One possible way to make that work: when compiling to generate the Application Bundle for a specific program, simultaneously generate two sets of code to include in the bundle:
1 - x86 code
2 - ARM code
Then, depending on power-resource utilization requests by the OS or directly by the user, the executing instance of the application can be migrated from one of the types of cores (eg x86 core) to one of the other types of cores (eg ARM-cores) by copying over (a) the current instances variable values, (b) the current instance's stack as a stack pointer = SP, and (c) a pointer to where the current instances program is within the context of the program code as the next instruction pointer (execution pointer.
Implementing (c) above may require creating an array of equivalent program break-points and entry-points for the x86-compiled code and the ARM-compiled code, meaning that the code to generate the bundle would compile the code for both architectures and then generate the bijection map between the two code-bases.
Institutional memory and big bold huge egos on both sides (of the table / of El Camino Real / or both sides of the 101, goog east at mountainview, appl west at cupertino) mean that those scenarious would never occur. Why would either side stop thinking of the other as an enemy? (enemy = competitor in the business world)
Well, considering that they made the jump for the PowerPC architecture to the x86 architecture because IBM/Motorola could not provide a low power version of the G5 PowerPC chip to be used in the portable space of laptops, it doesn't seem ironic at all that Apple might consider using a low power consumption chip in the laptop or portable space at all. It almost makes darned-good-sense. .
And considering what they'd been doing with Pink / Taligent in keeping a parallel universe of development of their codebase always going on the x86 architecture while publicly showing only PowerPC development, they've probably got a skunks-work factory team somewhere that's already been running ARM-based IOS or even ARM-based OSX for a year if not for years...
They need a cute small name for the ARM cores to go with the bulldozer for the large cores: maybe call them Cats or Toros or Deeres, more lawn-mowery than bull-dozery.:) Anyway, why translate X86 to arm when you could recompile directly for ARM? Isn't that where GNU and Linux (or GNU and HURD) could show the advantage of free-software-open-source-software's source code access allowing for the direct or cross-compilation of the source code into binaries which run on the ARM?
I would think that taking pre-compiled X86-binaries and then translating {pre-compiled and optimized for x86} code into ARM code is a waste of time and a lot of premature optimization.
Decent maps and map functionality have become a requirement for many smartphone users.
Yep. Who wants to carry a GPS around? There's a lame one with a lousy touch-screen interface in my car, but my phone's is better, even witht the mistakes that apple maps has. In fact, they've got the Radisson correctly placed in La Jolla, while Google maps had it screwed up (and one street / half-mile away) for years. So I'm actually not forgiving of Apple for screwing up their map transition; I want everything with me all at once. And working. And Apple is screwing up their once-held reputation of "it just works."
Don't forget the canonical example of TiVo and the TiVo-ization of GPL software behind a crypto-graphic signing of code. The TiVO one-way no-share-backsies approach is exactly what led to the necessity of creating GPL-V3which expressly forbids doing what TiVo did:
.
actively blocking users from running modified software on its hardware by design
Ha ha! Maybe/. is where I originally saw it, or in the Science section of the union-trib. Anyway, good catch to the/. article, the search function here on/. doesn't work so well.
Yep, and Google is also a great copyright violator in copying and storing books in electronic format without adequate permission. And it uses its 800-ton Gorilla status to send its lawyer-filled-legal minions to court to try to win itself the free and solitary right to side-step copyright issues in any and all books that exist in libraries that have signed on for this corrupt mis-appropriation of private products in book and illustration form. Even the storage of this data at Google violates copyright even if they do not re-distribute it.
Damn it you're right. My above post says that F/OSS will live on, but it won't live on unless we fight for our right to create, distribute, and run our own software on our own hardware. You're right about all of the locking down of hardware. There's also a return to the walling in of gardens by Apple, Amazon, Barnes-n-Noble, BlackBerry, and even MS wants in, and wants to keep all of their customers inside their bubble world. It's like how my parents describe the days of AOL and compuserve without open port 80 access to the internet, and no cross compatibility of email between those walled gardens of AOL-ers and the rest of the TCPIP world.
.
