I actually wonder if the only real danger as the story posts constits of never getting out of the crater, but actually also to make a safe journey downward without stumbling, falling and bursting? (Then you've a wreckage without any scientific data to make it payoff)
"A GPLed Java would require relicensing, which Sun cannot do"
Well I disagree here. People commonly believe they cannot release their code under GPL if it contains closed parts. Thats wrong. You can since it is _your_ code! Just add an exception to your GPL license if you're using any closed libraries or linking to other closed code. Like "This code may be linked to ASDF altough it's not GPL", well you can make it sound better. (Of course you can only do this if all the code is yours, you can't add legal appandixes to GPL code from others)
Java (classes) are currently released under a "Pine-like" license - look but do not touch! The Java Compiler also. However the JVM itself is still closed source as far I remember.
Yes it was, egcs has it been called. And it was a good thing! since the fork was a group of people which wanted to go differently than the mainstream developers, and they proofed to be succesful, so they were integrated again to be the mainstream. How do we benefit from it? A far better C compiler! So forks are GOOD. (i.e. in this case)
I think OSS reimplementations taking over is what sun actually is afraight of.
Forks everywhere everytime possible. But do I see massive forks of the gcc compiler to "extend" C, making it a useless language? It still works, and there is still a public consens of what C/Perl/Python/Ruby is without the need of an intellectual properety protected central control.
Java was always a wielded sun used against Microsoft and Intel. Not more and not less. I don't know where they said we want to keep it no matter what. It is not a business itself, they don't actually make money from java itself.
Standarizing and opening it is like pushing the "automatic" mode on your weapon, and have to be a shoot-and-forget. If sun manages to establish itself as free/open/standard it lashes itself about through computing world, harming the big monopolies intel/microsoft with no more action or money from sun required, and they can happily sell solaris&co. with people building on java.
ad.2 I think sun never has any real business implications in java. It's a support technolgy to support their main business solaris, servers. And java is a tool to be help this technology since javas cross-plattform allows you to use solaris, when otherwhise you would be forced to other OSes.
I can see a good reason, having a real OpenSource license for java would give it a significant popularity and usage thrust. Something they could really use in the battle against.Net
Java to be successful in the long term needs to be standarized and opened like C has been!
I know it isn't perfect, but in a case of a process going harvast and eating eat all VM up, it will be the one to be killed, very sure, nothing endagered, POINT!
(excerpt from oom_kill.c)/*
* The memory size of the process is the basis for the badness.
*/
points = p->mm->total_vm;
It is already prooven that exaggerated hygiene is at least fostering allergies, since your immune systems sits there and is idle, it can't train, and figurueally at one time it so bored it starts to react at just something - normally totally harmless to the human body like housedust, cat-hair, strawberries, milk, pollen, and so on.
I.e. chidring growing up on a farm have less than half the risk of becoming an allrgic, like ones living in a city.
I think there were some extreme examples where some babies even died after living some years too long in a hyper-steril surronding, and than beeing released to "normal" world.
For this issue even plastic gloves do not help, except you constantly change them against new ones (which is a real good thing for environmental waste, isn't it?).
If you touch raw chicken with you gloves, and suppose it even has salmonellae then use the gloves to pluck the lettuce, guess what happens?
I rather have bare hands washed even only sleazy inbetween, since even if one or two bacteries keep steeking on the hand, they won't kill you. Remember everything is just a matter of the dose.
I usually wash my hands only after going to the toilet, and then just mere 2-3 seconds. Well I'm still pretty alive and sound, hardly hadn't any influenza for more than two years.
Actually not, if you read the parent you'll notice he pointed out that a runaway process would endanger the whole system, and hinder *other* processess. This is not case.
Re:Swap can save your ass
on
Is Swap Necessary?
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Thats not true, if the linux kernel gets out of memory it takes the list of all processes, scores them with memory usage, runtime etc. and then simply kills the process of highest score. In your case your RAM munching app. would just be killed by the kernel.
I know that pretty for sure, since I modified that part of the kernel once for an embedded system, where we explicitly didn't want it to kill any process, but have instead to reboot in such a case. Since nothing is worse than having a half-functional system with some processes missing....
