Uh. No, the MT-32 was fully digital. The brilliance was that it used the old analog style subtractive synthesis as well as sample playback. But it was all done digitally.
Thing is, most of the coolest stuff Roland did was in the 80's. I'd still love to have a JD800 though. I've been a Roland nut ever since I had an MPU-401 interface for my Apple ][ connected to a Juno-60 via a MIDI to DCB converter.
I have been disappointed with Roland's products since the JD-800, though.
They have a KILLER R&D department, I expect better stuff from them!
Have you ever really experienced that??? Or did your ex's just pretend to feel pain?
Did any of them say "I'm sorry but I can't see you anymore because I am infatuated with your best friend. But I feel terrible pain because I am dumping you." ????
Both your roommate and your 'friend' have no respect for you and are only getting together because of their relationship WITH you. They are playing games. If you like to play games, go along with it. If you don't, leave now. Remember there is no use wrestling with pigs - you only get muddy and the pigs LIKE mud.
Your 'friendship' with this girl was never really a friendship anyways as obviously there was a sexual twist to it.
If your roommate were having sex with a different girl, would you feel as bad as you do now?
I've been in all sides of this exact situation before. Never again.... the infernal triangle of Victim, Abuser, and Savior. Step out of the triangle and deal with people worthy.
Firstly, I was not allowed to demonstrate Viola to the jury. It was explained to me that the judge had decided that my demonstration, of the Viola browser from May 1993 showing interactive objects embedded in a web page, would have been too "prejudicial" against Eolas. I was also not allowed to tell the jury that Doyle knew about Viola. This I suppose is understandable but still puzzles me a little and leads to unfortunate effects, as I imagine the Jury ought to know these things. Lets not kid ourselves, everything said in court by both sides were certainly aimed at swaying the jury. But facts are facts, especially relevant ones.
Could it be that Microsoft got this patent as a DEFENSIVE patent, so that someone like Gaim or Jabber doesn't patent something silly like this and sue Microsoft for $472 million? Or if they did sue Microsoft, they could sue back?
Remember that the role of the patent office is to NOT check for prior art. All they do is make sure that your invention is not a perpetual motion machine (and if it is, they dispatch the Men In Black to deal with you).
Some people believe that the people checking for prior art is the court system. However, as seen in the Eolas case against Microsoft, Microsoft was NOT allowed to present proof of prior art to the court!
Glad to see panther being faster - I had noticed that running a compile on yellowdog linux on my mac was noticeably faster than running the exact same compile under jaguar...
If I have 20 user processes together allocating 99% of available phys + swap, and two root process using 1%, there is no out of memory situation yet.
Then one of of the root processes needs to touch a new memory page that was alloced, or it needs a new memory page to expand its stack. The root process will be killed, right? It is the root process that is the offender. And there is no way for the root process to handle this error. It is just killed.
Try the program. I have a small linux server sitting here with 64 megs of physical memory, and 400 megs of swap. I can run 10 copies of that program at once. This means that 2.56 gigs of ram is allocated. Hmm, only 2 gigs more than should be possible.
Next, change the program so it actually touches memory pages. malloc() still never returns 0. When the system is out of memory, the program will be killed WHEN IT TOUCHES the memory.
What does this mean? It means that under linux there is no use handling the case of malloc() returning 0. There is no need to ever handle any out of memory exceptions in c++, because these will never happen.
Your program will just crash anyways. Yes this can be a security hole, and yes the original poster is correct in saying that a ring of buffers is safer than using malloc dynamically.
The thing is, in all the other states where trash is NOT private property, the court still seems to think that what is IN your trash on the curb has something to do with you.
If I didn't like someone very much, all I'd have to do is stuff some pot into his trash on the curb. He gets blamed and arrested.
The man page is lying. Make a test program. It is entirely possible for two or more programs to allocate more memory than phys+swap together. malloc() and realloc() on linux NEVER return 0, unless one single allocation in one program exceeds swap.
