regular characters? Where's the sci-fi then? Are soap-operas in which people talk about internet "post-cyberpunk"? I guess not. (BTW, there are some pseudo sci-fi, or cyberpunk novels that are made to talk politically, say feminism, or homosexual rights, whatever.. Are those post-cyberpunk? Worthless crap... bash 'em!)
I'd asked/. which gui framework is better beforehand, although this question is a bit different, it was also discussed. Please search previous Ask Slashdot posts to find it out.
Since the two desktop environments depend on pretty different GUI architectures, the first thing to see is that the same CORBA interface works for both... Then, you should encapsulate all GUI into classes, and write separate implementations for GTK-- and QT. However, this will wear you down, since the QT seems to be a little limited for coding.
One fancy idea that came up was writing a GUI abstraction library. This will facilitate the kind of interface that is independent of any GUI lib. However, it would still support all types of (sensible) widgets, messaging (talking about event handling as well), etc. Unfortunately, that's not a piece of cake, and it wasn't attempted before as far as I know.
Not only x86 must be targeted if their product is to make any sense after all.
First, it is a bit difficult to overtake Intel in performance, since the PII/PIII chips have pretty modern architecture inside. When you use a translator+EPIC it's not much better than a plain modern chip that fetches/decodes x86 instructions and sends them over to processing elements on the same chip. If you'd like performance from an EPIC chip, you shouldn't be using an old instrction set at all.. that feels like burning coal to power up a Porsche.
On the other hand, if you have great emulation support for Java VM it'd make great sense. That could be a competent design. You could have the kind of chip that gives you Swing applications that are as good as plain old x86 apps.
Once a friend (yep, a geek one) and I used to talk about an ultimate emulator generator that would generate an optimal software emulator (possibly at the load level) for any emulation of B on A. Now that was a difficult task, but cranking it ou at the h/w level is kinda funky. Now that you have the target processor set, all that is required is translate an instruction stream on the fly, and secondly make sure no exceptions occur so that won't crash the target cpu.. you know crashing the cpu isn't what you'd like.
I think linus will be chopping some code to make that host processor internal to the kernel, so it's gonna be all transparent.
I believe one would love to emulate x86 instruction set and (most part of a) JavaVM at a level that low. And who knows, you even get your RISCy or EPICey target processor do some of the harder stuff like blits or DSP.
Still, sounds pretty cool, and makes sense when the previous patents considered.
Slashdot Mirror
Debian is the leading edge of free software distributions. It's not a contender for proprietary distributions such as Red Hat or Suse. Far from it. Debian is an immense proof that free development always produces things at better quality than non-free development.
The sheer size of software on potato and the stability it displays is incredible. Debian has managed to be the distribution for a variety of tasks, including development, and on many architectures.
Okay, I had this idea when I first read Transmeta's patents. In fact, it's all old hat. The challenge is in the real processor, VLIW, EPIC or whatever.
If you have some device like a FPGA, reconfig is going to take some time. Although there have been advances in that field, I have a very cheap solution to it.
All that the hardware must assume is the quantum of the pre-emptive task scheduler in OS. I think you can make a translator chip that reconfigs within a quantum. Then just double buffer the translators. Since the next quantum can be known beforehand, reconfig the idle translator while the other is operating. Then switch translators when the quantum is done. The instruction set for the upcoming code stream will be ready. Voila!
That way, I think you could do all sorts of emulation tricks, plus an array of DSP, 3d, etc. features easily. I won't elaborate further, but the implementation should be obvious, (you need a *bit* of software support to take advantage of this design...)
exa
Let aside the few mistakes here and there, and Matrix does have those points. Actually, those points have been made much better than, for instance eXistenZ.. whatever, that movie quite didn't make it.
:)
// funky exit sequence // clean up so that people just see a miracle.
:)
In Matrix, you're subject to some fundamental questions of epistemology, so what is it that you might know? That is, what knowledge is available to you and what is real? Anyway, the total immersion through that "neuro-active simulation", actually a total VR, is interesting in its own right. Noting that the term "VR" is not used in the movie, but "AI" actually worded.