As anything it's hard to get real statistics, but googles Zeitgeist is a fairly good resource:
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html
Unfortunally as you see IE 6.0 is gaining rapidly more and more market share, while mozilla 5.0+ is only veeeery slowly advancing. I know that Browsers like Opera or so announce themselves as IE by default, this is no good, so it's well their problem to be unseen.
The key issue about the negative side of bundling is finance.
If you "buy" a Linux distro, you're not passively forced to finance all side products that come with it, they are developed indepently.
I agree that there are distro's where you're financing side-product development, like redhat gcc,glibc and a lot of other stuff, SuSe money goes into ALSA, USB development and so on. This is actually good as you're financing OpenSource software when paying for RedHat/Suse many others. However again you are left the choice not to do so, but install debian for example.
In contrast to that if you buy windows XY, you are actually also financing IE, WMP and development of all the other stuff you really don't want.
Don't take me wrong I'm a mozilla fan and linux user.
But honestly if I'm running windows, what real motiviation is there to download a replacement browser when IE is already installed, and works?
I can't be mad at any secretary 'cause she uses IE instead of Mozilla/Netscape. Of course of political reasons she shouldn't, but practically?
If you sell an operating system, you practically just have the ultimate power to drive any other software out of business by bundeling and installing it by default.
I agreee with you, I personally like the construction of micro-kernels better than of monolithic ones.
However I've recently seen some oscilloscopes running Microsoft Windows 95 and NT, we got several to evaluate. Almost all of the newer ones are constructed like this.
Honestly I'm really considiring this as stupid. Why can't they run Linux with X on such a Oszi-PC? Saves the license costs, and also keeps the Oszi from crashing (which the Agiland one actually did ocassionally).
Sorry but embedded NT 4.0 is only the result of rather uneducated developers if you ask me. 'cause all they know has been windows in all their life.
I personally don't see any real reason to use embedded NT in favor of embedded linux. Second can do it all cheaper, with less hardware requirments, and beeing more flexible, and over all it's Open Source thus giving you complete control over your product.
Your absolutely right, I'm no expert in the american/british law system, but from the european one I know a bit.
There are everywhere exceptions for "openhanded" transcations (oneway). However it is still a transaction in legal sense.
Some points include:
* The receiver has no legal right on a faultless "object" whatsoever (most important)
* In cases of ambiguous interpretations in the contract of transaction it is always ruled for the giver. It is assumed the giver wants to give less. (For example if I present my purse to you, is the content of it also part of the transaction or not. In a generous transaction it would be of course ruled for me, in a give-and-reive transaction against me since I used the ambigous part),
* The giver may step back from the transaction in case of a misconception in motive. (I wanted to give it under certain assumptions which proved not to be true) (in normal transaction this is of course not possible).
Drawing and dawning of iceages is a veeeeeeery slow process, a hundret years make no significant difference. While glasshouse the effect is a rather quik working process. Since both effekt work on completely different time scales they do not interfer with each other.
I know it's a hard concept to grasp. It's like driving a car forward (greenhouse effekt) on a continent, while the continental drift would move you backward. You would say you compensate contintal drift by driving the car would you?
Okay in 10000 years we possible have an ice age, its not to happen in the next 100 years either way. But we might have some degrees warmer earth in the next decades to come due to the glasshouse. And believe me a degree longtime average difference makes HUGE effects.
"""In this case, no. The waste would decay on its own naturally, releasing CO2 into the atmosphere upon doing so. At least through Thermal Depolymerization, we are harnessing the energy from that process.""
And this is simply not true so.
What I want to point out is that the plants would grow there eitherway, does not matter if we use them to TCP them or if we let them rot and let them add to soil.
Where is second case we've a light reduction in CO2 levels, and in TCP case we've not.
But as you said we secretly agree, and I will make that unsecret!:o)
I'm also aware that the major CO2 "filters" are not agriculture, the biggest is the plankton in the ocean, so we see that poising it (with crude oil) is also here very dangerous. The next bigger CO2 "eater" are the primeval forest around the equador. Unfortunally they are also cutted clear as we're speaking, making things just worse.
