Not to get tooo far into it, but on the subject of C# being a good tool for the job, the next version of SQL Server (Yukon) will allow you to write SPs in C#.
Personally I find this distasteful for the same reasons you do. TSQL is a BEAUTIFUL set driven language. C# is a BEAUTIFUL object oriented/linear processing language. Those are not the same problem and should not be solved in the same way.
Oh, and #1 has to be the truest thing I've seen in a long time. I have to deal with a data model right now created by a middle-tier programmer. Violence is the only solution I can think of.
I believe you are correct, but that seems to be what nVidia is complaining about. The shader programs in the benchmark are written using the "Standard"... they aren't optimized for the FX. If they WERE, the FX would come out on top, but as it stands ATI is somewhat faster when using non-vendor-specific code.
At least that's what I seem to have gathered.
Seems a little silly to me to say that the benchmark is bad just because they stuck to the standard for the pixel shader programs rather than using your vendor specific extensions... while a specific game MAY use the vendor specific extensions, that isn't a safe assumption.
Yeah, try that with a NASA manager with a billion dollars of hardware sitting on the pad and several million dollars at stake if you don't launch.
So what? Only launch when the temperature is exactly right? But the temperature changes through the atmosphere and the booster heats up.
The managers aren't STUPID. Often they were engineers. They know the questions to ask and probably know when they're being snowballed.
It wasn't a decision with no consequences. It was a risk. If the risk wasn't shown to them, they had a DUTY to launch. They were wrong with Challenger, yes. People died, yes. But if the information wasn't available, that doesn't make it the wrong choice.
This is spaceflight, dammit. You're strapping people to a million tons of explosive and hoping that the designs are right and nothing that you haven't planned for goes wrong.
If you wait till you know it's safe, YOU'LL NEVER DO IT!
Be real. We're talking about 20 years here, not 2000+.
The oldest corporation still in it's original form is > 1000 years old. Mergers would retain the copyrights. Copyrights could well live on for a VERY VERY VERY long time.
Secondly, even if Disney lasted that long, it is unlikely that they would maintain copyrights on works that no longer appear to be relelvant, i.e., most of them.
Why not? Disney employs an ARMY of laywers. Fill out a form every 10 or 20 years... they could easily keep up and it would be in their interest to do so.
The loss of Mickey mouse from the public domain, i.e., the freedom to copy it in its entirity,
Mickey Mouse is trademarked, though, and those are different rules. All that applies here is the actual film in which Mickey appears that first time. Not the concept.
I guess my problem with your logic is that it could also be extended to patents. As long as the original inventor is using them, let them keep their monopoly. Think about how much perscription drugs would cost.
Patents are for ideas on physical things. Copyrights are for ideas on... slightly less physical things.
Part of the motivation of copyright expiration is to encourage people to create NEW works. All works are derivitave to some degree or another... the expiration sees to it that a derivitave work does not get an infinite placement and wind up to some degree or another obscuring the original work in the public doman.
As for a disaster... Imagine if Plato had been indefinitely copyrighted... or the Bible... or any of the other great works of history. The Pope would be able to license or dismiss ANY printing of the Bible... how would the protestants feel about that?
Disney is likely to live INFINITELY long (e.g. until there is a major change in the world order that makes the arguement moot). Why should they have more rights than an individual copyright holder? "Because they will continue to re-invest"?
It isn't about what's good for the economy in the short term... it's about what's good for society... OFTEN different things.
(Clearcutting all the forests is good for the economy... in the short term)
If I recall correctly, some of the GEForce FX previewers were expressing doubts about the GEForce MX being much faster than the ATI 9700 Pro.
Apparently the way nVidia was quoting it's memory bandwidth numbers was EXTERMELY misleading (like, electically impossible) and, if ATI quoted it's numbers in the same fashion (it was based on some compression, IIRC, which is already in the 9700 Pro) ATI's card was still faster.
Still, there's no reason NOT to upgrade now. This card will run Doom 3 just fine when it comes out (not that I care) and it runs all my current games quite well. There's always something better right around the corner.