Linux allocates physical memory pages on the fly, as you use them. Try this code. It allocates 256 megs on each run until you exit. How many times do you have to run it before it says malloc returns 0? How much more memory than you have (including swap) did it allocate?
#include <stdio.h> #include <unistd.h>
int main() { char *p = (char *)malloc(256*1024*1024); printf( "malloc returned 0x%X\n", (unsigned long)p ); getchar(); }
This kind of thing happens with stacks as well. Memory on your stack is allocated on the fly as you use it. What happens when the kernel can't allocate a memory page when it is first accessed? It kills the process. hard. This means that user processes can steal resources and cause any number of root processes to die, just because they made a function call that required a larger stack.
This does have many security and dependability implications, as the original poster said. Most people do not know this and do not handle this case!
I have been thinking that eventually I may just put an auto-responder on my email addresses that tell the sender 'Please PHONE me at my office'. And I'll shut off all my voicemail services. And if it is important, they will get through eventually. If it isn't, they won't bother me.
Not only that, but I've had one email smtp server email me to say that any further email from me will be blocked to that domain! I run linux and never sent the spam - the headers in the returned email show it originated in brazil - but their anti-spam software actually trusts the From: header! insane!
The interesting thing is that it looks like Britney Spears and Michael Jackson are the ones implementing this sort of multi-hominid-synchronized-movement system. Maybe there is some sort of connection?
Point #1: Nixon, Henry Kissenger, Alexander Haig, and many others ADMITTED to plotting and executing the overthrow of the democratically elected leader of Chile. All of these documents were declassified by the Clinton Administration. I don't know about the other points, but why don't YOU try to read the fully documented information?
Slashdot Mirror
Uh. No, the MT-32 was fully digital. The brilliance was that it used the old analog style subtractive synthesis as well as sample playback. But it was all done digitally.
--jeff++
Because it is not the best browser.
--jeff++
Thing is, most of the coolest stuff Roland did was in the 80's. I'd still love to have a JD800 though. I've been a Roland nut ever since I had an MPU-401 interface for my Apple ][ connected to a Juno-60 via a MIDI to DCB converter.
I have been disappointed with Roland's products since the JD-800, though.
They have a KILLER R&D department, I expect better stuff from them!
--jeff++
Have you ever really experienced that??? Or did your ex's just pretend to feel pain?
Did any of them say "I'm sorry but I can't see you anymore because I am infatuated with your best friend. But I feel terrible pain because I am dumping you." ????
Both your roommate and your 'friend' have no respect for you and are only getting together because of their relationship WITH you. They are playing games. If you like to play games, go along with it. If you don't, leave now. Remember there is no use wrestling with pigs - you only get muddy and the pigs LIKE mud.
Your 'friendship' with this girl was never really a friendship anyways as obviously there was a sexual twist to it.
If your roommate were having sex with a different girl, would you feel as bad as you do now?
I've been in all sides of this exact situation before. Never again.... the infernal triangle of Victim, Abuser, and Savior. Step out of the triangle and deal with people worthy.
Unless you feel you are not worthy...
--jeff++
That's why you gotta be the one doing the dumping. Then it doesn't hurt!
--jeff++
From http://www.xcf.berkeley.edu/~wei/viola/aboutEolasM icrosoft.html:
Could it be that Microsoft got this patent as a DEFENSIVE patent, so that someone like Gaim or Jabber doesn't patent something silly like this and sue Microsoft for $472 million? Or if they did sue Microsoft, they could sue back?
--jeff++
Remember that the role of the patent office is to NOT check for prior art. All they do is make sure that your invention is not a perpetual motion machine (and if it is, they dispatch the Men In Black to deal with you).
Some people believe that the people checking for prior art is the court system. However, as seen in the Eolas case against Microsoft, Microsoft was NOT allowed to present proof of prior art to the court!
