His goal seems to be to make rock solid software with well-considered security of design and operation, and that's about his only goal. Compliance with the LSB is nice and all, but it's not something that keeps me up at night. Hell, it's not even in the top ten; and while DJB's software can be a little rough around the edges, I'm more than happy to use it because I have a high level of confidence in the design and implementation of his ideas.
The article you reference seems to mostly refer to weightloss for obese people and additionaly the difficulties in keeping that weight off in the long-term. The OP doesn't have that problem, he's just getting a little more spread out in his older age.
Although, everyone here is right. I shouldn't have said "stop lifting." I should have said "Balance your excercise out with some cardiovascular routines or other types of exercise."
What I have noticed is that people have differing needs when it comes to working out to stay healthy. Which is why I consider it a good idea to talk to a professional about your own needs and tailor a plan specific to your body.
On a packet based network, as opposed to a circuit based network, streaming video is stupid. A lot of data ends up getting duplicated, and the quality of the viewing experience is directly related to the quality of the network at that particular time. It's almost a complete waste of effort. The fact that it works at all is probably an indication that it is an under-utilized service; expect that to change.
What I _really_ wish to see is content providers get smart, and just start creating AVIs of their shows with commercials embedded. Then release those on the P2P networks before the "priates" do. It would put them back in control, and entirely subvert the ISPs doing their best/worst in trying to deal with the problem their indifference/ineffectiveness is creating.
I highly doubt, due to general human nature, that more than 10% of users would download these shows, edit the commercials out, then reupload them. Even more so, I highly doubt that there would be too many people who would go out of their way to find the commercial free versions and download those instead. Particularly if it's easy to find the "offical" version, and moreover, completely legal.
In short, the reason streaming video exists is because content providers can't learn to give up control (and make more money in the process). If this is the case, I shouldn't have to subsidise extra bandwidth through higher ISP fees, the content providers should.
Why not just have a black-box "communcations device?" Something that can sit in your pocket, purse, backpack, whatever and just offer bluetooth services to a variety of devices. Have a handset if you want one, a graphical display if that suits you, or any other device that can communicate via bluetooth to your hidden communications device? Yea, you'd need to charge everything up separately, but so what? You'd get a hell of a lot more functionality out of the modular devices. And network flexibility as well.. if you like your handset, great, you can use it with any type of blackbox (WiFi/VOIP, 3G/Cellular, the new 700Mhz bands) you want, and you just don't have to worry about portability.
We don't need anything.. we like it. Why should I use libTomCrypt as opposed to the many other libraries like it already available? Why should I port all my crypto-using code to your library from what I'm already using? I mean, libTomCrypt is cool and all, but unless I can be assured that it will actively developed in 5 years -- I can't really go and use it in any of my projects. OpenSSL has been around for a long time, and has plenty of people whom I'd assume are very smart about crypto working on it. Can you say the same for libTomCrypt?
I wouldn't think so.. anyone attempting to use a language should study it, and the toolchain involved. Just because we're all mostly using unix and have become used to the ABI and methodologies dosen't mean that they are sane, or are going to apply to every other tool we pick up and use.. this is the same for the FPC compiler. As my father might say: "That's not a toy. Put it down until you understand what it does."
Um.. isn't application portability one of the strong suits of the FPC compiler. Isn't the expansion of this strength even mentioned in the article summary?;) Check out Lazarus and I think you'll understand where the FPC people are coming from a little better.
In short.. pascal isn't the best, and FPC isn't the fastest/greatest/whatever. It's damn good though, and in the right situation, it shines. Which, is a lot like all the other tools we have available to us.:)
Your examply only shows that you don't exactly know how to use the fpc compiler. It's okay.. it's got a lot of options, and it dosen't exactly work like C. For example, the pascal compiler generates, by default, static executables. And C, dynamic.
Yes, simply looking at obj size will make this look bad. Actually looking at the object itself makes it pretty clear what's really happening. Remember, 'file' is your friend.
...all this time I really believed that broadcasting was about selling advertising. Not controlling what I do with the content. The content is almost meaningless. In a fair number of cases, it is practically free to the broadcaster; you play some national advertisements and you get the "shows" for free (you just have to fill out some affidavits promising that you actually ran their ads).