Politicians can be voted out of office in 2, 4, 6 years, but judges stay around much longer.
But these are the people kow-towing to their special interests to raise more money CONSTANTLY in order to get re-elected.
I'd rather have a judge, appointed for LIFE (not the stupid state and local systems) who is completely independent, even if I disagree strongly with them. At least they're voting their beliefs and not their pocketbook.
But of course, all of this is the exact reason why The Matrix is so popular,
I have to disagree with this. The only question I had coming out of the first movie was "Why in the HELL wouldn't they use compost? Humans are about the most inefficient bloody electical generators you could POSSIBLY imagine." Heck, even just grow a human WITHOUT a brain (then elect him... DOH!)... our brains use up something like 60% of our total body nutrients (when at rest).
I think that the popularity of the movie had 2 primary reasons: 1) Leather Catsuit 2) Guns.
For instance: 2) Encourage the making of laws and rules by trial lawyers and sympathetic judges, especially through class actions.
As opposed to letting it be made by a morally bankrupt, corrupt congress which is primarilly elected based on their ability to: 1) Kow-tow to the incredibly popular president, regardless of what he's actually doing and 2) Raise cash from huge corporations?
I'd much rather have intelligent judges legislate from the bench (even if I disagree with them) than letting CEOs legislate from the board room.
Besides, this is ONE of the ways that things can enter law, and if it's really WRONG congress can always overturn it.
I always love these "10 point" lists. They are ALWAYS oversimplifications of an incredibly complex problem (which can itself be simplified to "People are stupid")
Quick: What do you think the CEO got as his contractual, required bonus that year?
In this age of outrageous executive salarys (STILL, even in the age of gargantuan bankrupcys and frauds) and large layoffs at the same time, giving employees a bobble head of the CEO is an incredible slap in the face.
I think that genetic engineering can, in the hands of those who are honest, wise, and well intentioned, also be used to enhance human abilities without trying to alter human nature.
How many people have you really met like that? REALLY?
I've found zero. Including myself.
People are short sighted, limited, and selfish. Technology that CAN be used for personal gain, will be. Besides, even if you find one of the hypothetical people to use the technology in this fashion, I will personally bet you $100 that there will be at LEAST 100 who use the technology for one of the following reasons: 1. Decide the gender of the child (They want a boy child.) 2. Decide appearance only attributes of a child (Blue eyes, blond hair, etc) 3. They want someone who looks exactly like them.
Human nature is to act like animals, only more-so.
I'll keep it straighforward since I know it'll start a flamewar but:
money != speech tv != speech newspaper != speech
speech == speech.
Not EVERYONE can afford a newspaper advertisement. However EVERYONE can afford speech. It's free (both as in beer and as in FREE).
You do not have a right to reach a larger audience just because you have more cash than others... once we accept that we have doomed ourselves to be an oligarchy.
Another Osprey Detractor
on
Fanwing Planes?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Because it's an easy target, I guess. Big money, ambitious project, several setbacks, no supporters anymore. It just happens to be the perfect tool for what it needs to do... that's all.
Give designers a contradictory set of specs (long range/endurance, high speed, VTOL, high capacity) and you get a vehicle that's a bit odd and a bit difficult to build and maintain.
OTOH, I'd trust my life to an osprey ANY DAY over something that can't glide when the engines quit.
Re:A better way - have computers do more work.
on
Just One Page a Day
·
· Score: 2
The "Three Monkeys" from Minority report?
Interesting idea... to be even better, you'd want to use 2 different scanners and 2 different technologies.
Agreed, comparing myself to the corporations would be a better example. But what if I compare myself to the top 5% of the economic population?
Because money buys lobbyists and (as it stands at the moment) access to the politicians that I don't have, people with more money matter more. Period. They get more say.
I consider lobbyists a symptom of this problem... where the needs of the few (with cash) outweigh the needs of the many. You can see it everywhere that a corporation makes millions by hurting or killing (think Union Carbide) hundreds or thousands.
