The software authors who pop up license dialogs may just be reacting to section 2c of the GPL:
If the modified program normally reads commands interactively when run, you must cause it, when started running for such interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on the Program is not required to print an announcement.)
The first thing to come to mind to a lot of developers would be to toss the usual "I Agree" button on the bottom of the dialog.
According to Toyota, since the Prius first went on sale in 2000, they have not replaced a single battery for wear and tear.
Maybe Toyota ought to get into the consumer AA NiMH battery market. I've got a few stinkers that stopped holding their charge after only about a dozen cycles of light duty operation. (Which is quite a bit less than the "100s of times" touted on the package.)
No, not OBVIOUSLY, because that's pretty much how I transocde DVDs. My example was simplified; you need to add a few options to specify bitrate, deinterlacing, etc.
I also assumed that anyone who's not an idiot would understand that in the real world you would substitute a more meanginful title for "espisode_*".
Mainly, I was pointing out that this whole thing is much simpler than people want to make it out to be.
What I need is a program that can automate that process so I can (for example) quickly and easily insert a Stargate DVD, and come back an hour later to 4 episode AVIs on my C: drive.
i=1 for title in {3,5,7,8}; do
mencoder "dvd://$title" -o "episode_$i.avi";
i=$(($i+1)); done
It still doesn't matter. It's speculated that the finest resolution a spy satellite can get is in the 5-10cm range, and that's probably using many digital imaging tricks.
The spy agencies probably fell for the same tricks as consumers at Best Buy. The sticker on the demo satellite said:
Store even more spy shots with twice the onboard storage! With a breathtaking 5-10cm zoom**, you won't miss a single detail!
**Included SurveillanceMaster® imaging program provides maximum software zoom of 5-10cm. Actual maximum optical zoom: 30cm.
CO2 is the problem, the climate was working fine with the water vapor.
This is a "straw that broke the camel's back" issue we have here. If we know that water vapor causes 70% of the greenhouse effect and carbon dioxide only about 10%, then doubling the concentration of carbon dioxide won't do much-- will it?
Yes it will. Without the greenhouse effect, the entire planet would be at subzero temperatures. Even in your oversimplified scenario (which totally ignores the feedback effects in the real world), tacking 12.5% onto the greenhouse effect would cause catastrophic changes in temperatures.
As I understand it, multiple processes don't necessarily mean more bloat. If a set of processes are all running the same executables and libraries, then the code is all mapped into physical memory only once and shared between the processes.
At least under Linux, using fork() and copy-on-write paging makes multiple processes highly efficient. Maybe it's a bit tougher to do under Windows (which lacks a fork call), but it seems to me that careful coding could get close to the same results.
Any MIPS or ARM at a given price point will run cooler and faster than x86. All x86 processors are RISC with an instruction converter front end, but that's still enough of a liability to make the first sentence true.
Your assertion may be somewhat true in the world of embedded applications with their tiny caches and narrow busses.
For desktop and server chips, it's a different story. ARM has never even been in that market, and MIPS ran away from that market with its tail between its legs 10 years ago because even back then it wasn't faster or cooler than x86 at a given price point.
The supposed advantages of MIPS and ARM cores pale in comparison to the cache and memory interface issues that currently dominate price, power and performance. The x86 has a nice compact instruction set that saves on real-estate hogging caches, and the ARM recently added a new compact instruction set and an instruction converter of its own to go down the same path for the same reasons.
By the time you scale MIPS and/or ARM up to server or desktop performance levels, they'll have very similar power and price specs to the x86 chips. The only difference will be that they won't be able to run any of the customers' software. It's not hard to figure out how well that will go over in the marketplace.
I didn't say that investment is zero sum. I said that whatever the economic output, that's 100%. The more people who are idle, the less of the fraction of that 100% active workers get from their labors, no matter how efficient they are. That will always be a recipe for tension.
Investment is also not unlimited. The problem with any kind of fundamentalist viewpoint like yours is that you assume that your model of the economy remains linear well past the reasonable limits of its inputs. Nothing in this world remains linear for an arbitrary large magnitude of inputs. The fact is, there's a limit to how much productivity can possibly be increased just by increasing investments. Beyond that limit, more people buying will just bid down the value of the investments.
How come? Because the sun beams bounce off higher up in the atmosphere and get an easier way out?