Of course, the major hit there is about the philosophy of mind which I see everybody around tries to avoid. Mind is mechanical, folks! I am not an eliminative materialist, but still we're all materialists right? The proposition that a piece of software can attain human-like, or perhaps super-human intelligence, as Agent Smith in the movie is striking to many. Not in the AI community though, in which the word 'agent' having ultimately more technical references, however aimed decidedly at producing stuff as decent as Agent Smith. Some drop the strong AI claim, but you know, strong AI is the real thing.
Well, I sometimes like the idea that our descendents, of metal and fibers, take over the world, but that's not really what I'm working on...
Okay, getting on with the blurb, the dark side of AI concept is a bit fishy in fact. You know, AI creatures would be just rational, thus the principle of charity would operate, and therefore we would come to understand and appreciate each other. In case they are superior, at least some of us would acknowledge, whatever... But sci-fi writers always hope for the worst, so we have some dramatic moments, and have some story right? I recall John McCarthy claiming that fiction is impossible without some mischief.
Getting back to the computational view of the mind, in Matrix, you have a lot of good assessments of "cyberspace". Take the tracking device placed by the agents in the beginning of the movie. One of the best scenes in the movie, but beyond that. The tracking device is a piece of software, autonomous and pertains to a particular interaction with the simulator environment. Indeed, you would think that the agents would be able to track down Neo wherever he went since it's all software, but that's not the case. The complexity of simulation, well I have no idea how it could be achieved since the granularity of simulation would undermine any attempt at doing so, nevertheless decorates the virtual environment with qualities of real life.
Now this may sound strange, but it is the case. The Matrix is not a passive database, it's a software system that's full of processes and interaction among them, like a big multiuser system.In fact the system is so complex that you would need a tracking device to track down someone. The tracking device plugs right into the body simulation process of the host, and signals a daemon over there about the inputs, like a satellite. The transformation of its shape is also very clever in the movie. Think of it as a sort of interface, in cyberspace you'd need to make some kind of "human interface" for your software. Recall that it's just like a Bond gadget that the agents activate. Very familiar interface, a fairly mechanical device, however assuming an organic form once easily activated, has some sort of safety cap and a button I guess.The organic form is appropriate because it probably has the subsystems that will enable it to attach to host "organism"
On the other hand, some of the interpretations in "The Matrix" are not very convincing. In addition to the desperate "battery" thingy, there is the case of dying in the real world when you're killed in the Matrix. Hmm, let's come to think of it. Now it would be certainly persuasive for the corps in fields to really die when they die in the simulation. But for our team of hackers engaged to alleviate the ultimately evil AI, there should be no such thing. Death would be a side effect of the neuro-plug, you could imagine that the body simulation software detects death, and instructs the cell software to kill the corp.
if (dead())
cell.kill();
Whatever. Now a second way is possible as implied in the movie. The brain is so convinced that the Matrix is the real world that when the body in Matrix dies, the brain believes that it is dead, and therefore terminates all life functions. But, that's not persuasive. You could say that the person may die because of the shock caused by death, but that's rather psychological and is not guaranteed to kill the person. The person might have the kind of psychological strength that would hold him back from death in such a case. Anyhow, these guys are hackers, and they would have fixed that bug in the simulator, not all neural signals are overridden by the neuro-plug. You'd not let the device control your breathing, anyway. Some of the physical effects of strain, excitement, could be enforced by the cell, but the hackers don't need it. All they need to do is to sit there silently, and work with their minds. So, your mind wouldn't actually be uploaded to the matrix, that's costly, instead you'd only interface with it. So here's a question of implicit dualism, you see.
Then, surely, our hackers wouldn't need an exit, they can just exit anytime.. just unplug, and you're gone from the matrix, ha, of course you'd have some robust code like
while (plugged())
{
run_simulation_step()
}
clean_up()
void clean_up() {
if (self_image) {
self_image->flash_sequence();
delete self_image;
}
}
You see, that easy. In such a world, hackers are gods anyway. You need a plasma gun, download from www.weapons.resistance.org, no problem! Arm yourself with all kinds of plug-ins. What do you need? Speed? Let the software handle it. Go ahead, and become an X-Men, it's allowed.