Of course, the entire fallacy of corporate personhood (that a corporation has any rights, but no responsibilities) is an entirely different matter...
There are a few DVDA discs I want. Most of them aren't available yet. THat's MY biggest problem with it.
The new format doesn't really bother me. The DVD player I just bought (the seemingly outstanding Panasonic RP-82) does DVD-A, so why worry? It'll be hooked up to my 5.1 setup, so no need to move.
But yes, I want Jethro Tull's "Thick as a Brick" and "Passion Play" on DVDA for the 5.1. I want Greig's "Peer Gynt Suite" on DVDA. A few others.
I won't be replacing my entire CD collection since I do most of my listening in the car, but there arew a few things that I'm willing to buy for the extra tracks.
Flame away! I can take it. I've already been backstabbed today.
I would disagree with the "not even immoral" part. A single person with sufficient funds or a corporation can EMPLOY a lobbyist to talk all day to congressmen. While you and I are out doing our jobs, they are doing theirs. Their JOB gives them a larger voice than hundreds of regular, voting citizens.
To put it another way: Would it be fair if Police couldn't be prosecuted for crimes simply because it was a perk of their job? (Ignoring if this sometimes happens in reality) Why does the fact that this one person is employed as a lobbyist give them SIGNIFICANTLY more say in how my life is run than any 100 people like me put together.
It would cost me thousands of dollars to be nearly as influential as the most inefficient lobbyist, and during that time I wouldn't be working, my wife and cats would be going hungry, the house would be getting reposessed, etc, etc.
IMHO the extra influence that lobbyists have in DC is just another indication of the badly flawed idea that money == speech. In a democracy/republic, the fundamental idea is that all citizens have equal influence on the government. Big money political campaigns, PACs and lobbyists strike at this concept.
If the accident is due to the person 1) Talking on the cellphone 2) Makeup/hair 3) Reading or watching movies (don't laugh, I regularly get passed by a guy with a laptop on his dashboard watching DVDs. And I already drive way faster than I should) or even fiddling with the radio 4) Any other non-driving activity
Yes, they should be sued. I may be biased because I already have a 1 hour each way commute, but string the fsckers up!
I won't disagree with your points on Firewire being better/more mature/etc than USB 2.0.
Personally I haven't been overly impressed with USB 2.0 myself.
But given that USB 2.0 is backward compatible w/USB 1.X, putting a USB 2.0 choice on a PDA and then implementing USB-to-Go-Go-Gadget-Interconnectivity will probably wind up being the choice most manufacturers implement. It lets all of us who have no firewire OR USB 2.0 ports still communicate with the latest & greatest PDA and still get kewl features like inter-device-connectivity if we happen to have more than one USB 2.0 device.
USB:
Low speed peripherals (Keyboards, mice)
Low price peripherals, medium bandwidth (scanners, CDRW, small hard drives, mp3 players)
Firmly entrenched, all new PCs have USB 1.1 at least
Cheaper to implement.
Firewire:
High speed devices (Hard drives, video cameras, etc)
More expensive to implement
NOT FIRMLY ENTRENCHED!
USB is here to stay, people. A Firewire mouse just isn't going to happen. A Firewire scanner is a waste of $25 to implement the firewire on the scanner and the motherboard to support it.
Please stop with the "Who cares? Firewire is better!" If you have a PDA with a firewire chip on it, I'd like to see it! (A real PDA, not a very small PC).
This does matter, if you don't care, go back to the "Why buy a Toyota? An F-18 is faster!" threads.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to get tooo far into it, but on the subject of C# being a good tool for the job, the next version of SQL Server (Yukon) will allow you to write SPs in C#.
Personally I find this distasteful for the same reasons you do. TSQL is a BEAUTIFUL set driven language. C# is a BEAUTIFUL object oriented/linear processing language. Those are not the same problem and should not be solved in the same way.
Oh, and #1 has to be the truest thing I've seen in a long time. I have to deal with a data model right now created by a middle-tier programmer. Violence is the only solution I can think of.