One would expect black things to catch up more heat and warm the planet up more.
IIRC, much of the temporary cooling effect of coal pollution is due to sulfur dioxide emmisions, which turns into lots of reflective microscopic sulfuric acid droplets in the stratosphere.
First, you're not *consuming* most of what you pay in housing costs; much of the expense is recovered on sale, so that doesn't count as consumption. Second, retirees have typically paid off their houses, so even more of their income percentage goes to recently produced goods.
Finally, your assertion that producing an excess of long term goods now (which can only mean housing in this context; what else lasts for decades?) will somehow somehow support 1/3 of the population doesn't make much sense. It mainly sounds like a recipe for a major housing glut down the road as seniors try to sell of their homes to pay for food.
You have a low opinion of investing, but it's what provides the capital for expanded production.
I don't have a low opinion of investing; it works great for me. However, I have a realistic view of where the economic model of investing goes nonlinear. Just shoveling massive funds into investments will not magically fix fundamental demographic trends, it will instead distort the investment markets until they are diluted to compensate.
People consume what is produced year to year; that aspect of the economy *will* remain a zero-sum game. You can't create something out of nothing by changing the names and details on slips of paper. The bottom line is: as people live longer, they are either going to have to work longer or get by with less while they are working.
My consumption this year was split roughly evenly between goods that were produced this year, goods that were produced years ago, and goods that were produced decades ago.
Yeah, but very few of us spend half of our income purchasing antiques on eBay. Most people spend most of their income on newly produced goods.
The 12% of your income that the government is taking for their pyramid scheme is more than enough, even at low wages, to maintain your lifestyle even with moderately safe investments.
No, you still don't get it. All investments, safe or not, will get diluted if there are too many retirees vs. workers. It's just a form of inflation: too many investment yields chasing too few goods.
Thanks to the magic of automation, we need only a tiny fraction of the workforce once required to manufacture core goods.
Ok, but only if you can convince these increasingly efficient workers to give the fruits of their increased productivity to idle retirees instead of keeping it for themselves.
Either they choose to keep working, or they didn't put enough of THEIR OWN money away for retirement.
It is not possible for a significant fraction of the population to "put enough of THEIR OWN money away" so that they can sit on their asses for 25 years while enjoying a middle class lifestyle.
At the end of the day, somebody has to produce the goods that will be consumed each year. If too many people try to make "investments" for an extended retirement, they'll find that when they try to redeem them that the investments will be devalued until it matches the available goods produced by active workers.
The total goods consumed each year must be produced by people who work each year. The only way to manage this is to delay the average retirement age to maintain the overall ratio of workers vs. ass sitters. This really has nothing to do with whether the mechanism of supporting idle retirees flows through government paper notes or private paper notes.
But.. becuase the ISS is in-orbit around the planet, it is still inside the event horizon of Earth's gravity well, making it's primary gravitational influence the Earth.
Holy crap! Nobody told me that the earth is actually a black hole... We're all DOOMED!
By my calculations, it ceases to be "reasonable doubt" and veers off into "complete mathematical certainty" when they use phrases like "Reiser's chilling confession," and "led authorities to [the body]".
Those do raise a good deal of suspicion, but what convinced me in this case was: "And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for you meddling kids and your dog!"
and they haven't actually built anything yet, except full scale models (whatever that means).
Creating 1:1 scale battery models is one of my hobbies. I find that tubes from toilet paper rolls work well as a base for models of D cells. Large drinking straws are a good starting point for AAA cells. Old laundry detergent boxes are great when you want to move to more advanced projects like automobile batteries.
Hyperthreading can make a lot of sense in some circumstances. Sun pushed hyperthreading to its limits to achieve very impressive energy efficiency for certain niche workloads with its Niagra CPUs and derivatives. (IIRC, up to 128 threads per chip.)
He certainly accomplished a lot in his lifetime. However, transmitting commercially significant wireless power was not one of them. The great expense of these experiments did contribute to his financial woes (although probably not as much as his unfortunate patent licensing arrangements).
Slashdot Mirror
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a rubber dinghy loaded to capacity with USB thumb drives.
The software authors who pop up license dialogs may just be reacting to section 2c of the GPL:
If the modified program normally reads commands interactively when run, you must cause it, when started running for such interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on the Program is not required to print an announcement.)
