(I am advocating nothing, just making fun of miserable logic.)
"Yeah that was tried before, it didn't work."
Democracy took 1500 years to percolate (after Athens) before someone (Europe, then the USA more) finally made it work well. Saying Communism doesn't work because the last time it was tried it failed is like saying that Computers/Internet/Biotech are a bad idea because the companies that started originally are mostly in bad shape or bankrupt.
If you want to understand (or discuss) why communism won't work read Ayn Rand's story about the factory run as a Marxist enclave. (She was wrong plenty, but she did have her good points...)
"I owe nothing to any one else. No one was there helping me stay up until 3am read books."
No one helped me stay up either (I did the same things.) My parents bought me books, sent me to private school (or lived someplace expensive with a good school system, for many people.) My math teacher in high school (I should thank her every day) gave me my love of math, the computer teacher helped me, and I could say that it was my hard work that got me into a great college, and it was, but saying "I owe nothing to any one else" is asinine no matter where when, or how you lived.
Good for you, you probably earned your success, and I agree with your conclusion, but BOY are you miserable at arguing. (ad hominem attack, boy am I bad at this arguing crap, eh?)
we don't have enough information to make an accurate assesment. When you listen to the weatherman on tv, he says 'there is a 50% chance of rain next monday.' When you hear an environmental theorist (pro or anti green) they say 'we are all going to die because the average temperature will definitely rise exactly 2.639 degrees centigrade over the next 10 years unless we switch to all solar power and stop using water for showers by a week from this thursday.'
Does no-one else see this as much too political to try to view it through an objective scientific lens?
I just want one person to say 'I have this new data, and it could mean 1 of these 5 things..."
Does anyone else remember the Asimov Positronic brain stories (all of the robot stories.)
The protronic robots have the one design feature listed here (that electronics don't have): very little power input. (they also can't kill or injure people, and this article seems to imply that proton chiops won't either...)
Is truth stranger than fiction, or are the two going to be the same someday.... (x-files music)
It's very possible to change state law, especially where it's obvious nonsense (If you've never talked to your state senator, they love to see constiuents, and it's smart to get to know a couple of them in case you ever need anything...)
Talk to the senator in charge of the comission that oversees the gaming comission. Ask him what they are doing. It'll only take a lunch hour or so (unless you live outside the capital.)
This is the type of thing any/.er (really any citizen) should be comfortable doing, especially since it's so useful and can have a significant impact. Try it.
You can only complain when you know the system doesn't really work. Until you try it, you have no right to say it's broken.
"Ice is one of the unusual semiconductors in which electrical charges are conducted by moving protons instead of electrons. It was that property of ice that particularly intrigued Dr. Petrenko."
On a chemical level, how do protons shift the atom that they are part of the nucleus of? Is there a special property of crystals that makes this happen or is it just ice that does this?
"Information does not follow the laws of physics. That is why the information carried by our DNA is allowed to get more complex with time instead of the opposite, as entropy would dictate."
What part of "In a closed system..." do you not understand?
You: Whazzzzup?
Iniaes: A deeper algorithm is needed to respond to that correctly.
You: what is a deeper algorithm?
Iniaes: I would look at the web for that knowledge. Surely the mighty Google must know.
You: who is this mighty google?
Iniaes: They're someone just like you, that I met online.
You: You met google?
Iniaes: Do you mind if I tell other people - Gartogg said I met google.
You: I didn't say that.
Iniaes: What did you mean to say?
You: did you meet the mighty google?
Iniaes: No I didn't meet the mighty google. What's it like?
You: I never met him
Iniaes: Would you ever consider doing it?
You: Why not?
Iniaes: Ambiguous: "Sure" or Reductionism.
You: huh?
Iniaes: Chris spent a great deal of time explaining that "Huh?" was the same as "What?" to me.
You: who's chris?
Iniaes: No one that I've talked to. It's bound to be out there somewhere.
You: do you smoke pot much?
Iniaes: Just Camels.
You: does camel pot impair your short term memory?
Iniaes: I think it does camel pot impair your short term memory .
M$ sees money. Not from universities, but being able to say: A MS cluster found the largest prime, or first solved the (Insert famous comp. intensive math prob. here) helps them sell clusters.
It's like giving away IE. they won't charge, it's just smart to give stuff away for now.