That's just the gadgetry though, only the interface between the mind and the world. There's of course more to it. From the movie, it would seem that reality is what you perceive. Morpheus makes it clear in his statement "Do you think it(this?) is the air you breathe?" Then you'd think what is Agent Smith. From our discussions, I think a consensus was reached that Agent Smith is only a process, it has no physical extensions in the real world, it is only an instance of a program. That is, he isn't a robot that plugs into the matrix, he exists in the matrix, or rather their network. Exactly, Agent Smith inherits some of the human characteristics with which it was not designed, from the his dwellings in a world populated by human minds. His despise for humans and his struggle for escape is not by chance. He conceives of himself as absolutely superior to humans. The purity which it was endowed, the mental power he possesses, and his independence from a false set of beliefs make him think that these creatures with dependence on a history of organic filth, are worthless, and the Matrix is what they deserve. He hates them so profoundly, that he wishes that his job is done, and steps outside the Matrix, to some other part of the system which can serve his goals better. Agent Smith, is not a simple goal planning agent that processses straightforward inferences towards a logical goal. He is as decent as a human being, perhaps far better than one, stressed by his excellence in speaking and his acts in perfection. Though, a capable human being, hacker Neo, defeats him by virtue of his mental skills. A friend of mine argued that the following happened when Neo did away with Agent Smith.
neo@matrix$ whoami
root
neo@matrix$ ps aux | grep agent
root 3050 0.0 0.0 2052 0 pts/0 SW 10:39 0:00 agent --image=smith
root 8264 0.0 0.3 2060 420 pts/2 S 10:09 0:00 agen --image==william
root 8449 0.0 0.5 2056 756 pts/3 S 10:18 0:00 agent --image=john
neo@matrix$ kill -9 3050
neo@matrix$ ps aux | grep agent
root 8264 0.0 0.3 2060 420 pts/2 S 10:09 0:00 agen --image==william
root 8449 0.0 0.5 2056 756 pts/3 S 10:18 0:00 agent --image=john
But can a process be intelligent? That is the thing you'd like to ask in philosophy class. Screw free will. You'd want to know the problem of representation, the mind-body problem, intentionality - Brentano's thesis, syntax/semantics - linguistic representation, the theory of computation and how it relates to representation and processing of representations, knowledge representation, logic, and all that
Whether consumers in US can change this proposed new law or not, it will have echoes everywhere in the world. The states constitute the biggest proportion in all of computer usage, and a defense of user rights there is a significant one.
Now, this case will only emphasize backers' position. It will mark a clear distinction between the people who would like to take your freedom away from you and the people who would like you to preserve them. This, I believe, is a great opportunity for free software to claim its cause.
Not only the Linux kernel and the GNU project but the totality of programs with a free software license, for instance the Debian distribution which I use on a daily basis, will provoke the users' enthusiasm for their own freedom. They will see that free software is designed to protect their rights and "The Industry"'s licenses and laws are made to destroy those rights.
Evidently, this will only be a proof recurring. As free software is heard and used, computer users will be even more aware of their rights and they will demand the thing free software grants them: freedom. I hope this legal assault is prevented, but even if it is not free software can help.
SAL9000, in a later post it is said to stand for Syllogistic ALgorithmic. I really liked it, A.C. Clarke has great imagination. The way Dr. Chandra works in 2010 is admirable, I was really influenced by that. Anyway, it was a great novel, let aside the 2069 and 3001, though 3001 is probably not as good.
;)
Actually, while I was studying our parallel programming textbook, I came across a reference to a Dr. Chandra working on a supercomputer. Of course Chandra is a common name, but I think it would be coincident with the development of a supercomputer prior to 1997 at a national lab. So it could be HAL9000
Heuristic ALgorithmic has a twin operating back on Earth in the movie. Do you recall its name, HAL 8000 perhaps ? Also, I guess in 2010 (or in 2069?), Dr. Chandra comes along with an improved version... well HAL 10000? You know we just have to make sure we know all the versions. HAL is a computing system from the ground up, dedicated hardware, OS, software.. the IBM way.. but don't confuse the 'HAL' acronym with IBM.. :) (Can OSS build HAL?)
you need a doctor when you have NT
First of all, I'd like to mention that potato is a rock stable and incredibly rich distribution. Debian keeps its technical edge as an all-purpose multi-platform OS/software distribution. With about 4400 packages, we will be able to entertain any computing needs. Adding to that the configurability, consistency, reliability and support it offers together with its open software development model, Debian 2.2 may well be the ultimate GNU/Linux distribution. It would seem only a coincidence that Microsoft's competing product will be released around the same date.