The first thing to come to mind to a lot of developers would be to toss the usual "I Agree" button on the bottom of the dialog.
According to Toyota, since the Prius first went on sale in 2000, they have not replaced a single battery for wear and tear.
Maybe Toyota ought to get into the consumer AA NiMH battery market. I've got a few stinkers that stopped holding their charge after only about a dozen cycles of light duty operation. (Which is quite a bit less than the "100s of times" touted on the package.)
No, not OBVIOUSLY, because that's pretty much how I transocde DVDs. My example was simplified; you need to add a few options to specify bitrate, deinterlacing, etc.
I also assumed that anyone who's not an idiot would understand that in the real world you would substitute a more meanginful title for "espisode_*".
Mainly, I was pointing out that this whole thing is much simpler than people want to make it out to be.
What I need is a program that can automate that process so I can (for example) quickly and easily insert a Stargate DVD, and come back an hour later to 4 episode AVIs on my C: drive.
i=1
for title in {3,5,7,8}; do
mencoder "dvd://$title" -o "episode_$i.avi";
i=$(($i+1));
done
Pure genius. Take a system you don't really understand, but depend on for living, and drastically modify a variable to see what happens.
That's exactly what we've been doing for more than a century now.
It still doesn't matter. It's speculated that the finest resolution a spy satellite can get is in the 5-10cm range, and that's probably using many digital imaging tricks.
The spy agencies probably fell for the same tricks as consumers at Best Buy. The sticker on the demo satellite said:
Store even more spy shots with twice the onboard storage! With a breathtaking 5-10cm zoom**, you won't miss a single detail!
**Included SurveillanceMaster® imaging program provides maximum software zoom of 5-10cm. Actual maximum optical zoom: 30cm.
This is a "straw that broke the camel's back" issue we have here. If we know that water vapor causes 70% of the greenhouse effect and carbon dioxide only about 10%, then doubling the concentration of carbon dioxide won't do much-- will it?
Yes it will. Without the greenhouse effect, the entire planet would be at subzero temperatures. Even in your oversimplified scenario (which totally ignores the feedback effects in the real world), tacking 12.5% onto the greenhouse effect would cause catastrophic changes in temperatures.
As I understand it, multiple processes don't necessarily mean more bloat. If a set of processes are all running the same executables and libraries, then the code is all mapped into physical memory only once and shared between the processes.
At least under Linux, using fork() and copy-on-write paging makes multiple processes highly efficient. Maybe it's a bit tougher to do under Windows (which lacks a fork call), but it seems to me that careful coding could get close to the same results.
Can you copyright a copyright law?
Only if the law is defined within a (letrec ...) expression.
Any MIPS or ARM at a given price point will run cooler and faster than x86. All x86 processors are RISC with an instruction converter front end, but that's still enough of a liability to make the first sentence true.
Your assertion may be somewhat true in the world of embedded applications with their tiny caches and narrow busses.
For desktop and server chips, it's a different story. ARM has never even been in that market, and MIPS ran away from that market with its tail between its legs 10 years ago because even back then it wasn't faster or cooler than x86 at a given price point.
The supposed advantages of MIPS and ARM cores pale in comparison to the cache and memory interface issues that currently dominate price, power and performance. The x86 has a nice compact instruction set that saves on real-estate hogging caches, and the ARM recently added a new compact instruction set and an instruction converter of its own to go down the same path for the same reasons.
By the time you scale MIPS and/or ARM up to server or desktop performance levels, they'll have very similar power and price specs to the x86 chips. The only difference will be that they won't be able to run any of the customers' software. It's not hard to figure out how well that will go over in the marketplace.
I didn't say that investment is zero sum. I said that whatever the economic output, that's 100%. The more people who are idle, the less of the fraction of that 100% active workers get from their labors, no matter how efficient they are. That will always be a recipe for tension.
Investment is also not unlimited. The problem with any kind of fundamentalist viewpoint like yours is that you assume that your model of the economy remains linear well past the reasonable limits of its inputs. Nothing in this world remains linear for an arbitrary large magnitude of inputs. The fact is, there's a limit to how much productivity can possibly be increased just by increasing investments. Beyond that limit, more people buying will just bid down the value of the investments.