These guys are just pissed that they can't find anyone who knows how to advertise on the "new" medium of the internet. Sales Managers continue to believe that they can call the shots, because they work for a company that owns thousands or millions of dollars of broadcast equipment. They hardly realize that advertisers ultimately call the shots, and they will figure out how to get the most bang for their buck -- even if this means dropping traditional, expensive, and centralized broadcasting systems for new, cheap and distributed _networks_.
Ultimately, this will mean less control over the content, but more exposure to and money from the consumer.
Seriously, doesn't anyone remember Quake and QuakeC? CTF (original and thunderwalker), the real Team Fortress, tons of other crap. Anyone playing FPS games 11 years ago knew all of this already.
[ pasted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syscall ]
System calls often use a special CPU instruction which causes the processor to transfer control to more privileged code, as previously specified by the more privileged code. This allows the more privileged code to specify where it will be entered as well as important processor state at the time of entry.
When the system call is invoked, the program which invoked it is interrupted, and information needed to continue its execution later is saved. The processor then begins executing the higher privileged code, which, by examining processor state set by the less privileged code and/or its stack, determines what is being requested. When it is finished, it returns to the program, restoring the saved state, and the program continues executing.
[ end paste ]
So, forgive me.. I could just be naive; but what does C or C++ calling semantics / methods have anything to do with calls into the OS? Seems like you'd have to make the same calls regardless of the language that you use, or more to the point, that the calls represent the facilities that the OS has made available to you. Seems pretty language independent from my readings.
To the 50% of posters who said things like the above. True, but Firefox does the same thing whenever a new version comes out. So what's your point?
Probably because their point revolves around the fact that most people did not
_choose_ IE7. Even if upgrades did count on the ff stats pages (they don't), you
still had to make a _choice_ to download it in the first place. And when we're
talking about "product popularity" choice is the only bit that actually matters.
Giving some of that "prime" 112Mhz of electromagnetic real-estate to the Police, Fire, and Emergency response departments across this country. Because, you know, they need it. But first, a short story.
HDTV first came to the United States partially as a ploy by the broadcast companies in this country. Congress got together and suggested that the public broadcast companies (CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, and even WB) weren't even making use of 1% of the UHF broadcast television spectrum, and put forth the crazy idea that some of these businessmen give up a resource that they didn't even have plans to use.
Of course, the industry response is predictable. They launch a lobbying and marketing campaign at full strength; the subject, HDTV. They get all their cronies from Japan to put together all this neat-looking fancy broadcast equipment and flat-screen high-definition televisions. They talk about all the capabilities, the greater services they will be able to offer the public through this new technology.
The catch? HDTV needs more bandwidth. Oh, by the way, we suddenly have plans to use that UHF spectrum you were talking about. All of it. The broadcast companies basically strong-arm congress by telling them that if the public is thinking of taking "their" excess and unused bandwidth away, then they won't have any way to bring this new HDTV stuff into the country. And you know how Americans are about TV, and you especially know how American Representatives are about Big Corproate Money (of which TV has *tons*).
Congress, of course, capitulated. They did, however, tell the broadcast companies that they had a limited about of time to make the switch.
This, of course, was all the way back in the 80's. Since then, we've heard more and more from the broadcast regime about how cool HDTV is going to be, and how we're already making the technology better before we've even deployed it, and how hard it is to implement a brand-new nation-wide television standard, and how expensive the components have to be because this is high-def afterall.
The FCC has delivered a deadline. Rescheduled that deadline, allowed the industry to go past that deadline, and then reschedule again. Congress, for the most part, has been pretty much unconcerned with this whole mess. And the American public is as uneducated and clueless as ever.
The whole reason congress got together on this issue way back in the 80s is because Police, Fire and Emergency departments were starting to feel the crunch of their own bandwith limitations. In order to operate as efficiently as possible, these organizations were among the first to start using digital packet radio networks to convey data to the field. They also have other constraints as police forces get larger, and criminals become more sophisticated. Adding even more to these problems is the fact that many large American Cities have many large American Buildings that make it more difficult to get a radio signal through.