The problem is where exactly do you sign up for this fight? They send recruiting officers over to the high schools to get the teenagers to sign up to die for their country and fight. How/where/when does one fight for one's constitutional and computational rights?
An aside question for the parent Anonymous poster: am I making a mistake by not posting anonymously? Normally, most anonymous posts are drivel, but yours certainly is not. What's the/your key reason for posting anonymously? Are opinions like this better off not being attributable? (is that the right word?)
Crabs can also be used as the logic gates to compute certain functions. I kid you not! The Boston Globe had an article about some Japanese researchers who used crabs to design logic gates based on their motion on the beach.
Their swarm computing article (pdf link in the journal Complex Systems) is rather interesting.
Calling out the parents' patronizing tone and commentary and replying with factual disagreement is not trolling and is not worthy of being down-voted as trolling. Why don't you come out of the anonymous shadows and actually respond and disagree? I may be up a notch calling an Anonymous Coward an "idiot", but haven't they already called themselves Cowardly by definition? And being patronizing and idiotic to boot gets them my reply, which I put in under my own name-nick. That's a little more effort and responsibility than you were willing to take on, eh? Please re-read my response about sample means and population means and reply on the content of my comment, not just the tone. I may have used a harsh word. but I won't take back my opinion.
Calling out the grand-parents' patronizing tone and commentary and replying with factual disagreement is not trolling and is not worthy of being down-voted as trolling. Why don't you come out of the anonymous shadows and actually respond and disagree? I may be up a notch calling an Anonymous Coward an "idiot", but haven't they already called themselves Cowardly by definition? And being patronizing and idiotic to boot gets them my reply, which I put in under my own name-nick. That's a little more effort and responsibility than you were willing to take on, eh?
I was expecting to find some content of interest to slashdotters, not just a rehash of some historical factoid. Where did News for Nerds go? North? Was this a book report that Cowboy Neal was assigned? Is this posting the reason that Cowboy Neal and the obligatory option has been absent from the polls?
.
Could Cowboy Neal answer why he's missing from the polls?
Anyway, about the future of OSS, OSS as a paradigm will continue to exist. Open source as "existing available source code, available openly" existed pre-GNU, pre-Stallman. There is so much conflation of free software, open source, OSS, and GNU licensing that even this summary article had a few swings and misses.
It's possible for people to be a powerset (2**{whatever number of options}) of all of these different overlapping and some mutually-exclusive definitions of open source software (lowercase, like lowercase god). That would be a good poll: open source software to me means:... x, y, z, Cowboy Neal.
There is no Pakastan. There is, however, a country named
Pakistan. I think the CIA World Factbook might be a reliable source for the spelling of (and existence of) Pakistan. Perhaps that is what the editors intended. Certainly, the tags should never have to correct spelling mistakes created by the editors. This is even worse than a dupe or slashvertisement. This is a sad indicator of how low/. has fallen with these new editors. Fix it, already!
learn about the difference between sample means and population means. And it's even worse than that: just like in fubared research papers, it's possible to generate the sample mean which you would like by choosing the right sample.
Example: if you could really do a study of all of the arrests that happened and could have (not should have) happened, you would most certainly find that children of policemen/policewomen and the children of mayors/governors/congressman/senators/district-attorney/and-any-other-corruptibles-in-the-chain are so amazingly incapable of doing any wrong whatsover, even when:
-- they drunk-drive into a person's house (Orlando)
-- they rape one or more underage girls at a house party (Orange County, California) [or in that case, the other boys get busted and the DA's kid somehow did nothing wrong]
-- rape women frequently (pick a Kennedy, not any Kennedy, just the one(s) that do that sort of thing)
-- kill (pick a Kenned... Chappa-what-a-dick)
-- find any two examples from any county in any state in any year just by looking at the papers.
When certain populations are arrested more frequently than others, you get the self-serving statistics that you need: look at how many arrests there are for this violent behaviour, or for robbery, or for loitering, or for associating with known gang-members. It just turns out that for the "right people" (on the "right side of the tracks"), madame-Justice uses her blind-eye to really turn a blind eye and ignore those wrong doings.