How come? Because the sun beams bounce off higher up in the atmosphere and get an easier way out?
One would expect black things to catch up more heat and warm the planet up more.
IIRC, much of the temporary cooling effect of coal pollution is due to sulfur dioxide emmisions, which turns into lots of reflective microscopic sulfuric acid droplets in the stratosphere.
First, you're not *consuming* most of what you pay in housing costs; much of the expense is recovered on sale, so that doesn't count as consumption. Second, retirees have typically paid off their houses, so even more of their income percentage goes to recently produced goods.
Finally, your assertion that producing an excess of long term goods now (which can only mean housing in this context; what else lasts for decades?) will somehow somehow support 1/3 of the population doesn't make much sense. It mainly sounds like a recipe for a major housing glut down the road as seniors try to sell of their homes to pay for food.
You have a low opinion of investing, but it's what provides the capital for expanded production.
I don't have a low opinion of investing; it works great for me. However, I have a realistic view of where the economic model of investing goes nonlinear. Just shoveling massive funds into investments will not magically fix fundamental demographic trends, it will instead distort the investment markets until they are diluted to compensate.
People consume what is produced year to year; that aspect of the economy *will* remain a zero-sum game. You can't create something out of nothing by changing the names and details on slips of paper. The bottom line is: as people live longer, they are either going to have to work longer or get by with less while they are working.
My consumption this year was split roughly evenly between goods that were produced this year, goods that were produced years ago, and goods that were produced decades ago.
Yeah, but very few of us spend half of our income purchasing antiques on eBay. Most people spend most of their income on newly produced goods.
The 12% of your income that the government is taking for their pyramid scheme is more than enough, even at low wages, to maintain your lifestyle even with moderately safe investments.
No, you still don't get it. All investments, safe or not, will get diluted if there are too many retirees vs. workers. It's just a form of inflation: too many investment yields chasing too few goods.
Thanks to the magic of automation, we need only a tiny fraction of the workforce once required to manufacture core goods.
Ok, but only if you can convince these increasingly efficient workers to give the fruits of their increased productivity to idle retirees instead of keeping it for themselves.
Either they choose to keep working, or they didn't put enough of THEIR OWN money away for retirement.
It is not possible for a significant fraction of the population to "put enough of THEIR OWN money away" so that they can sit on their asses for 25 years while enjoying a middle class lifestyle.
At the end of the day, somebody has to produce the goods that will be consumed each year. If too many people try to make "investments" for an extended retirement, they'll find that when they try to redeem them that the investments will be devalued until it matches the available goods produced by active workers.
The total goods consumed each year must be produced by people who work each year. The only way to manage this is to delay the average retirement age to maintain the overall ratio of workers vs. ass sitters. This really has nothing to do with whether the mechanism of supporting idle retirees flows through government paper notes or private paper notes.
Can we get a Godwin 2.0 rule, please? Anybody that mentions the Iraq war breaks the rule.
That would be nice, but after all the money we've blown on the war in Iraq, there's unfortunately no funding left to implement any new rules.
But.. becuase the ISS is in-orbit around the planet, it is still inside the event horizon of Earth's gravity well, making it's primary gravitational influence the Earth.
Holy crap! Nobody told me that the earth is actually a black hole... We're all DOOMED!
By my calculations, it ceases to be "reasonable doubt" and veers off into "complete mathematical certainty" when they use phrases like "Reiser's chilling confession," and "led authorities to [the body]".
Those do raise a good deal of suspicion, but what convinced me in this case was: "And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for you meddling kids and your dog!"
and they haven't actually built anything yet, except full scale models (whatever that means).
Creating 1:1 scale battery models is one of my hobbies. I find that tubes from toilet paper rolls work well as a base for models of D cells. Large drinking straws are a good starting point for AAA cells. Old laundry detergent boxes are great when you want to move to more advanced projects like automobile batteries.
Hyperthreading can make a lot of sense in some circumstances. Sun pushed hyperthreading to its limits to achieve very impressive energy efficiency for certain niche workloads with its Niagra CPUs and derivatives. (IIRC, up to 128 threads per chip.)
He certainly accomplished a lot in his lifetime. However, transmitting commercially significant wireless power was not one of them. The great expense of these experiments did contribute to his financial woes (although probably not as much as his unfortunate patent licensing arrangements).