All of this became disaterously apparent on 9/11. Police and Fire response units even a SINGLE FLOOR away from each other found it impossible to communicate using their current radio equipment. None of the ground units were able to coordinate with the units actually in the building. No one standing on the ground could even tell those people risking their lives about the buildings imminent collapse, or to provide them with information that
looks like crap using lynx. Fancy CSS tricks, like changing the style of an <li> to be 'inline' rather than 'block' causes wildly different appearances under a graphical browser and a text mode browser. Seriously.. if you don't check how your site looks in lynx, or using a screenreader, or using some browser other than IE and Firefox, then you're just doing people a greater disservice. Anyway, it's not horridly annoying, and it is nice to see the change around here.
Which is all well and good when you consider keyboard shortcuts for GUI commands; however, the Dvorak layout really sucks when it comes to a UNIX shell. '/bin/ls' comes down to being completely on the pinky, which is the one I remember being the worst as I use it a lot. There are many other commands that seem to be choosen for their convenience on the QWERTY keyboard layout, this way, ls is completely on the ring fingers. Much, much easier.
And, this is the main reason, after prying all the keys off my QWERTY keyboard and "hacking" it into a Dvorak layout -- I did the process all over again to reverse it. It's simply too annoying for many of the pseudo-typing activities I use my computer for (shell admin, programming, lynx, etc...)
GOD DAMNIT, IT'S SPELLED HANGAR. H-A-N-G-A-R.
I've had this handle for 6 years, and damned if someone dosen't somehow
mispell the thing. Same way every time. If you put yer coat on the
thing, you call it a hanger, if you put a fuggin airplane or aliens
or whatever else in it, it's a hangar.
Of course you aren't going to prevent every little act of stupidity that slips across the ariwaves. That's why you issue fines, and move on. The tremendously stupid act is trying to make the world 100% safe.
The whole FUCKING point of the V-Chip. I thought broadcasters were supposed
to put stupid little tags in their broadcast that announced exactly what the
current program contains. Don't like references to drugs, fine.. your TV
can filter that out for you. Don't like swearing, fine.. deal with it.
Otherwise, get your grubby hands off of my television programming, I
don't need some highly subjective entity deciding exactly what is "fit" for
broadcast or consuption by the public.
That a company that's recently been hammered in the anti-trust area wouldn't have a president gloating over how hard it is to change away from their system to a more standards-compliant and open one. I guess they've given up any sense of decorum a long time ago, but it's still a bit shocking.
[...] is going to help convict anyone of anything?
Well, perhaps not convict anyone of anything.. but it certainly could be used to provide an alibi for someone. Esentially, the Tivo might be used to corroborate someone's stated whereabouts at anytime. The fact that it actually tracks the keystrokes could be advantageous, proving that someone had to be in your home and watching television at that time. I doubt it could be used as the only evidence to clear you, but it could be used with enough circumstantial evidence to provide enough reasonable doubt.
Slashdot Mirror
His goal seems to be to make rock solid software with well-considered security of design and operation, and that's about his only goal. Compliance with the LSB is nice and all, but it's not something that keeps me up at night. Hell, it's not even in the top ten; and while DJB's software can be a little rough around the edges, I'm more than happy to use it because I have a high level of confidence in the design and implementation of his ideas.
Mr. Izzard?
The article you reference seems to mostly refer to weightloss
for obese people and additionaly the difficulties in keeping that
weight off in the long-term. The OP doesn't have that problem,
he's just getting a little more spread out in his older age.
Although, everyone here is right. I shouldn't have said
"stop lifting." I should have said "Balance your excercise
out with some cardiovascular routines or other types of
exercise."
What I have noticed is that people have differing needs when
it comes to working out to stay healthy. Which is why I
consider it a good idea to talk to a professional about your
own needs and tailor a plan specific to your body.
Stop lifting weights. It will not necessarily burn fat. You need
an aerobic workout. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerobic_exercise
Walk, jog or run if you can. Swim. Bicycle. Basically, get
your heart rate up for at least 15 minutes at least once a day.
And, as always, see a doctor or an accredited professional before
you try anything new.
On a packet based network, as opposed to a circuit based network, streaming video is stupid. A lot of data ends up getting duplicated, and the quality of the viewing experience is directly related to the quality of the network at that particular time. It's almost a complete waste of effort. The fact that it works at all is probably an indication that it is an under-utilized service; expect that to change.