However to sum it up, I'll agree very much after all on the part that TCP is a GoodThing (TM).
Finnal Add-On: I find it funny on the mod-points in all these topic that you see posts getting modded up that contains content on what people want to hear (Using oil does not do harm, it all will become easy&good, etc.) But I guess thats a problem in science in general. Goes down to theories highly apprechiated with say crude oil gets generated from the inner core of earth. LOL. But there are people that actually believe this, and the whole thing of oil-shortage is just a lie by the oil-companies who know better after all to raise prices and get richer. Believe it or not;)
Again the original post is FALSE, there is absolutly no debatte if CO2 causes globar warming, it is.
It is highly debatted how strong that effect ist, nobody knows, and which part of globar warming we're currently experiencing is artificial and which part is natural, if the natural is working in the same direction at all and over compensated by global warming due to CO2. Nobody can tell, thats true.
I just wanted to express with my examples how talented people are in ignoring reality and working out strange theories just as it comforts them. Smoking and Nazis are perfect examples, Denial of global warming is also one.
However right now, while the biomass is NOT fostered, it's one way to get a bit of CO2 out of the atmosphere exhausted by oil usage and put it "back" into the soil. By "recycling" that relief factor your are also one worsening the situation.
So, thats another way to put it. You wrote in the original post that fostering the biomass by generating div. burnable products of it is just the same net result as letting it rot, since rotting also produces CO2. Thats so not true and a bit of blinding, which I've wanted to express. By reburning you are also hindering natures self-healing process.
Of course I would also perfectly welcome a prefect cycle of burn, grow, foster, burn, etc. if not use of any crude oil resources anymore. However we've to keep it honest IMHO.
Slashdot Mirror
I actually wonder if the only real danger as the story posts constits of never getting out of the crater, but actually also to make a safe journey downward without stumbling, falling and bursting? (Then you've a wreckage without any scientific data to make it payoff)
"A GPLed Java would require relicensing, which Sun cannot do"
Well I disagree here. People commonly believe they cannot release their code under GPL if it contains closed parts. Thats wrong. You can since it is _your_ code! Just add an exception to your GPL license if you're using any closed libraries or linking to other closed code. Like "This code may be linked to ASDF altough it's not GPL", well you can make it sound better. (Of course you can only do this if all the code is yours, you can't add legal appandixes to GPL code from others)
Java (classes) are currently released under a "Pine-like" license - look but do not touch! The Java Compiler also. However the JVM itself is still closed source as far I remember.
And this relates to the story how?
My guess you just waited for a moment that remotly enables you to bring your story up. Whooohoo!
Yes it was, egcs has it been called. And it was a good thing! since the fork was a group of people which wanted to go differently than the mainstream developers, and they proofed to be succesful, so they were integrated again to be the mainstream. How do we benefit from it? A far better C compiler! So forks are GOOD. (i.e. in this case)
I think OSS reimplementations taking over is what sun actually is afraight of.
So is C, so is Perl, so is Phython, so it Ruby
Forks everywhere everytime possible. But do I see massive forks of the gcc compiler to "extend" C, making it a useless language? It still works, and there is still a public consens of what C/Perl/Python/Ruby is without the need of an intellectual properety protected central control.
Java was always a wielded sun used against Microsoft and Intel. Not more and not less. I don't know where they said we want to keep it no matter what. It is not a business itself, they don't actually make money from java itself.
Standarizing and opening it is like pushing the "automatic" mode on your weapon, and have to be a shoot-and-forget. If sun manages to establish itself as free/open/standard it lashes itself about through computing world, harming the big monopolies intel/microsoft with no more action or money from sun required, and they can happily sell solaris&co. with people building on java.
ad.2 I think sun never has any real business implications in java. It's a support technolgy to support their main business solaris, servers. And java is a tool to be help this technology since javas cross-plattform allows you to use solaris, when otherwhise you would be forced to other OSes.