It could just as easily be a low-level person going after the last name, foreign look, or didn't like the way he looked or acted superior... Bow down before our ICE, knaves! But they also do this customs abuse and seziing of laptops and laptop hard-drives to USA citizens as well these days. Maybe they'll set up border patrol stations just in front of the polling booths for election day too.
Yeah, it seems more like an attempt to intimidate and perhaps influence the upcoming elections in other countries. It's not like the guy hides his political ideas.
29 is definitely not just about "foreign invaders":
Two points of disagreement: 29 is talking about the organized militia and 46 is talking about the unorganized militia, every able-bodied free man of (and over) the age of 17. Federalist 29 was written by
Alexander Hamilton,
and Federalist 46 was written by
James Madison. 46 pushes the fact that the power is inherent in, and comes from, the people, and that the federal government will ultimately not be able to overpower the will of the people under whose authority it is given the right to govern. 29 pushes the idea that the militia, even when controlled by the feds, is not a danger to the people, as the states individually will appoint officers, etc. It talks about how the unorganized militia, even though he refers to just militia,
can be under the direction of the federal powers.
So there's the difference between organized vs. unorganized militia, and the different intent of the two authors. 29 is about how the feds can control the "national guard" state militias: note that 29 also talks about:
commanding its services in times of insurrection... [and]
...of watching over the internal peace of the Confederacy.
.
Those two phrases definitely do not mean "foreign invaders."
And don't forget how law enforcement divisions always review their own problems and always seem to come to the conclusion that the application of force was justified. Sure, that's an unbiased and reasonable conclusion to always come to, right?
(btw, first post to reference Hurd that I'm seeing. That's kinda lame for this being/., isn't it?)
There could/should have been a whole Hurd of GNUs sent over except for the fact that so many of them have been discontinued:
Hurd-based GNU distributions include:
-- Arch Hurd
-- Debian GNU/Hurd
-- NixOS[23][24]
-- Bee GNU/Hurd (discontinued)
-- Gentoo GNU Hurd (discontinued)
-- GNU/Hurd Live CD (discontinued)
I kid, I kid. I love GNU. I love Linux. They taste great together, like peanut butter and chocolate. There's a commercial for you:
Your GNU ran into my Linux! No, your Linux ran into my GNU! Hey, they taste great together! And no unpopped kernels, either! (c) 2012-10-27-23h35PDF, by me.
BTW, first post to reference Hurd that I'm seeing. That's kinda lame for this being/., isn't it?
Creativity matters when you've got a single producer and no-one else to ever work on or look at the code. Style matters when you've got a single producer and others who will look at, maintain, and update that code. Style matters when you've got multiple producers of code who need to be able to look at each others' code and code fragments and be able to grok it without having to search through hundreds/thousands of other header files (or in the case of C++ and overloading of operators, through all of the ways and environments that a function may be called, with overloading replacing just about anything with anything else.)
.
When you've got to be able to de-cipher and re-jigger someone elses code to get the job done, a stable and well-defined coding style means that the job really can get done in a finite amount of time.
Vertical space is very important. I agree that breaking submodules out with v-spacing is as important as using braces to collect a group of actions together. The braces tell the compiler that the group may be viewn as a single object. The spacing/vertical spacing of lines tell the coder that the segment is a disctinct sub-object or module inside a group of code items.
The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence.
.
And militia is defined as all able-bodied men of and over the age of 17 at that time, I believe.
Slashdot Mirror
1 - x86 code
2 - ARM code
Then, depending on power-resource utilization requests by the OS or directly by the user, the executing instance of the application can be migrated from one of the types of cores (eg x86 core) to one of the other types of cores (eg ARM-cores) by copying over (a) the current instances variable values, (b) the current instance's stack as a stack pointer = SP, and (c) a pointer to where the current instances program is within the context of the program code as the next instruction pointer (execution pointer.
Implementing (c) above may require creating an array of equivalent program break-points and entry-points for the x86-compiled code and the ARM-compiled code, meaning that the code to generate the bundle would compile the code for both architectures and then generate the bijection map between the two code-bases.
(poetically getting the theme-scheme a+d and c+b to complement a+b and c+d
Institutional memory and big bold huge egos on both sides (of the table / of El Camino Real / or both sides of the 101, goog east at mountainview, appl west at cupertino) mean that those scenarious would never occur. Why would either side stop thinking of the other as an enemy? (enemy = competitor in the business world)
.