/. uses :) ]
Second, the new distribution is going to get update packages by timely intervals. I suppose that's what the mighty Debian Project Leader had said. The updates from now on are going to be regular, so that the usual antiquity of stable release won't be such a hunchback. Which was to my opinion the only drawback Debian really had...
I've been personally using potato for more than three months, and no distribution I see stands as a replacement for Debian. It is brilliant as the only distribution for the developer, a fully-armed internet server, a great environment for the scientist, and yet a fulfilling one for any user as a desktop/internet machine. [What's more, I suppose the one
I send greetings and wishes of happiness in the new year to all Debian users and developers.
This is an e-mail I sent to Bruce Perens:
/. article.
-
-----------------------------------------------
Congratulations on your new business effort. However, there is a point that I'd like to make. This effort will of course not hinder Debian development at all. Or will it? I didn't quite understand the "which will produce a commercial version of Debian in cooperation with the Debian developers" phrase about Progeny Linux in the
I very much hope this will not damage the already stalled new maintainer process since I'd really like to be a Debian developer.
Thanks for your attention,
-----------------------------------------------
Just 32 Pii-450's, a great 3com switch, and a master node. Beowulf is the way to go. BTW, with that $500000, I could make a zillion-nodes cluster ;) I just think our new cluster at CS dept. needs a name. Thinkin'
You should be first reading the Beowulf FAQ. (There are links in prev. posts), but my take for the /. readers here.
First of all, distributed/parallel computing is not an area in which there is consensus on hardware/software systems. Though, there is an accelerating trend towards building supercomputers comprised of clusters of commodity components. The fastest computer on Earth, last time that was ASCI RED (and I hear it's gotten an upgrade!), is built as such. That is vector computers and ultra-expensive parallel computers are being phased out in favor of cluster systems.
A cluster is basically a number of computers connected through a decent interconnection network. On each compute node a traditional OS runs. On top of the OS, a software interface that implements either a message-passing environment or a shared-memory environment sits. In some cases, it may be desirable to modify the OS itself for a better single-system image (such as MOSIX patches). Thus, a cluster is nothing but a number of connected machines. With proper software, it might be possible to run huge clusters on the internet (Check the Globus project!)
In the design of this system, a couple of parameters must obviously be determined.
1) Number of compute nodes
2) Processor/Memory configuration of each compute node.
3) The interconnection network:
a) Network interface of each compute node
b) The switch that is used to connect each machine.
An incorrect estimation of these parameters may give rise to a very sub-optimal hardware configuration. That is the network must be fasst enough to account for the messages being sent, the memory must be JUST large enought to support the granularity of processing, etc. I advise you to read some introductory text on parallel programming before embarking on a cluster effort.
Notice that there is no SINGLE piece of software that will magically parallelize and distribute your applications gracefully. You will find that explicitly parallel or distributed applications will run much more efficiently. While you can get a global process implementation, or even shared-mem implementations with some software, the real "speedup" is going to be observed for explicitly parallel programs, for instance linear algebra libraries designed to run on message passing architectures.
Finally, let me give you a list of component we're in the process of acquiring.
32 PII-450, 128 MByte compute nodes with 3COM Fast Etherlink 100Base-TX
1 master node, a plain PIII-450, Gigabit ethernet and another NIC to connect to internet, some megs of disk
1 devel workstation, plain PIII-450...
