With such a small number, it is important that the will of the people is respected. We will therefore demand a manual recount, starting with netscape strongholds: netscape.com, mozilla.org, and aol.com.
We'll take every legal step to make sure that every browser is counted. Even in those cases where the people clicked on the "download netscape 6" button, but due to a faulty mechanism, didn't press their mouse button down far enough, thus producing a soft "cluck" instead of a firm "click". We will have all mice inspected for "clucks", and we'll make sure these count as well! It's the intention that counts!! Long live democracy!
The only reason a 486 won't cut it, is because of sloppy programming that is geared towards multi Mhz/Ghz processors. I remember that the first DOOM came out, and I played it on a 486. It ran just fine, displaying like 10-15 frames per second. If somebody can display a texture mapped 3D screen in.1 second, then why does it take so much longer to display a pie chart ?
Speech to text is probably too much for a 486, though.
Am I the only one wondering why I have to download audio clips instead of downloading a text page with the transcript of the interview. I don't see the appeal of audio.
If the sound quality is poor, audio may be hard to understand. Audio is also much bigger than text. I can read faster than someone can talk, and I can skim the text for interesting bits. It's also easier to understand something that's written down, especially if it's not your first language.
This souns a lot more impressive than it really is. Getting all these processors to actually do something useful isn't easy. The posted maximum number of operations/second is for pure calculations only. A lot of real life applications, even if they are scalable to a large number of processors still need to have access to large data structures.
Having to use a special language is going to shy people away as well. Anybody remember transputers ? Occam ?
These processors, made by small start-ups also have lots of real-life issues that need to be solved. For example, you also need a good motherboard, with appropriate chip sets to access peripherals (network/hard disks) as well as a high-bandwidth memory bus. Who's going to make those ? Also, what's the quality of the development tools, like the compiler? Even if all those obstacles are overcome, users still need to spend time and money to get acquainted with this platform, and they are risking that the manufacturer(s) will be out of business a couple of years later.
For applications requiring more than just pure calculations, it's not going to be easy to offer a solution that offers users more value for money than a bunch of networked SMP machines based on off-the-shelf hardware, and using development tools that they are already used to, and can be assumed to be bug-free.
I wouldn't worry too much about your MAC address being exposed. There are much better ways to track what people are doing, and to combine the information that is gathered about you.
You can store a unique personal number in somebody's cookie, and use that to track what they are doing. This is especially powerful in combination with big banner ad servers: the ad server reads your cookie, and combines this information with the URL the banner ad was on. This information can even be augmented with data (like your home address) that you fill in on web forms, assuming that the site owner is willing to sell that kind of data. And why wouldn't they?
The banner ad doesn't even have to be visible for this purpose, it can be a 1x1 pixel transparent gif.
I have tried various window managers/desktops, ncluding KDE and Gnome, but I'm still using plain old twm. Pop open a couple of xterms, xbiff, netscape, and I'm happy. Everything in plain colors, no fancy shading, themes, or shiny icons. I have been using twm since tvtwm was still considered revolutionary.
Twm is ultra fast, uses very little memory, and starts up in a blink of an eye. I also shuts down really fast using ctrl-alt-backspace:-) With my hands on the keyboard, and aliases for often used commands, starting up new applications is faster than picking up the mouse, and navigating through menus, or finding the right icon.
Maybe I'm just too old... haha... but I am very thankful that nobody's forcing me to upgrade to the latest desktop. Having the choice to use something old-fashioned and outdated is what makes Linux and OSS great.
If people want to extend the number of choices, more power to them. If they don't want to help working on KDE, but start their own project, I respect them. I'm glad Linus started his own little project, instead of contributing to minix.
Slashdot Mirror
With such a small number, it is important that the will of the people is respected. We will therefore demand a manual recount, starting with netscape strongholds: netscape.com, mozilla.org, and aol.com.
We'll take every legal step to make sure that every browser is counted. Even in those cases where the people clicked on the "download netscape 6" button, but due to a faulty mechanism, didn't press their mouse button down far enough, thus producing a soft "cluck" instead of a firm "click". We will have all mice inspected for "clucks", and we'll make sure these count as well! It's the intention that counts!! Long live democracy!
The only reason a 486 won't cut it, is because of sloppy programming that is geared towards multi Mhz/Ghz processors. I remember that the first DOOM came out, and I played it on a 486. It ran just fine, displaying like 10-15 frames per second. If somebody can display a texture mapped 3D screen in .1 second, then why does it take so much longer to display a pie chart ?
Speech to text is probably too much for a 486, though.
Am I the only one wondering why I have to download audio clips instead of downloading a text page with the transcript of the interview. I don't see the appeal of audio.
If the sound quality is poor, audio may be hard to understand. Audio is also much bigger than text. I can read faster than someone can talk, and I can skim the text for interesting bits. It's also easier to understand something that's written down, especially if it's not your first language.
However, not all big sites will answer to ping.
For example, I can't get a reply from cnn.com.
Actually, I see a third possible explanation:
It's a fraud/hoax, giving the professor 15 minutes of fame (or 15 megs of flame).
This souns a lot more impressive than it really is. Getting all these processors to actually do something useful isn't easy. The posted maximum number of operations/second is for pure calculations only. A lot of real life applications, even if they are scalable to a large number of processors still need to have access to large data structures.
Having to use a special language is going to shy people away as well. Anybody remember transputers ? Occam ?
These processors, made by small start-ups also have lots of real-life issues that need to be solved. For example, you also need a good motherboard, with appropriate chip sets to access peripherals (network/hard disks) as well as a high-bandwidth memory bus. Who's going to make those ? Also, what's the quality of the development tools, like the compiler? Even if all those obstacles are overcome, users still need to spend time and money to get acquainted with this platform, and they are risking that the manufacturer(s) will be out of business a couple of years later.
For applications requiring more than just pure calculations, it's not going to be easy to offer a solution that offers users more value for money than a bunch of networked SMP machines based on off-the-shelf hardware, and using development tools that they are already used to, and can be assumed to be bug-free.
I wouldn't worry too much about your MAC address being exposed. There are much better ways to track what people are doing, and to combine the information that is gathered about you.
You can store a unique personal number in somebody's cookie, and use that to track what they are doing. This is especially powerful in combination with big banner ad servers: the ad server reads your cookie, and combines this information with the URL the banner ad was on. This information can even be augmented with data (like your home address) that you fill in on web forms, assuming that the site owner is willing to sell that kind of data. And why wouldn't they?
The banner ad doesn't even have to be visible for this purpose, it can be a 1x1 pixel transparent gif.
I have tried various window managers/desktops, ncluding KDE and Gnome, but I'm still using plain old twm. Pop open a couple of xterms, xbiff, netscape, and I'm happy. Everything in plain colors, no fancy shading, themes, or shiny icons. I have been using twm since tvtwm was still considered revolutionary.
:-) With my hands on the keyboard, and aliases for often used commands, starting up new applications is faster than picking up the mouse, and navigating through menus, or finding the right icon.
Twm is ultra fast, uses very little memory, and starts up in a blink of an eye. I also shuts down really fast using ctrl-alt-backspace
Maybe I'm just too old... haha... but I am very thankful that nobody's forcing me to upgrade to the latest desktop. Having the choice to use something old-fashioned and outdated is what makes Linux and OSS great.
If people want to extend the number of choices, more power to them. If they don't want to help working on KDE, but start their own project, I respect them. I'm glad Linus started his own little project, instead of contributing to minix.