I can see a good reason, having a real OpenSource license for java would give it a significant popularity and usage thrust. Something they could really use in the battle against .Net
Java to be successful in the long term needs to be standarized and opened like C has been!
I know it isn't perfect, but in a case of a process going harvast and eating eat all VM up, it will be the one to be killed, very sure, nothing endagered, POINT!
/*
(excerpt from oom_kill.c)
* The memory size of the process is the basis for the badness.
*/
points = p->mm->total_vm;
Let me guess, but you do have an allergy.
It is already prooven that exaggerated hygiene is at least fostering allergies, since your immune systems sits there and is idle, it can't train, and figurueally at one time it so bored it starts to react at just something - normally totally harmless to the human body like housedust, cat-hair, strawberries, milk, pollen, and so on.
I.e. chidring growing up on a farm have less than half the risk of becoming an allrgic, like ones living in a city.
I think there were some extreme examples where some babies even died after living some years too long in a hyper-steril surronding, and than beeing released to "normal" world.
For this issue even plastic gloves do not help, except you constantly change them against new ones (which is a real good thing for environmental waste, isn't it?).
If you touch raw chicken with you gloves, and suppose it even has salmonellae then use the gloves to pluck the lettuce, guess what happens?
I rather have bare hands washed even only sleazy inbetween, since even if one or two bacteries keep steeking on the hand, they won't kill you. Remember everything is just a matter of the dose.
I usually wash my hands only after going to the toilet, and then just mere 2-3 seconds. Well I'm still pretty alive and sound, hardly hadn't any influenza for more than two years.
Actually not, if you read the parent you'll notice he pointed out that a runaway process would endanger the whole system, and hinder *other* processess. This is not case.
Thats not true, if the linux kernel gets out of memory it takes the list of all processes, scores them with memory usage, runtime etc. and then simply kills the process of highest score. In your case your RAM munching app. would just be killed by the kernel.
I know that pretty for sure, since I modified that part of the kernel once for an embedded system, where we explicitly didn't want it to kill any process, but have instead to reboot in such a case. Since nothing is worse than having a half-functional system with some processes missing....
As anything it's hard to get real statistics, but googles Zeitgeist is a fairly good resource:
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html
Unfortunally as you see IE 6.0 is gaining rapidly more and more market share, while mozilla 5.0+ is only veeeery slowly advancing. I know that Browsers like Opera or so announce themselves as IE by default, this is no good, so it's well their problem to be unseen.
The key issue about the negative side of bundling is finance.
If you "buy" a Linux distro, you're not passively forced to finance all side products that come with it, they are developed indepently.
I agree that there are distro's where you're financing side-product development, like redhat gcc,glibc and a lot of other stuff, SuSe money goes into ALSA, USB development and so on. This is actually good as you're financing OpenSource software when paying for RedHat/Suse many others. However again you are left the choice not to do so, but install debian for example.
In contrast to that if you buy windows XY, you are actually also financing IE, WMP and development of all the other stuff you really don't want.
Don't take me wrong I'm a mozilla fan and linux user.
But honestly if I'm running windows, what real motiviation is there to download a replacement browser when IE is already installed, and works?
I can't be mad at any secretary 'cause she uses IE instead of Mozilla/Netscape. Of course of political reasons she shouldn't, but practically?
If you sell an operating system, you practically just have the ultimate power to drive any other software out of business by bundeling and installing it by default.
I agreee with you, I personally like the construction of micro-kernels better than of monolithic ones.
However I've recently seen some oscilloscopes running Microsoft Windows 95 and NT, we got several to evaluate. Almost all of the newer ones are constructed like this.
Honestly I'm really considiring this as stupid. Why can't they run Linux with X on such a Oszi-PC? Saves the license costs, and also keeps the Oszi from crashing (which the Agiland one actually did ocassionally).
This is IMHO as fatalistic as a comment can be.
Lets not do anything, because we'll loose anyway. Some idea like don't leave your house, the day will be shitty anyway.
Sorry but embedded NT 4.0 is only the result of rather uneducated developers if you ask me. 'cause all they know has been windows in all their life.