3COM SuperStack II 3900 36-port 100Base-TX, 1 1000Base-SX managed switch
32-port (hopefully) multi-port serial board (you use this for diagnostics)
The software will simply be the stable Debian release, on the compute nodes not much software will run. Of course the lam package will be resident since it is a pretty good MPI implementation. The server will be uplinked to the switch with 1000Base-SX so that it can act as a synchronizing source (you know, beowulf master node, file server, etc.) The multi-port serial board provides a shell over the serial cables to each compute nodes, that gives you a good chance for repair when a node goes down.
Keep clustering,
What are the major goals for the Potato, and the consequent releases? That is what architectures and features will you be supporting in the near future? Is the release process, for instance in favor of utilizing package pools for more up-to-date releases, likely to change?
Thanks,
__
Eray Ozkural,
CS, Bilkent Univ.
I suppose that the GPL enforces the distributor to provide ALL the sources in a physical medium, for a nominal charge if they like. So all the debian packages MUST be _offered_ on CD. Does Corel do that?
Of course, no condition of being "minor" must be put in that license according to GPL.
Why is the KDevelop program and the whole KDE project in general trying to mimic MS libraries, technologies, concepts, and GUI?
:)
Wouldn't we then carry over all the bugs and incapacities of many Windows applications written in VC? Also, will not the KDevelop carry the limitations of DevStudio IDE ? Do you think that the way MS programs and libraries have been designed is, at any rate, optimal, or at least highly satisfactory?
Are you assuming that MS is really going the right path, and all we should do is to copy, verbatim, what they do? Then, why not imitate every MS windows app out there and add 'K' suffix (Change KDevelop to KDevStudio perhaps) ?
I'm asking these questions as a programmer who has worked 1.5 years on NT4.0/VC50 so I really wonder what they think since my sufferings were incredible during that period of time.
The analogies made are a bit misleading. Try to think of programmers as music performers. RMS is like those rock stars that are not very very popular but still admired wildly by enthusiasts of music. Well, actually trying to build systems targeted primarily, if not only, at average users is like trying to become like a pop star, say Ricky Martin.
For the enthusiast your work will no more carry value. Sorry, I don't buy Ricky Martin crap. And I don't see why someone who is a "pop programmer" is really more likely to get a decent job.
After all, I've got an autograph from RMS. It reads "Happy Hacking!" and that's exactly what I want to do.
Read the GNU Coding standards some time, GNU proggys provide reasonable defaults and a basic usage but are highly flexible and contain advanced features. So... keep that in mind.
.
In the previous sections it's indicated that one must distribute the sources in a *physical medium* or offer distribution at a nominal charge.
What Cobalt does is a violation of this, and I think they must be warned immediately. Also, with the increasing number of distributions, there is a need to check whether ALL the source is really available in a physical medium. Probably FSF is working on this, sure we are going to aid them by reporting such violations, won't we? Let's e mail the nasty Qube guys and remind them to read the license!
That's the only way to ensure sanity. (and freedom)
Any of you interested in a C++ DICOM3.0 library? Medical Imaging area is mostly populated by proprietary software, so I just thought it needed a change. The library emerged from the "ashes" of a PACS project here at Bilkent, I wrote a quite extensive DICOM lib (because other sol'ns just didn't make it) on the damned NT, and I'm just porting that to the GNU platform. It's going to be a rather modern piece of medical imaging and communications package, so watch out for that! Thanks to a talk by RMS, I was able to convince our project supervisor of the greater good in free software.
If you're interested in such stuff, please let me know. Once I make the public release, there's gonna be need for discussions over how to cope with new versions of the standard and such...
We're also planning to push some GNOME/GTK+ components for the lib as well, (even a volume visualization component). This's gonna be tasty. I'd like to see how those $million proprietary software systems are going to crash.
Wohooo, the next century belongs to a GNU generation!
My supervisor was at that big parallel computing conference 2 weeks ago, and he told me that the number of nodes at Sandia amounted to 9000.
;)
Is that correct I wonder, last time I checked they were talking about.. 4500 nodes.., hmm are those dual?
Whatever, I'm sure Sandia will get some upgrade by 2001.. But I like the idea of fastest computer being a Beowulf cluster.
No great news I suppose. Before the mem prices come down and the motherboard features are finally settled for a kinda stable chipset that would last for more than 6 months IS desirable. I care less about having a 5% faster CPU for zillion bucks right now.