*DEEP VOICE*Men's Wear*/DEEP VOICE*
Oh he-LLO mother!
I believe you are correct, but that seems to be what nVidia is complaining about. The shader programs in the benchmark are written using the "Standard"... they aren't optimized for the FX. If they WERE, the FX would come out on top, but as it stands ATI is somewhat faster when using non-vendor-specific code.
At least that's what I seem to have gathered.
Seems a little silly to me to say that the benchmark is bad just because they stuck to the standard for the pixel shader programs rather than using your vendor specific extensions... while a specific game MAY use the vendor specific extensions, that isn't a safe assumption.
And yes. This is spaceflight. You don't hope that everything goes well. You make damn sure that everything goes well.
Welcome to humanity. There's always something you haven't thought of.
Yeah, try that with a NASA manager with a billion dollars of hardware sitting on the pad and several million dollars at stake if you don't launch.
So what? Only launch when the temperature is exactly right? But the temperature changes through the atmosphere and the booster heats up.
The managers aren't STUPID. Often they were engineers. They know the questions to ask and probably know when they're being snowballed.
It wasn't a decision with no consequences. It was a risk. If the risk wasn't shown to them, they had a DUTY to launch. They were wrong with Challenger, yes. People died, yes. But if the information wasn't available, that doesn't make it the wrong choice.
This is spaceflight, dammit. You're strapping people to a million tons of explosive and hoping that the designs are right and nothing that you haven't planned for goes wrong.
If you wait till you know it's safe, YOU'LL NEVER DO IT!
I hope you are right, but I think you mis-estimate the current situation. Economic rough times, expensive war ahead, little precieved benefit.
Within a year the ISS will be abandoned and manned space flights will be a novelty for the rest of my life.
My thoughts go out to the families and us all. Finally the use of an aging orbiter fleet has come back to bite us.
Be real. We're talking about 20 years here, not 2000+.
The oldest corporation still in it's original form is > 1000 years old. Mergers would retain the copyrights. Copyrights could well live on for a VERY VERY VERY long time.
Secondly, even if Disney lasted that long, it is unlikely that they would maintain copyrights on works that no longer appear to be relelvant, i.e., most of them.
Why not? Disney employs an ARMY of laywers. Fill out a form every 10 or 20 years... they could easily keep up and it would be in their interest to do so.
The loss of Mickey mouse from the public domain, i.e., the freedom to copy it in its entirity,
Mickey Mouse is trademarked, though, and those are different rules. All that applies here is the actual film in which Mickey appears that first time. Not the concept.
I guess my problem with your logic is that it could also be extended to patents. As long as the original inventor is using them, let them keep their monopoly. Think about how much perscription drugs would cost.
Patents are for ideas on physical things. Copyrights are for ideas on... slightly less physical things.
Why should one be so different from the other?
Part of the motivation of copyright expiration is to encourage people to create NEW works. All works are derivitave to some degree or another... the expiration sees to it that a derivitave work does not get an infinite placement and wind up to some degree or another obscuring the original work in the public doman.
As for a disaster... Imagine if Plato had been indefinitely copyrighted... or the Bible... or any of the other great works of history. The Pope would be able to license or dismiss ANY printing of the Bible... how would the protestants feel about that?
Disney is likely to live INFINITELY long (e.g. until there is a major change in the world order that makes the arguement moot). Why should they have more rights than an individual copyright holder? "Because they will continue to re-invest"?
It isn't about what's good for the economy in the short term... it's about what's good for society... OFTEN different things.
(Clearcutting all the forests is good for the economy... in the short term)
If I recall correctly, some of the GEForce FX previewers were expressing doubts about the GEForce MX being much faster than the ATI 9700 Pro.
Apparently the way nVidia was quoting it's memory bandwidth numbers was EXTERMELY misleading (like, electically impossible) and, if ATI quoted it's numbers in the same fashion (it was based on some compression, IIRC, which is already in the 9700 Pro) ATI's card was still faster.