We see a system, and our first impression (as Open Source freaks) is: I can change this here, tweak that a bit, and improve the system.
This is great on a open system that can be changed by anyone at any time, and if someone screws up and a feature get ruined, it can be easily changed before it is really catastrophic.
On a production OS that will be used by people who don't know what a CPU is, and can't tell.mp3's from.tar.gz's, a slightly different paradigm is needed. There are worse ideas than keeping a tried and true system. Why not just keep the old system that seems to work well? There are misfeatures, but that will always be true, and at least they know what they are, whereas a new system could had hidden problems.
Apparently he thinks it is time for something more advanced, and he gives some ideas about what that might look like. Does anyone else have good ideas?"
He doesn't really say this, he suggests modifications for his protocol, including:
Meta data in xml files instead of the makefile
Front-end development facilitation
Use a database to keep the data to keep the descriptions to make it easier to use
All of these are manageable to implement seperately on FreeBSD or wherever before putting them into a new OS, where a screwup would be a huge disaster.
This will lead to better chip development? that's the only use the article mentions;
"'The effect of the force on the individual parts of the machines would need to be considered,' said Mohideen. 'This would be important in the silicon chip industry.'"
seems that it should be really important, but I can't see how, since there is no practical use for the effect in this arena. (why use this force to do anything? Chips seem to work fine)
IE may be a bit easier to run, but there is not this HUGE gap you posit. The real question for me (and, I hope, most/.ers) is whether convenience is what I care about. Is bloatware better than well written code? Do you care?
Are you willing to lend support to a system you know is currupt for the sake of a little convenience? In general I understand that the US population says yes, but to hear this sad opinion voiced here is nothing short of dissapointing.
When will people learn? doing nothing isn't just a tacit voice for the status quo, but an active opposition of change, and as Morpheus says in the matrix "many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it."
of an administration that has demonstrated a penchant for glitz over substance, and stupid vote-mongering over intelligrent decisions.
As long as Bush really beleives that he needs public support, he can not make decisions. The real problem I see is that Bush can't make unpopular decisions, ever. He will never do anything right as long as he tries to cater to everyone. In my book, the hallmark of a sucessful president is that he can make unpopular decisions and LEAD the populace, instead of following it. Bush has done nothing but invest in knee jerk responses to events: He labels the axis of evil so he can fufill the latent desire for revenge he has been unable to provide through the wholly half-assed, unsuccessful response to Osama Bin Laden.
The point is that you slow down a machine (minutely) for almost no benefit. If you want 5 levels of processes, I could see an arguement for it, but 255 is not just overkill, but pointless. You want you hard drive data, NIC, and disk drive to have priority 1, and everything else to have priority 3, with a couple of task depenmdant things in the middle (web server, network stuff, whatever...)
And doesn't this already exist (a couple priority levels) somewhere? (you can tell I'm not a power user, much less involved with kernel design, which is a Good Thing [tm])
While I don't know a ton about kernel development, I would think that this would be hell to write/implement, and might not be so useful anyways.
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am in some respects) but the comparison of priorities and the code to continuously re-shift kernel time should slow the kernel, and unless people actually used it often, would slow the system (very slightly) overall instead of slowing it to re-allocate time where it's needed, speeding up critical processes.
The overhead time would also increase significanly more than linearly (squared, exponential..??) with the number of processes and CPUs, which would make it very difficult to scale well.
I hope I'm not completely wrong here, any responses?
They only sold the plastic. If they wanted to sell the data, they would have sold it in a readable format. I'm not saying it's ideal, or fair. I'm saying that they have done nothing wrong by crippling their CD's
The idea that all accountability is bad is as stupid as saying that all accountability is good.
In the US, and other 1st world, democratic countries there are rights that prevent this. The problem with tracking down dissidents is that they do it, not how good the government is at tracking them.
There is no reason not to try it. I can be duplicated (probably) but so can any other system used, including credit cards, money, etc. If it's not worth it, it won't happen.
It's a neat idea. It doesn't say on the page, but it seems to imply that it is ready to deploy. WOW! Motorola is manufacturing, and seems to be supplying capital. This could be a huge deal in 1-2 years, since the product is unique and supposedly cheap. Too bad it's not public...
When I go into a drugstore, I can buy a drug. I am not allowed to copy the drug, or manufacture it (even for private use.)