And considering what they'd been doing with Pink / Taligent in keeping a parallel universe of development of their codebase always going on the x86 architecture while publicly showing only PowerPC development, they've probably got a skunks-work factory team somewhere that's already been running ARM-based IOS or even ARM-based OSX for a year if not for years...
I would think that taking pre-compiled X86-binaries and then translating {pre-compiled and optimized for x86} code into ARM code is a waste of time and a lot of premature optimization.
Yep. Who wants to carry a GPS around? There's a lame one with a lousy touch-screen interface in my car, but my phone's is better, even witht the mistakes that apple maps has. In fact, they've got the Radisson correctly placed in La Jolla, while Google maps had it screwed up (and one street / half-mile away) for years. So I'm actually not forgiving of Apple for screwing up their map transition; I want everything with me all at once. And working. And Apple is screwing up their once-held reputation of "it just works."
.
actively blocking users from running modified software on its hardware by design
Ha ha! Maybe /. is where I originally saw it, or in the Science section of the union-trib. Anyway, good catch to the /. article, the search function here on /. doesn't work so well.
Yep, and Google is also a great copyright violator in copying and storing books in electronic format without adequate permission. And it uses its 800-ton Gorilla status to send its lawyer-filled-legal minions to court to try to win itself the free and solitary right to side-step copyright issues in any and all books that exist in libraries that have signed on for this corrupt mis-appropriation of private products in book and illustration form. Even the storage of this data at Google violates copyright even if they do not re-distribute it.
The problem is where exactly do you sign up for this fight? They send recruiting officers over to the high schools to get the teenagers to sign up to die for their country and fight. How/where/when does one fight for one's constitutional and computational rights?
An aside question for the parent Anonymous poster: am I making a mistake by not posting anonymously? Normally, most anonymous posts are drivel, but yours certainly is not. What's the/your key reason for posting anonymously? Are opinions like this better off not being attributable? (is that the right word?)
Their swarm computing article (pdf link in the journal Complex Systems) is rather interesting.
Calling out the parents' patronizing tone and commentary and replying with factual disagreement is not trolling and is not worthy of being down-voted as trolling. Why don't you come out of the anonymous shadows and actually respond and disagree? I may be up a notch calling an Anonymous Coward an "idiot", but haven't they already called themselves Cowardly by definition? And being patronizing and idiotic to boot gets them my reply, which I put in under my own name-nick. That's a little more effort and responsibility than you were willing to take on, eh? Please re-read my response about sample means and population means and reply on the content of my comment, not just the tone. I may have used a harsh word. but I won't take back my opinion.
Calling out the grand-parents' patronizing tone and commentary and replying with factual disagreement is not trolling and is not worthy of being down-voted as trolling. Why don't you come out of the anonymous shadows and actually respond and disagree? I may be up a notch calling an Anonymous Coward an "idiot", but haven't they already called themselves Cowardly by definition? And being patronizing and idiotic to boot gets them my reply, which I put in under my own name-nick. That's a little more effort and responsibility than you were willing to take on, eh?
.
Could Cowboy Neal answer why he's missing from the polls? Anyway, about the future of OSS, OSS as a paradigm will continue to exist. Open source as "existing available source code, available openly" existed pre-GNU, pre-Stallman. There is so much conflation of free software, open source, OSS, and GNU licensing that even this summary article had a few swings and misses.
It's possible for people to be a powerset (2**{whatever number of options}) of all of these different overlapping and some mutually-exclusive definitions of open source software (lowercase, like lowercase god). That would be a good poll: open source software to me means:... x, y, z, Cowboy Neal.
There is no Pakastan. There is, however, a country named Pakistan. I think the CIA World Factbook might be a reliable source for the spelling of (and existence of) Pakistan. Perhaps that is what the editors intended. Certainly, the tags should never have to correct spelling mistakes created by the editors. This is even worse than a dupe or slashvertisement. This is a sad indicator of how low /. has fallen with these new editors. Fix it, already!
