This is far from being something intended for end users! It is something that can run some software, often badly. At best it can be used for dogfooding but even that is unlikely at this stage.
But yes QA is important, maybe you want to help the project with that?
Software doesn't magically come into existence because someone wills it - it is the product of hard work!
So if you think it should progress quicker you are free to contribute. If you aren't a developer then you can test software to find incompatibilities or outright bugs. If you aren't a developer or have no time to support it then you can contribute money or other resources to the project (bounties have helped many projects) or try to build awareness of the project and gain the support from others.
Being a whining anonymous asshole doesn't do anything.
No this was a good description of the post he (?) responded to.
This is like a library. You ask for help to locate a book and get directed to a certain shelf and a number on that shelf. You read that book and then see that there are books beside it. You read them too. No crime have been committed. Nothing is stolen. That someone included sensitive information in some books aren't your doing and not your responsibility. You aren't legally required (though perhaps morally so) to inform the librarians that sensitive information is out in the open, they should already know that unless they are incompetent anyway.
Note however that many countries have laws against knowingly spreading sensitive information to others even if getting that information is fully legal.
The 68000 have no MMU internally and no support for virtual memory even with an external MMU, the "bad" instructions just exposed system state making pure virtualization impossible. But virtualization isn't a requirement for a modern OS and x86 fixed their abstraction leakages much later (20+ years) and in a much more complex way (but with advantages).
The 68010 was hardware compatible with the 68000 but fixed both the virtualization problem and the MMU problem (the MMU itself had to be added externally).
A different thing. They will not try to lock down general purpose hardware as it would just be a problem.
The ones that want to lock things up are the hardware vendors as it simplifies support, the examples of that are many. But what have MS to gain for it? They have their semi-monopoly with Windows and have come to accept (read: forced to accept) Linux. There are no general purpose system (except Linux) that can compete with them so the attempts to lock stuff down are a thing of the past for Microsoft. If that would change I would protest in the small ways I can as would others, the EU and probably USA and others would see this as an attempt of monopoly control.
I don't write or think this because I think MS is a "good company" (there aren't any) but because they would get into a lot of trouble if they went back to their old ways and they really don't need to do that anymore. They have carved out a niche that they can't be removed from and really don't have any competition in, the complexity of their software is the thing that locks people to MS.
Hardware vendors like to lock down their hardware though as it simplifies support. Some computers even verifies the installed hardware before booting FFS and that isn't because MS forces them.
Not in general no. One can acknowledge something as generally true while find the argument using that something as absurd, either as it doesn't apply to a situation or as having little to no impact in the situation.
This isn't too uncommon when arguing against anti-AGW* people that like to point out a problem and making that problem out to be critical in the AGW argument. Or even simpler (but in the same context) the argument that Al Gore have a private plane and he use it contributing to the global warming, that's true and it's a downright ridiculous argument against AGW.
(* some are reasonable of course but they aren't as loud as the ignorant mass)
You skipped a lot in the later chain. How is the digital signal stored? How is it written and read? Then compare to how the analog signal is written and read in the vinyl design. You also skip the inner workings of ADCs and DACs.
Your digital chain also skips the two most complicated steps in digital audio: compression and decompression. Both of those are very complicated and are only avoided in DSD (AFAIK), theoretically even the ADCs and DACs can be simplified greatly using that format - but the storage method itself is still very complicated.
I have a Dell Precision m6300 and have periodically used it as the daily computer. Browsing, writing code, writing text, playing simple games, watching videos etc. The main limitation of the machine is the HDD which will probably be switched to an SDD soon.
That machine is 10 years old. The main limitations are the I/O hardware: the LCD screen isn't too good when used to modern bright IPS panels, the keyboard while very good for its time doesn't have the feel of a modern quality keyboard and the touchpad is just almost useable.
While it is nice to have a modern machine the power of even old computers are enough for almost everything.
Yes there are! Meltdown is due to Intel design decisions and can easily be fixed in hardware.
Current and older Intel systems can only be fixed by making the OS do more work - but that can be a fix too in that one can't abuse the Meltdown bug for anything. Not sure if current designs actually do enough for this to be true though, it would be easier to allow some information exposure in which case I'd agree that it's only mitigated but to a large degree.