I personally don't see any real reason to use embedded NT in favor of embedded linux. Second can do it all cheaper, with less hardware requirments, and beeing more flexible, and over all it's Open Source thus giving you complete control over your product.
Your absolutely right, I'm no expert in the american/british law system, but from the european one I know a bit.
There are everywhere exceptions for "openhanded" transcations (oneway). However it is still a transaction in legal sense.
Some points include:
* The receiver has no legal right on a faultless "object" whatsoever (most important)
* In cases of ambiguous interpretations in the contract of transaction it is always ruled for the giver. It is assumed the giver wants to give less. (For example if I present my purse to you, is the content of it also part of the transaction or not. In a generous transaction it would be of course ruled for me, in a give-and-reive transaction against me since I used the ambigous part),
* The giver may step back from the transaction in case of a misconception in motive. (I wanted to give it under certain assumptions which proved not to be true) (in normal transaction this is of course not possible).
and so on and so on
Sorry, this is so sensleless.
Drawing and dawning of iceages is a veeeeeeery slow process, a hundret years make no significant difference. While glasshouse the effect is a rather quik working process. Since both effekt work on completely different time scales they do not interfer with each other.
I know it's a hard concept to grasp. It's like driving a car forward (greenhouse effekt) on a continent, while the continental drift would move you backward. You would say you compensate contintal drift by driving the car would you?
Okay in 10000 years we possible have an ice age, its not to happen in the next 100 years either way. But we might have some degrees warmer earth in the next decades to come due to the glasshouse. And believe me a degree longtime average difference makes HUGE effects.
Well I'll quote mister AC again.
:o)
;)
"""In this case, no. The waste would decay on its own naturally, releasing CO2 into the atmosphere upon doing so. At least through Thermal Depolymerization, we are harnessing the energy from that process.""
And this is simply not true so.
What I want to point out is that the plants would grow there eitherway, does not matter if we use them to TCP them or if we let them rot and let them add to soil.
Where is second case we've a light reduction in CO2 levels, and in TCP case we've not.
But as you said we secretly agree, and I will make that unsecret!
I'm also aware that the major CO2 "filters" are not agriculture, the biggest is the plankton in the ocean, so we see that poising it (with crude oil) is also here very dangerous. The next bigger CO2 "eater" are the primeval forest around the equador. Unfortunally they are also cutted clear as we're speaking, making things just worse.
However to sum it up, I'll agree very much after all on the part that TCP is a GoodThing (TM).
Finnal Add-On: I find it funny on the mod-points in all these topic that you see posts getting modded up that contains content on what people want to hear (Using oil does not do harm, it all will become easy&good, etc.) But I guess thats a problem in science in general. Goes down to theories highly apprechiated with say crude oil gets generated from the inner core of earth. LOL. But there are people that actually believe this, and the whole thing of oil-shortage is just a lie by the oil-companies who know better after all to raise prices and get richer. Believe it or not
Again the original post is FALSE, there is absolutly no debatte if CO2 causes globar warming, it is.
It is highly debatted how strong that effect ist, nobody knows, and which part of globar warming we're currently experiencing is artificial and which part is natural, if the natural is working in the same direction at all and over compensated by global warming due to CO2. Nobody can tell, thats true.
I just wanted to express with my examples how talented people are in ignoring reality and working out strange theories just as it comforts them. Smoking and Nazis are perfect examples, Denial of global warming is also one.
You can put it this way, yes.
However right now, while the biomass is NOT fostered, it's one way to get a bit of CO2 out of the atmosphere exhausted by oil usage and put it "back" into the soil. By "recycling" that relief factor your are also one worsening the situation.
So, thats another way to put it. You wrote in the original post that fostering the biomass by generating div. burnable products of it is just the same net result as letting it rot, since rotting also produces CO2. Thats so not true and a bit of blinding, which I've wanted to express. By reburning you are also hindering natures self-healing process.
Of course I would also perfectly welcome a prefect cycle of burn, grow, foster, burn, etc. if not use of any crude oil resources anymore. However we've to keep it honest IMHO.