--jeff++
9 minutes!
Drool.
Glad to see panther being faster - I had noticed that running a compile on yellowdog linux on my mac was noticeably faster than running the exact same compile under jaguar...
--jeff++
If it is copyrighted by a RIAA member company, it is music. If it isn't RIAA, then it is not music, and would be illegal to listen to.
--jeff++
If I have 20 user processes together allocating 99% of available phys + swap, and two root process using 1%, there is no out of memory situation yet.
Then one of of the root processes needs to touch a new memory page that was alloced, or it needs a new memory page to expand its stack. The root process will be killed, right? It is the root process that is the offender. And there is no way for the root process to handle this error. It is just killed.
--jeff++
Try the program. I have a small linux server sitting here with 64 megs of physical memory, and 400 megs of swap. I can run 10 copies of that program at once. This means that 2.56 gigs of ram is allocated. Hmm, only 2 gigs more than should be possible.
Next, change the program so it actually touches memory pages. malloc() still never returns 0. When the system is out of memory, the program will be killed WHEN IT TOUCHES the memory.
What does this mean? It means that under linux there is no use handling the case of malloc() returning 0. There is no need to ever handle any out of memory exceptions in c++, because these will never happen.
Your program will just crash anyways. Yes this can be a security hole, and yes the original poster is correct in saying that a ring of buffers is safer than using malloc dynamically.
--jeff
Wow, I hope they have good spam filters!
--jeff++
The thing is, in all the other states where trash is NOT private property, the court still seems to think that what is IN your trash on the curb has something to do with you.
If I didn't like someone very much, all I'd have to do is stuff some pot into his trash on the curb. He gets blamed and arrested.
--jeff
Linux allocates physical memory pages on the fly, as you use them. Try this code. It allocates 256 megs on each run until you exit. How many times do you have to run it before it says malloc returns 0? How much more memory than you have (including swap) did it allocate?
This kind of thing happens with stacks as well. Memory on your stack is allocated on the fly as you use it. What happens when the kernel can't allocate a memory page when it is first accessed? It kills the process. hard. This means that user processes can steal resources and cause any number of root processes to die, just because they made a function call that required a larger stack.
This does have many security and dependability implications, as the original poster said. Most people do not know this and do not handle this case!
--jeff++
I have been thinking that eventually I may just put an auto-responder on my email addresses that tell the sender 'Please PHONE me at my office'. And I'll shut off all my voicemail services. And if it is important, they will get through eventually. If it isn't, they won't bother me.
--jeff++
Would Google qualify as a God? What would Google's role be?
--jeff
Some might say that ALL xml is bastardized.
However microsoft's office xml is apparently no more bastardized than any other xml document.
--jeff++
You were redirected by your browser. It automatically prepended 'www' to your request. Try use 'dig' to query the nameservers.
--jeff++
Not only that, but I've had one email smtp server email me to say that any further email from me will be blocked to that domain! I run linux and never sent the spam - the headers in the returned email show it originated in brazil - but their anti-spam software actually trusts the From: header! insane!
--jeff++
So, then, is the problem the media spin? Or is the number of 'brain-dead sheep' in the world the problem?
--jeff++
That can't be true. mod_gzip isnt used unless the browser tells the server via the Accept-Encoding header.
--jeff++
Shouldn't Aidtopia write instead, "Computer Graphics pioneer Andrew Glassner HAD a cool page on virtual cinema."
--jeff++
Wow.
The interesting thing is that it looks like Britney Spears and Michael Jackson are the ones implementing this sort of multi-hominid-synchronized-movement system. Maybe there is some sort of connection?
--jeff++
Point #1: Nixon, Henry Kissenger, Alexander Haig, and many others ADMITTED to plotting and executing the overthrow of the democratically elected leader of Chile. All of these documents were declassified by the Clinton Administration. I don't know about the other points, but why don't YOU try to read the fully documented information?
--jeff++