What I _really_ wish to see is content providers get smart, and just start creating AVIs of their shows with commercials embedded. Then release those on the P2P networks before the "priates" do. It would put them back in control, and entirely subvert the ISPs doing their best/worst in trying to deal with the problem their indifference/ineffectiveness is creating.
I highly doubt, due to general human nature, that more than 10% of users would download these shows, edit the commercials out, then reupload them. Even more so, I highly doubt that there would be too many people who would go out of their way to find the commercial free versions and download those instead. Particularly if it's easy to find the "offical" version, and moreover, completely legal.
In short, the reason streaming video exists is because content providers can't learn to give up control (and make more money in the process). If this is the case, I shouldn't have to subsidise extra bandwidth through higher ISP fees, the content providers should.
Why not just have a black-box "communcations device?" Something that can sit in your pocket, purse, backpack, whatever and just offer bluetooth services to a variety of devices. Have a handset if you want one, a graphical display if that suits you, or any other device that can communicate via bluetooth to your hidden communications device? Yea, you'd need to charge everything up separately, but so what? You'd get a hell of a lot more functionality out of the modular devices. And network flexibility as well.. if you like your handset, great, you can use it with any type of blackbox (WiFi/VOIP, 3G/Cellular, the new 700Mhz bands) you want, and you just don't have to worry about portability.
At least, that's what I'd love to use.
You missed my personal favorite: Windows Metafile
Terrible engineering, that.
I use what I likes. And, apparently, so do you.
Um.. isn't application portability one of the strong suits of the FPC compiler. Isn't the expansion of this strength even mentioned in the article summary? ;) Check out Lazarus and I think you'll understand where the FPC people are coming from a little better.
In short.. pascal isn't the best, and FPC isn't the fastest/greatest/whatever. It's damn good though, and in the right situation, it shines. Which, is a lot like all the other tools we have available to us. :)
Yes, simply looking at obj size will make this look bad. Actually looking at the object itself makes it pretty clear what's really happening. Remember, 'file' is your friend.
These guys are just pissed that they can't find anyone who knows how to advertise on the "new" medium of the internet. Sales Managers continue to believe that they can call the shots, because they work for a company that owns thousands or millions of dollars of broadcast equipment. They hardly realize that advertisers ultimately call the shots, and they will figure out how to get the most bang for their buck -- even if this means dropping traditional, expensive, and centralized broadcasting systems for new, cheap and distributed _networks_.
Ultimately, this will mean less control over the content, but more exposure to and money from the consumer.
Seriously, doesn't anyone remember Quake and QuakeC? CTF (original and thunderwalker), the real Team Fortress, tons of other crap. Anyone playing FPS games 11 years ago knew all of this already.
He said 'syscall' right?
[ pasted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syscall ]
System calls often use a special CPU instruction which causes the processor to transfer control to more privileged code, as previously specified by the more privileged code. This allows the more privileged code to specify where it will be entered as well as important processor state at the time of entry.
When the system call is invoked, the program which invoked it is interrupted, and information needed to continue its execution later is saved. The processor then begins executing the higher privileged code, which, by examining processor state set by the less privileged code and/or its stack, determines what is being requested. When it is finished, it returns to the program, restoring the saved state, and the program continues executing.
[ end paste ]
So, forgive me.. I could just be naive; but what does C or C++ calling semantics / methods have anything to do with calls into the OS? Seems like you'd have to make the same calls regardless of the language that you use, or more to the point, that the calls represent the facilities that the OS has made available to you. Seems pretty language independent from my readings.
Giving some of that "prime" 112Mhz of electromagnetic real-estate to
the Police, Fire, and Emergency response departments across this country.
Because, you know, they need it. But first, a short story.
HDTV first came to the United States partially as a ploy by the
broadcast companies in this country. Congress got together and suggested that
the public broadcast companies (CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, and even WB) weren't even
making use of 1% of the UHF broadcast television spectrum, and put forth the
crazy idea that some of these businessmen give up a resource that they didn't
even have plans to use.
Of course, the industry response is predictable. They launch a
lobbying and marketing campaign at full strength; the subject, HDTV. They
get all their cronies from Japan to put together all this neat-looking fancy
broadcast equipment and flat-screen high-definition televisions. They talk
about all the capabilities, the greater services they will be able to
offer the public through this new technology.