Still, there's no reason NOT to upgrade now. This card will run Doom 3 just fine when it comes out (not that I care) and it runs all my current games quite well. There's always something better right around the corner.
Politicians can be voted out of office in 2, 4, 6 years, but judges stay around much longer.
But these are the people kow-towing to their special interests to raise more money CONSTANTLY in order to get re-elected.
I'd rather have a judge, appointed for LIFE (not the stupid state and local systems) who is completely independent, even if I disagree strongly with them. At least they're voting their beliefs and not their pocketbook.
But of course, all of this is the exact reason why The Matrix is so popular,
I have to disagree with this. The only question I had coming out of the first movie was "Why in the HELL wouldn't they use compost? Humans are about the most inefficient bloody electical generators you could POSSIBLY imagine." Heck, even just grow a human WITHOUT a brain (then elect him... DOH!)... our brains use up something like 60% of our total body nutrients (when at rest).
I think that the popularity of the movie had 2 primary reasons:
1) Leather Catsuit
2) Guns.
For instance:
2) Encourage the making of laws and rules by trial lawyers and sympathetic judges, especially through class actions.
As opposed to letting it be made by a morally bankrupt, corrupt congress which is primarilly elected based on their ability to:
1) Kow-tow to the incredibly popular president, regardless of what he's actually doing
and
2) Raise cash from huge corporations?
I'd much rather have intelligent judges legislate from the bench (even if I disagree with them) than letting CEOs legislate from the board room.
Besides, this is ONE of the ways that things can enter law, and if it's really WRONG congress can always overturn it.
I always love these "10 point" lists. They are ALWAYS oversimplifications of an incredibly complex problem (which can itself be simplified to "People are stupid")
Correct, a bonus is for exceptional behavior.
Quick: What do you think the CEO got as his contractual, required bonus that year?
In this age of outrageous executive salarys (STILL, even in the age of gargantuan bankrupcys and frauds) and large layoffs at the same time, giving employees a bobble head of the CEO is an incredible slap in the face.
Prelude: Stem cell research good, IMHO.
I think that genetic engineering can, in the hands of those who are honest, wise, and well intentioned, also be used to enhance human abilities without trying to alter human nature.
How many people have you really met like that? REALLY?
I've found zero. Including myself.
People are short sighted, limited, and selfish. Technology that CAN be used for personal gain, will be. Besides, even if you find one of the hypothetical people to use the technology in this fashion, I will personally bet you $100 that there will be at LEAST 100 who use the technology for one of the following reasons:
1. Decide the gender of the child (They want a boy child.)
2. Decide appearance only attributes of a child (Blue eyes, blond hair, etc)
3. They want someone who looks exactly like them.
Human nature is to act like animals, only more-so.
I'll keep it straighforward since I know it'll start a flamewar but:
money != speech
tv != speech
newspaper != speech
speech == speech.
Not EVERYONE can afford a newspaper advertisement. However EVERYONE can afford speech. It's free (both as in beer and as in FREE).
You do not have a right to reach a larger audience just because you have more cash than others... once we accept that we have doomed ourselves to be an oligarchy.
Because it's an easy target, I guess. Big money, ambitious project, several setbacks, no supporters anymore. It just happens to be the perfect tool for what it needs to do... that's all.
Give designers a contradictory set of specs (long range/endurance, high speed, VTOL, high capacity) and you get a vehicle that's a bit odd and a bit difficult to build and maintain.
OTOH, I'd trust my life to an osprey ANY DAY over something that can't glide when the engines quit.
The "Three Monkeys" from Minority report?
Interesting idea... to be even better, you'd want to use 2 different scanners and 2 different technologies.
IMHO, the true potential of Blu-Ray isn't 15+ hours of video... as others have said, there are economic reasons that won't happen.
But 2-4 hours of full 1080p HDTV resolution at 30 fps? THAT'S a decision I can live with!
No, it makes sense. Teaching people about security holes is illegal. Patching them isn't.