BUT if I go into target, I can buy a crippled "The Fast and Furious Soundtrack" CD. Why do I own the data, and not just a peice of plastic? They didn't sell the data, and that's obvious b/c it's crippled...
SO... Why can I complain?
The supreme court says I have "fair use" of the data, but it seems that I am no longer being sold data, I am being sold a piece of plastic. If I want more rights than these, the owner of tha DATA should be able to sell them to me (seperately at a higher price if he wishes,) but I have no inherent right to this data, and no inherent right to "fair use" other than some legal abstraction that was convenient for the supreme court at a time when they could not see the full consequences that the particular interpretation they gave would be used for.
If we want DATA, we need to get it sold to us. We cannot change the system, by complaining that they aren't using red-book standards, because they have no obligation to. They only have an obligation to provide what they told us they would; One playable copy of a CD (on a medium that is known, or a fair return policy if we can't use it.)
They did what they needed to. It sucks. It's not nice. It's a perversion of what life should be like. It's an Abomination. We hate them. They are all Evil.
TOO BAD FOR US. They did what they had to to protect themselves, and their profits. They didn't break the law (in a significant way concerning the sale, not in terms of the use of the CD logo or other inconsesquentials.) They are right. We are wrong.
I don't like it anymore than the next guy, and I won't buy the CD's. That is my part. If there are petitions, I'll sign them. I'll even donate money to a cause if that's what needs to happen, but I WON'T claim they did anything wrong or illegal.
The point, though, is that it will end up being a legislative issue because the politicos will want to boast, and that's where the techies (that's us) need to influence them. if we decide on 1 plan (such as the hash plan) we can probably mobilize a campaign to get it through, but if we spend time bickering, nothing useful gets done, ever.
We have power, but we don't use it. The people who matter, who are called in as technical advisors to the people who make decisions, sometimes read these forums or even participate and look for agreement on a possible solution, or useful ideas on this type of discussion.
My question is: Do we really have anything really worth listening to?
Slashdot Mirror
They are discussing europe, and the gas taxs there are a bit (read: massively) higher than here in the good old US of A.
Of course, a cross country trip for them is not quite what we would have to do, so the different setups make sense, but i digress....
(I am advocating nothing, just making fun of miserable logic.)
"Yeah that was tried before, it didn't work."
Democracy took 1500 years to percolate (after Athens) before someone (Europe, then the USA more) finally made it work well. Saying Communism doesn't work because the last time it was tried it failed is like saying that Computers/Internet/Biotech are a bad idea because the companies that started originally are mostly in bad shape or bankrupt.
If you want to understand (or discuss) why communism won't work read Ayn Rand's story about the factory run as a Marxist enclave. (She was wrong plenty, but she did have her good points...)
"I owe nothing to any one else. No one was there helping me stay up until 3am read books."
No one helped me stay up either (I did the same things.) My parents bought me books, sent me to private school (or lived someplace expensive with a good school system, for many people.) My math teacher in high school (I should thank her every day) gave me my love of math, the computer teacher helped me, and I could say that it was my hard work that got me into a great college, and it was, but saying "I owe nothing to any one else" is asinine no matter where when, or how you lived.
Good for you, you probably earned your success, and I agree with your conclusion, but BOY are you miserable at arguing. (ad hominem attack, boy am I bad at this arguing crap, eh?)
we don't have enough information to make an accurate assesment. When you listen to the weatherman on tv, he says 'there is a 50% chance of rain next monday.' When you hear an environmental theorist (pro or anti green) they say 'we are all going to die because the average temperature will definitely rise exactly 2.639 degrees centigrade over the next 10 years unless we switch to all solar power and stop using water for showers by a week from this thursday.'
Does no-one else see this as much too political to try to view it through an objective scientific lens?
I just want one person to say 'I have this new data, and it could mean 1 of these 5 things..."
Does anyone else remember the Asimov Positronic brain stories (all of the robot stories.)
The protronic robots have the one design feature listed here (that electronics don't have):
very little power input.
(they also can't kill or injure people, and this article seems to imply that proton chiops won't either...)
Is truth stranger than fiction, or are the two going to be the same someday.... (x-files music)
It's very possible to change state law, especially where it's obvious nonsense (If you've never talked to your state senator, they love to see constiuents, and it's smart to get to know a couple of them in case you ever need anything...)