Overly complicated? You obviously don't know the meaning of the word! Vinyl is very simple and modern audio is very complicated.
Vinyl: position changes in a stylus/needle induces proportional voltages that is amplified and then replayed with a speaker.
Digital: compressed audio is decompressed to a digital sound representation that is converted to an analog value which is then amplified and replayed with a speaker.
Decompression of the audio isn't exactly a simple operation and the workings of a modern audio DAC is anything but simple. If we should look over the entire chain of operations there is also the audio compression that is very complicated and includes things like psychoacoustic modelling...
An engineer should strive for the simplest system possible IMO. This complicates one step (done once) but keeps compatibility with old technology while improving the result. Sounds good to me!
The post you replied to had an argument why vinyl could sound better than CD even though it is more (quality) limited. Maybe you should respond to that? This post just makes you look like a jerk not understanding the original argument.
No we can't - we can however stop them from discriminate against gay people. Quite a difference.
You know what? The company people could have used _their_ free speech to tell the customers what they thought about the whole thing (as long as there were no threats). The company could have ridiculed their customers, insulted them in the worst way imaginable (within legal limits) and then made the cake for them if they still wanted to be customers. No problem.
I think people like you should be castrated and then boiled in tar but if I _did_ bake cakes for money I make one for you. (/s)
This is obvious. Not obvious in hindsight but obvious as a fundamental well known security problem. It have been protected against in the past (filtering power lines to reduce or eliminate signal transmission). And it is _really_ old news, this was known and protected against before I was born.
This is incredibly ignorant. Insulin is prescribed as the body needs it to function. In the old days before insulin the only "cure" was to have extremely low-carb diets which didn't work well in general.
LOL! Do you think it's hard to get that information? If it also had his logins on important websites there could be a problem however him having that would be a bigger one...
Slashdot Mirror
This is far from being something intended for end users! It is something that can run some software, often badly. At best it can be used for dogfooding but even that is unlikely at this stage.
But yes QA is important, maybe you want to help the project with that?
Software doesn't magically come into existence because someone wills it - it is the product of hard work!
So if you think it should progress quicker you are free to contribute. If you aren't a developer then you can test software to find incompatibilities or outright bugs.
If you aren't a developer or have no time to support it then you can contribute money or other resources to the project (bounties have helped many projects) or try to build awareness of the project and gain the support from others.
Being a whining anonymous asshole doesn't do anything.
No this was a good description of the post he (?) responded to.
This is like a library. You ask for help to locate a book and get directed to a certain shelf and a number on that shelf. You read that book and then see that there are books beside it. You read them too. No crime have been committed. Nothing is stolen. That someone included sensitive information in some books aren't your doing and not your responsibility. You aren't legally required (though perhaps morally so) to inform the librarians that sensitive information is out in the open, they should already know that unless they are incompetent anyway.
Note however that many countries have laws against knowingly spreading sensitive information to others even if getting that information is fully legal.
The 68000 have no MMU internally and no support for virtual memory even with an external MMU, the "bad" instructions just exposed system state making pure virtualization impossible. But virtualization isn't a requirement for a modern OS and x86 fixed their abstraction leakages much later (20+ years) and in a much more complex way (but with advantages).
The 68010 was hardware compatible with the 68000 but fixed both the virtualization problem and the MMU problem (the MMU itself had to be added externally).
A different thing. They will not try to lock down general purpose hardware as it would just be a problem.
The ones that want to lock things up are the hardware vendors as it simplifies support, the examples of that are many. But what have MS to gain for it? They have their semi-monopoly with Windows and have come to accept (read: forced to accept) Linux. There are no general purpose system (except Linux) that can compete with them so the attempts to lock stuff down are a thing of the past for Microsoft. If that would change I would protest in the small ways I can as would others, the EU and probably USA and others would see this as an attempt of monopoly control.
I don't write or think this because I think MS is a "good company" (there aren't any) but because they would get into a lot of trouble if they went back to their old ways and they really don't need to do that anymore. They have carved out a niche that they can't be removed from and really don't have any competition in, the complexity of their software is the thing that locks people to MS.
Hardware vendors like to lock down their hardware though as it simplifies support. Some computers even verifies the installed hardware before booting FFS and that isn't because MS forces them.