Thanks for the link to the economist article. That is truly enlightening. The economist seems to be a good source for info, particularly tech info.
learn about the difference between sample means and population means. And it's even worse than that: just like in fubared research papers, it's possible to generate the sample mean which you would like by choosing the right sample.
Example: if you could really do a study of all of the arrests that happened and could have (not should have) happened, you would most certainly find that children of policemen/policewomen and the children of mayors/governors/congressman/senators/district-attorney/and-any-other-corruptibles-in-the-chain are so amazingly incapable of doing any wrong whatsover, even when :
-- they drunk-drive into a person's house (Orlando)
-- they rape one or more underage girls at a house party (Orange County, California) [or in that case, the other boys get busted and the DA's kid somehow did nothing wrong]
-- rape women frequently (pick a Kennedy, not any Kennedy, just the one(s) that do that sort of thing)
-- kill (pick a Kenned... Chappa-what-a-dick)
-- find any two examples from any county in any state in any year just by looking at the papers.
When certain populations are arrested more frequently than others, you get the self-serving statistics that you need: look at how many arrests there are for this violent behaviour, or for robbery, or for loitering, or for associating with known gang-members. It just turns out that for the "right people" (on the "right side of the tracks"), madame-Justice uses her blind-eye to really turn a blind eye and ignore those wrong doings.
It could just as easily be a low-level person going after the last name, foreign look, or didn't like the way he looked or acted superior... Bow down before our ICE, knaves! But they also do this customs abuse and seziing of laptops and laptop hard-drives to USA citizens as well these days. Maybe they'll set up border patrol stations just in front of the polling booths for election day too.
Yeah, it seems more like an attempt to intimidate and perhaps influence the upcoming elections in other countries. It's not like the guy hides his political ideas.
Two points of disagreement: 29 is talking about the organized militia and 46 is talking about the unorganized militia, every able-bodied free man of (and over) the age of 17. Federalist 29 was written by Alexander Hamilton, and Federalist 46 was written by James Madison. 46 pushes the fact that the power is inherent in, and comes from, the people, and that the federal government will ultimately not be able to overpower the will of the people under whose authority it is given the right to govern. 29 pushes the idea that the militia, even when controlled by the feds, is not a danger to the people, as the states individually will appoint officers, etc. It talks about how the unorganized militia, even though he refers to just militia, can be under the direction of the federal powers.
So there's the difference between organized vs. unorganized militia, and the different intent of the two authors. 29 is about how the feds can control the "national guard" state militias: note that 29 also talks about:
commanding its services in times of insurrection... [and]
.
Those two phrases definitely do not mean "foreign invaders."
``Above Their Own Laws'', in Time magazine.
And don't forget how law enforcement divisions always review their own problems and always seem to come to the conclusion that the application of force was justified. Sure, that's an unbiased and reasonable conclusion to always come to, right?
There could/should have been a whole Hurd of GNUs sent over except for the fact that so many of them have been discontinued:
Hurd-based GNU distributions include:
-- Arch Hurd
-- Debian GNU/Hurd
-- NixOS[23][24]
-- Bee GNU/Hurd (discontinued)
-- Gentoo GNU Hurd (discontinued)
-- GNU/Hurd Live CD (discontinued) I kid, I kid. I love GNU. I love Linux. They taste great together, like peanut butter and chocolate. There's a commercial for you:
Your GNU ran into my Linux! No, your Linux ran into my GNU! Hey, they taste great together! And no unpopped kernels, either! (c) 2012-10-27-23h35PDF, by me.
BTW, first post to reference Hurd that I'm seeing. That's kinda lame for this being /., isn't it?
.
When you've got to be able to de-cipher and re-jigger someone elses code to get the job done, a stable and well-defined coding style means that the job really can get done in a finite amount of time.
Vertical space is very important. I agree that breaking submodules out with v-spacing is as important as using braces to collect a group of actions together. The braces tell the compiler that the group may be viewn as a single object. The spacing/vertical spacing of lines tell the coder that the segment is a disctinct sub-object or module inside a group of code items.
.
The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence.
.
And militia is defined as all able-bodied men of and over the age of 17 at that time, I believe.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3210135&cid=41786487
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_(United_States)#Twentieth_century_and_current