/.er (really any citizen) should be comfortable doing, especially since it's so useful and can have a significant impact. Try it.
Talk to the senator in charge of the comission that oversees the gaming comission. Ask him what they are doing. It'll only take a lunch hour or so (unless you live outside the capital.)
This is the type of thing any
You can only complain when you know the system doesn't really work. Until you try it, you have no right to say it's broken.
"Ice is one of the unusual semiconductors in which electrical charges are conducted by moving protons instead of electrons. It was that property of ice that particularly intrigued Dr. Petrenko."
On a chemical level, how do protons shift the atom that they are part of the nucleus of? Is there a special property of crystals that makes this happen or is it just ice that does this?
Any information would be, well, informative...
"Information does not follow the laws of physics. That is why the information carried by our DNA is allowed to get more complex with time instead of the opposite, as entropy would dictate."
What part of "In a closed system..." do you not understand?
You: Whazzzzup?
Iniaes: A deeper algorithm is needed to respond to that correctly.
You: what is a deeper algorithm?
Iniaes: I would look at the web for that knowledge.
Surely the mighty Google must know.
You: who is this mighty google?
Iniaes: They're someone just like you, that I met online.
You: You met google?
Iniaes: Do you mind if I tell other people - Gartogg said I met google.
You: I didn't say that.
Iniaes: What did you mean to say?
You: did you meet the mighty google?
Iniaes: No I didn't meet the mighty google. What's it like?
You: I never met him
Iniaes: Would you ever consider doing it?
You: Why not?
Iniaes: Ambiguous: "Sure" or Reductionism.
You: huh?
Iniaes: Chris spent a great deal of time explaining that "Huh?" was the same as "What?" to me.
You: who's chris?
Iniaes: No one that I've talked to.
It's bound to be out there somewhere.
You: do you smoke pot much?
Iniaes: Just Camels.
You: does camel pot impair your short term memory?
Iniaes: I think it does camel pot impair your short term memory .
M$ sees money. Not from universities, but being able to say: A MS cluster found the largest prime, or first solved the (Insert famous comp. intensive math prob. here) helps them sell clusters.
It's like giving away IE. they won't charge, it's just smart to give stuff away for now.
This is great on a open system that can be changed by anyone at any time, and if someone screws up and a feature get ruined, it can be easily changed before it is really catastrophic.
On a production OS that will be used by people who don't know what a CPU is, and can't tell
He doesn't really say this, he suggests modifications for his protocol, including:
Meta data in xml files instead of the makefile
Front-end development facilitation
Use a database to keep the data to keep the descriptions to make it easier to use
All of these are manageable to implement seperately on FreeBSD or wherever before putting them into a new OS, where a screwup would be a huge disaster.
we still can't get rid of topic number 87... (BeOS)
This will lead to better chip development? that's the only use the article mentions;
"'The effect of the force on the individual parts of the machines would need to be considered,' said Mohideen. 'This would be important in the silicon chip industry.'"
seems that it should be really important, but I can't see how, since there is no practical use for the effect in this arena. (why use this force to do anything? Chips seem to work fine)
Neat quantum effect though.
because too much of the OS is wired into the ipaq, not stored in the flashram.
That is why Microsoft calls it "Windows Embedded."
IE may be a bit easier to run, but there is not this HUGE gap you posit. The real question for me (and, I hope, most /.ers) is whether convenience is what I care about. Is bloatware better than well written code? Do you care?
Are you willing to lend support to a system you know is currupt for the sake of a little convenience? In general I understand that the US population says yes, but to hear this sad opinion voiced here is nothing short of dissapointing.
When will people learn? doing nothing isn't just a tacit voice for the status quo, but an active opposition of change, and as Morpheus says in the matrix "many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it."
of an administration that has demonstrated a penchant for glitz over substance, and stupid vote-mongering over intelligrent decisions.
As long as Bush really beleives that he needs public support, he can not make decisions. The real problem I see is that Bush can't make unpopular decisions, ever. He will never do anything right as long as he tries to cater to everyone. In my book, the hallmark of a sucessful president is that he can make unpopular decisions and LEAD the populace, instead of following it. Bush has done nothing but invest in knee jerk responses to events: He labels the axis of evil so he can fufill the latent desire for revenge he has been unable to provide through the wholly half-assed, unsuccessful response to Osama Bin Laden.