No they don't you stupid schmuck. How about shoving your paranoid crap up where it belong?
Not in general no. One can acknowledge something as generally true while find the argument using that something as absurd, either as it doesn't apply to a situation or as having little to no impact in the situation.
This isn't too uncommon when arguing against anti-AGW* people that like to point out a problem and making that problem out to be critical in the AGW argument. Or even simpler (but in the same context) the argument that Al Gore have a private plane and he use it contributing to the global warming, that's true and it's a downright ridiculous argument against AGW.
(* some are reasonable of course but they aren't as loud as the ignorant mass)
Exactly.
You skipped a lot in the later chain. How is the digital signal stored? How is it written and read? Then compare to how the analog signal is written and read in the vinyl design. You also skip the inner workings of ADCs and DACs.
Your digital chain also skips the two most complicated steps in digital audio: compression and decompression. Both of those are very complicated and are only avoided in DSD (AFAIK), theoretically even the ADCs and DACs can be simplified greatly using that format - but the storage method itself is still very complicated.
I have a Dell Precision m6300 and have periodically used it as the daily computer. Browsing, writing code, writing text, playing simple games, watching videos etc. The main limitation of the machine is the HDD which will probably be switched to an SDD soon.
That machine is 10 years old. The main limitations are the I/O hardware: the LCD screen isn't too good when used to modern bright IPS panels, the keyboard while very good for its time doesn't have the feel of a modern quality keyboard and the touchpad is just almost useable.
While it is nice to have a modern machine the power of even old computers are enough for almost everything.
Yes there are! Meltdown is due to Intel design decisions and can easily be fixed in hardware.
Current and older Intel systems can only be fixed by making the OS do more work - but that can be a fix too in that one can't abuse the Meltdown bug for anything. Not sure if current designs actually do enough for this to be true though, it would be easier to allow some information exposure in which case I'd agree that it's only mitigated but to a large degree.
Close to what they have now but slightly improved and on a more advanced manufacturing process. Just as AMD said they would be.
No renaming.
He didn't deny them which you would know if you read things before responding.
Overly complicated? You obviously don't know the meaning of the word! Vinyl is very simple and modern audio is very complicated.
Vinyl: position changes in a stylus/needle induces proportional voltages that is amplified and then replayed with a speaker.
Digital: compressed audio is decompressed to a digital sound representation that is converted to an analog value which is then amplified and replayed with a speaker.
Decompression of the audio isn't exactly a simple operation and the workings of a modern audio DAC is anything but simple. If we should look over the entire chain of operations there is also the audio compression that is very complicated and includes things like psychoacoustic modelling...
An engineer should strive for the simplest system possible IMO. This complicates one step (done once) but keeps compatibility with old technology while improving the result. Sounds good to me!
The post you replied to had an argument why vinyl could sound better than CD even though it is more (quality) limited. Maybe you should respond to that?
This post just makes you look like a jerk not understanding the original argument.
Some of us want to be honest and expect others to be too.
This is probably a surprise to you but all people here (or elsewhere) are individuals (except bots) and so may have different opinions about things.
Define harmful.
Bullshit.
There were a _lot_ of effort trying to reduce the Y2K problem, it succeeded and now it was all hype. Yeah...
No we can't - we can however stop them from discriminate against gay people. Quite a difference.
You know what? The company people could have used _their_ free speech to tell the customers what they thought about the whole thing (as long as there were no threats). The company could have ridiculed their customers, insulted them in the worst way imaginable (within legal limits) and then made the cake for them if they still wanted to be customers. No problem.
I think people like you should be castrated and then boiled in tar but if I _did_ bake cakes for money I make one for you. (/s)
This is obvious. Not obvious in hindsight but obvious as a fundamental well known security problem. It have been protected against in the past (filtering power lines to reduce or eliminate signal transmission). And it is _really_ old news, this was known and protected against before I was born.
This is incredibly ignorant. Insulin is prescribed as the body needs it to function. In the old days before insulin the only "cure" was to have extremely low-carb diets which didn't work well in general.
LOL! Do you think it's hard to get that information? If it also had his logins on important websites there could be a problem however him having that would be a bigger one...