The catch? HDTV needs more bandwidth. Oh, by the way, we suddenly
have plans to use that UHF spectrum you were talking about. All of it. The
broadcast companies basically strong-arm congress by telling them that if the
public is thinking of taking "their" excess and unused bandwidth away, then
they won't have any way to bring this new HDTV stuff into the country. And
you know how Americans are about TV, and you especially know how American
Representatives are about Big Corproate Money (of which TV has *tons*).
Congress, of course, capitulated. They did, however, tell the
broadcast companies that they had a limited about of time to make the switch.
This, of course, was all the way back in the 80's. Since then,
we've heard more and more from the broadcast regime about how cool HDTV is
going to be, and how we're already making the technology better before
we've even deployed it, and how hard it is to implement a brand-new
nation-wide television standard, and how expensive the components have to
be because this is high-def afterall.
The FCC has delivered a deadline. Rescheduled that deadline, allowed
the industry to go past that deadline, and then reschedule again. Congress,
for the most part, has been pretty much unconcerned with this whole mess.
And the American public is as uneducated and clueless as ever.
The whole reason congress got together on this issue way back in the
80s is because Police, Fire and Emergency departments were starting to feel
the crunch of their own bandwith limitations. In order to operate as
efficiently as possible, these organizations were among the first to start
using digital packet radio networks to convey data to the field. They also
have other constraints as police forces get larger, and criminals become
more sophisticated. Adding even more to these problems is the fact that
many large American Cities have many large American Buildings that make it
more difficult to get a radio signal through.
All of this became disaterously apparent on 9/11. Police and Fire
response units even a SINGLE FLOOR away from each other found it impossible
to communicate using their current radio equipment. None of the ground units
were able to coordinate with the units actually in the building. No one
standing on the ground could even tell those people risking their lives about
the buildings imminent collapse, or to provide them with information that
looks like crap using lynx. Fancy CSS tricks, like changing the
style of an <li> to be 'inline' rather than 'block' causes wildly
different appearances under a graphical browser and a text mode
browser. Seriously.. if you don't check how your site looks in
lynx, or using a screenreader, or using some browser other than IE
and Firefox, then you're just doing people a greater disservice.
Anyway, it's not horridly annoying, and it is nice to see the change
around here.
I'm so going to hack your car.
Which is all well and good when you consider keyboard shortcuts for GUI commands; however, the Dvorak layout really sucks when it comes to a UNIX shell. '/bin/ls' comes down to being completely on the pinky, which is the one I remember being the worst as I use it a lot. There are many other commands that seem to be choosen for their convenience on the QWERTY keyboard layout, this way, ls is completely on the ring fingers. Much, much easier.
And, this is the main reason, after prying all the keys off my QWERTY keyboard and "hacking" it into a Dvorak layout -- I did the process all over again to reverse it. It's simply too annoying for many of the pseudo-typing activities I use my computer for (shell admin, programming, lynx, etc...)
GOD DAMNIT, IT'S SPELLED HANGAR. H-A-N-G- A -R. I've had this handle for 6 years, and damned if someone dosen't somehow mispell the thing. Same way every time. If you put yer coat on the thing, you call it a hanger, if you put a fuggin airplane or aliens or whatever else in it, it's a hangar.
Sorry, but I had to say that.
Yea, well when was the last time you moved all
your books?
Of course you aren't going to prevent every little act of stupidity that
slips across the ariwaves. That's why you issue fines, and move on. The
tremendously stupid act is trying to make the world 100% safe.
Democracy is a scary scary thing.
That a company that's recently been hammered in the anti-trust area wouldn't
have a president gloating over how hard it is to change away from their
system to a more standards-compliant and open one. I guess they've given
up any sense of decorum a long time ago, but it's still a bit shocking.
Well, perhaps not convict anyone of anything.. but it certainly
could be used to provide an alibi for someone. Esentially, the Tivo
might be used to corroborate someone's stated whereabouts at anytime. The
fact that it actually tracks the keystrokes could be advantageous, proving
that someone had to be in your home and watching television at that time.
I doubt it could be used as the only evidence to clear you, but it
could be used with enough circumstantial evidence to provide enough
reasonable doubt.