Describing what you patched, though, would entail describing the security holes on an unpatched system. Ding! Go to Jail...
Agreed, comparing myself to the corporations would be a better example. But what if I compare myself to the top 5% of the economic population?
Because money buys lobbyists and (as it stands at the moment) access to the politicians that I don't have, people with more money matter more. Period. They get more say.
I consider lobbyists a symptom of this problem... where the needs of the few (with cash) outweigh the needs of the many. You can see it everywhere that a corporation makes millions by hurting or killing (think Union Carbide) hundreds or thousands.
Of course, the entire fallacy of corporate personhood (that a corporation has any rights, but no responsibilities) is an entirely different matter...
There are a few DVDA discs I want. Most of them aren't available yet. THat's MY biggest problem with it.
The new format doesn't really bother me. The DVD player I just bought (the seemingly outstanding Panasonic RP-82) does DVD-A, so why worry? It'll be hooked up to my 5.1 setup, so no need to move.
But yes, I want Jethro Tull's "Thick as a Brick" and "Passion Play" on DVDA for the 5.1. I want Greig's "Peer Gynt Suite" on DVDA. A few others.
I won't be replacing my entire CD collection since I do most of my listening in the car, but there arew a few things that I'm willing to buy for the extra tracks.
Flame away! I can take it. I've already been backstabbed today.
I would disagree with the "not even immoral" part. A single person with sufficient funds or a corporation can EMPLOY a lobbyist to talk all day to congressmen. While you and I are out doing our jobs, they are doing theirs. Their JOB gives them a larger voice than hundreds of regular, voting citizens.
To put it another way: Would it be fair if Police couldn't be prosecuted for crimes simply because it was a perk of their job? (Ignoring if this sometimes happens in reality) Why does the fact that this one person is employed as a lobbyist give them SIGNIFICANTLY more say in how my life is run than any 100 people like me put together.
It would cost me thousands of dollars to be nearly as influential as the most inefficient lobbyist, and during that time I wouldn't be working, my wife and cats would be going hungry, the house would be getting reposessed, etc, etc.
IMHO the extra influence that lobbyists have in DC is just another indication of the badly flawed idea that money == speech. In a democracy/republic, the fundamental idea is that all citizens have equal influence on the government. Big money political campaigns, PACs and lobbyists strike at this concept.
If the accident is due to the person
1) Talking on the cellphone
2) Makeup/hair
3) Reading or watching movies (don't laugh, I regularly get passed by a guy with a laptop on his dashboard watching DVDs. And I already drive way faster than I should) or even fiddling with the radio
4) Any other non-driving activity
Yes, they should be sued. I may be biased because I already have a 1 hour each way commute, but string the fsckers up!
I won't disagree with your points on Firewire being better/more mature/etc than USB 2.0.
Personally I haven't been overly impressed with USB 2.0 myself.
But given that USB 2.0 is backward compatible w/USB 1.X, putting a USB 2.0 choice on a PDA and then implementing USB-to-Go-Go-Gadget-Interconnectivity will probably wind up being the choice most manufacturers implement. It lets all of us who have no firewire OR USB 2.0 ports still communicate with the latest & greatest PDA and still get kewl features like inter-device-connectivity if we happen to have more than one USB 2.0 device.
USB:
Low speed peripherals (Keyboards, mice)
Low price peripherals, medium bandwidth (scanners, CDRW, small hard drives, mp3 players)
Firmly entrenched, all new PCs have USB 1.1 at least
Cheaper to implement.
Firewire:
High speed devices (Hard drives, video cameras, etc)
More expensive to implement
NOT FIRMLY ENTRENCHED!
USB is here to stay, people. A Firewire mouse just isn't going to happen. A Firewire scanner is a waste of $25 to implement the firewire on the scanner and the motherboard to support it.
Please stop with the "Who cares? Firewire is better!" If you have a PDA with a firewire chip on it, I'd like to see it! (A real PDA, not a very small PC).
This does matter, if you don't care, go back to the "Why buy a Toyota? An F-18 is faster!" threads.