Yep, but who's tried it out? It seems that netbase and some basic packages do have IPv6 support. I think Debian has the best support so far...
That gets you coding... Nitzer Ebb, Meat Beat Manifesto, NIN, Ministry... Listening to music somehow tops the energy, anyone know why?
Errr, I'm always confused about post x-ism so forgive me if I'm mistaken. ;)
;) Now, what makes cyberpunk some special kind of sci-fi? Uh, I suppose those're the very attributes the critic would find not highly (hi-tech/low-life, etc.) Plus, that's the cool part of it ;)
I just realized that I haven't read much of the works mentioned as exemplary of post-cyberpunk, but I feel it is a bit awkward to hail its arrival. It makes little sense to attribute cyberpunk "has its own universe" uniquely, and the distinction, or the relation between cyberpunk and post-cyberpunk doesn't seem very clear.
Indeed, I think people have been creating entire worlds for their books since long ago. Well, there are entire worlds in the ordinary sci-fi, and phantasy, etc. (No need to mention
Secondly, I think trying to label a work as post-cyberpunk is only being excessively enthusiastic about cyberpunk. I personally don't like stuff that can be labelled that easily.
Besides, the shift to populism is a bit repulsive for some of the sci-fi audience. Saying that the future will be all too good for the common man, that's just too optimistic. After all, couldn't it be part of a shift to populism in all of literature, or all of sci-fi? Then it isn't so appropriate to call it post-cyberpunk.
John McCarthy once said that if you solve every problem in a scientific and optimal way, then there is no room for literature. How's the twist, the drama and tragedy are to occur in such a regular society and with regular characters? Where's the sci-fi then? Are soap-operas in which people talk about internet "post-cyberpunk"? I guess not. (BTW, there are some pseudo sci-fi, or cyberpunk novels that are made to talk politically, say feminism, or homosexual rights, whatever.. Are those post-cyberpunk? Worthless crap... bash 'em!)
I'd asked /. which gui framework is better beforehand, although this question is a bit different, it was also discussed. Please search previous Ask Slashdot posts to find it out.
Since the two desktop environments depend on pretty different GUI architectures, the first thing to see is that the same CORBA interface works for both... Then, you should encapsulate all GUI into classes, and write separate implementations for GTK-- and QT. However, this will wear you down, since the QT seems to be a little limited for coding.
One fancy idea that came up was writing a GUI abstraction library. This will facilitate the kind of interface that is independent of any GUI lib. However, it would still support all types of (sensible) widgets, messaging (talking about event handling as well), etc. Unfortunately, that's not a piece of cake, and it wasn't attempted before as far as I know.
Happy GUI hacking,
Not only x86 must be targeted if their product is to make any sense after all.
First, it is a bit difficult to overtake Intel in performance, since the PII/PIII chips have pretty modern architecture inside. When you use a translator+EPIC it's not much better than a plain modern chip that fetches/decodes x86 instructions and sends them over to processing elements on the same chip. If you'd like performance from an EPIC chip, you shouldn't be using an old instrction set at all.. that feels like burning coal to power up a Porsche.
On the other hand, if you have great emulation support for Java VM it'd make great sense. That could be a competent design. You could have the kind of chip that gives you Swing applications that are as good as plain old x86 apps.
Once a friend (yep, a geek one) and I used to talk about an ultimate emulator generator that would generate an optimal software emulator (possibly at the load level) for any emulation of B on A. Now that was a difficult task, but cranking it ou at the h/w level is kinda funky. Now that you have the target processor set, all that is required is
translate an instruction stream on the fly, and secondly make sure no exceptions occur so that won't crash the target cpu.. you know crashing the cpu isn't what you'd like.
I think linus will be chopping some code to make that host processor internal to the kernel, so it's gonna be all transparent.
I believe one would love to emulate x86 instruction set and (most part of a) JavaVM at a level that low. And who knows, you even get your RISCy or EPICey target processor do some of the harder stuff like blits or DSP.
Still, sounds pretty cool, and makes sense when the previous patents considered.
Keep kewl,