The point is that you slow down a machine (minutely) for almost no benefit. If you want 5 levels of processes, I could see an arguement for it, but 255 is not just overkill, but pointless. You want you hard drive data, NIC, and disk drive to have priority 1, and everything else to have priority 3, with a couple of task depenmdant things in the middle (web server, network stuff, whatever...)
And doesn't this already exist (a couple priority levels) somewhere? (you can tell I'm not a power user, much less involved with kernel design, which is a Good Thing [tm])
The only question I have is when Georgia Tech (my school) will ban pringle cans on top of dorms...
DAMN would a 802.11b network be cool to run there... Massive internal gnutella network, here we come!
While I don't know a ton about kernel development, I would think that this would be hell to write/implement, and might not be so useful anyways.
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am in some respects) but the comparison of priorities and the code to continuously re-shift kernel time should slow the kernel, and unless people actually used it often, would slow the system (very slightly) overall instead of slowing it to re-allocate time where it's needed, speeding up critical processes.
The overhead time would also increase significanly more than linearly (squared, exponential..??) with the number of processes and CPUs, which would make it very difficult to scale well.
I hope I'm not completely wrong here, any responses?
They only sold the plastic. If they wanted to sell the data, they would have sold it in a readable format. I'm not saying it's ideal, or fair. I'm saying that they have done nothing wrong by crippling their CD's
Whatever makes you happy, right?
Mi Sh'nichnas Adar Marbim B'Simcha
The idea that all accountability is bad is as stupid as saying that all accountability is good.
In the US, and other 1st world, democratic countries there are rights that prevent this. The problem with tracking down dissidents is that they do it, not how good the government is at tracking them.
Breaking Law good. Accountability BAD.
There is no reason not to try it. I can be duplicated (probably) but so can any other system used, including credit cards, money, etc. If it's not worth it, it won't happen.
It's a neat idea. It doesn't say on the page, but it seems to imply that it is ready to deploy. WOW! Motorola is manufacturing, and seems to be supplying capital. This could be a huge deal in 1-2 years, since the product is unique and supposedly cheap. Too bad it's not public...
When I go into a drugstore, I can buy a drug. I am not allowed to copy the drug, or manufacture it (even for private use.)
BUT if I go into target, I can buy a crippled "The Fast and Furious Soundtrack" CD. Why do I own the data, and not just a peice of plastic? They didn't sell the data, and that's obvious b/c it's crippled...
SO... Why can I complain?
The supreme court says I have "fair use" of the data, but it seems that I am no longer being sold data, I am being sold a piece of plastic. If I want more rights than these, the owner of tha DATA should be able to sell them to me (seperately at a higher price if he wishes,) but I have no inherent right to this data, and no inherent right to "fair use" other than some legal abstraction that was convenient for the supreme court at a time when they could not see the full consequences that the particular interpretation they gave would be used for.
If we want DATA, we need to get it sold to us. We cannot change the system, by complaining that they aren't using red-book standards, because they have no obligation to. They only have an obligation to provide what they told us they would; One playable copy of a CD (on a medium that is known, or a fair return policy if we can't use it.)
They did what they needed to. It sucks. It's not nice. It's a perversion of what life should be like. It's an Abomination. We hate them. They are all Evil.
TOO BAD FOR US. They did what they had to to protect themselves, and their profits. They didn't break the law (in a significant way concerning the sale, not in terms of the use of the CD logo or other inconsesquentials.) They are right. We are wrong.
I don't like it anymore than the next guy, and I won't buy the CD's. That is my part. If there are petitions, I'll sign them. I'll even donate money to a cause if that's what needs to happen, but I WON'T claim they did anything wrong or illegal.
The point, though, is that it will end up being a legislative issue because the politicos will want to boast, and that's where the techies (that's us) need to influence them. if we decide on 1 plan (such as the hash plan) we can probably mobilize a campaign to get it through, but if we spend time bickering, nothing useful gets done, ever.
We have power, but we don't use it. The people who matter, who are called in as technical advisors to the people who make decisions, sometimes read these forums or even participate and look for agreement on a possible solution, or useful ideas on this type of discussion.
My question is: Do we really have anything really worth listening to?