Yuck, I am disgusted. No! not by Goggle, but by the vast amount of cheap remarks I have read so far. I cannot believe how many of you recoil at the thought of patening software algorithms. Hah!, I dobut you could code! If you could, you would realize how important and hard it is to come up with original software algorithms. Anyone who discovers a software algorithm is free to patent it, I just hope the patent in the software world will have a limit of 2-3 years, because the software world moves at an incredibly pace. The problem of text data mining on the web is not an easy task. I have been doing slight research on it, and I will tell you, that it takes great skills to come up with something. Look at goggle, look how small they are, compared with altavista, yahoo, excite and infoseek. Imagine if these other competitors could grab their algorithms and stiff them out of the search engine world. How fair will that be? Not at all! I know I rather see goggle survive, than another lame search engine survive cuz they have money and ripped on the poor guys.
If software algorithsm shouldn't be patented, Why the hell should hardware? Cuz hardware takes work, and software doesn't take work? Good software algorithms takes years of painful, hardworking research just as software. If you don't think so, you are not a programmer and have no say in this, go take a seat my friend. Anyway, to end this off, I will like to state, that I am against stupid patents, patent of one shop clicking, something that is very obvious, something that takes no brain cells to implement, The technology behind slashdot is original and unique, if there was a patent behind it, I will not mind! Now on the other hand, if someone puts a patent on guest books, now they have to get in the same pant with me.
Paul who? Paul erdos! The greatest mathematician of all time. He lived for mathematics and for nothing else, a very brilliant genius who was never afriad to admit weakness. He knows when he faces problems greater than him, and when this happens, he takes the small money he makes from lectures and sets up prizes for anyone that solved it. He wrote and co authored more than 1500 mathematical papers. He didn't expire at an old age, he did mathematics till the day he died, hell he collapsed at a mathematics conference when he died. Talk about Fermants theorem, Number theory and prime number, combinatorial mathematics, sure, just don't forget to thank uncle paul. I was totally blown away when I read "The Man Who Loved only Numbers" - by Paul Hoffman. But of course this is the man of the century, not mathematicain, suffice to say, I think he is even greater than Einstein. Einstein was brilliant but a man who was very wrong and stuborn, think of the progress he would have made, if he accepted humility and pursued other things within his reach, instead he wasted his life chasing after dreams. Anyway, to make this short, The man of the century is me and you. Do not let anyone else tell you otherwise, the next century depends on us, just me and you. That is right, without us, there is no tomorrow. *cheers*
I am in US, and going to http://www.hotmail.com doesn't work. But I notice that if I use Microsoft messenger, it works. Is this a move by Microsoft to force people to use their own IM? Hrmm.
Ah ah, what crap are you talking? How can you ever ask if you can create a "full and good operating system"(like Linux) with Java. Java is not a low level language thus, asking if you can create operating system out of it is crazy. Linux is not a full and good operating system because it was done in C, It could have been done in Lisp or some other language. Linux is "full and good" because of the mind behind it, because of the philisophy behind it. What are you talking about substitution? Java was not designed to replace C. Has C replaced assembly? No, C was not designed to replace assembly, C was designed to make life easier, and as far as Java makes life easier than C, all will be well with it.
I am very very worried. I am worried about how this will hurt Linux and open source. It is very sad, but inevitable that sooner or later some fucking bastards will try to exploit us and this is a clear case. A lot of people today, who do not know much about the market or linux, !(me and you), are going to dump their money if Linuxone goes IPO. Now, what do you think will happen? After a short while, people will realize that this company is a hoax and will loose a lot of money! If a lot of people loose money in this, what will this say? Linux is not happening?! Linux is a hoax? I am not talking about what you will think, but what the average joe will. people will throw there money when this goes IPO if it ever does, they will do it, not to invest , but to make very quick money! THe outcome worries me.
a simple main() { while(1) fork(); } will not bring down any Unix box. Have you ever heard of resources? With Unix we can control the amount of CPU you get, the amount of Memory you use, the maximum number of processes you run and such. Almost all unix boxes come with these turned off, but if you have a clue, you can enable these settings and your fork() bomb will only be a waste of your time.
why VisualC now? It was done with GNU djgpp
on
Quake 1 GPL'ed
·
· Score: 1
Everyone who has reversed the original quake binary knew it was done with GNU djgpp. Why did ID clean it up to use visual C? hrmmm. I don't have windows, and gawd knows I am not switching to windows or dos to work on quake.
Re:GPL'ing the source code is great but...
on
Quake 1 GPL'ed
·
· Score: 1
If you know the amount of time that game programmers put into work, you will understand that ID has no time to write design docs. As a matter of fact, I dobut they use design docs that much, gee, this is ID not IBM. As a programmer, I will tell you that the hardest thing to do after writing code is to write docs. I write code 10x more than write a doc. So usually, I try very hard to make my code my documenatation. And I belive the quake code is a great documentation. First of all, ignore the asm source, use the c part. Start out with the header files, from here you will have a great idea of the data strucutres they game will be operating on. It might sound hard, but when you do this over and over again, it becomes really easier than you think. If Quake was a console only game ie for dreamcast only. the only way to figure it out will be by reversring and pouring through the assembly source code, sounds crazy? I know guys that do such daily.:)
Re:top 7 things I'd like to see with quake
on
Quake 1 GPL'ed
·
· Score: 1
Why don't you add one of these things? Or are you one of those, who only lame around while others code.
Yes, "if they can get that 2nd pair of eyes to go program something else". Notice the word, IF. Sadly, most programmers are not disciplened enough to work on their own in large projects. If you have a project that is going to be 20,000 lines of code. It will be much faster having a two people work together as a pair, then having each go his way and code seperate 10,000. This problem is like the classic problem, of 1 towel takes 10 minutes to try, how long does 2 towel take? some will answer 5, some will answer 20, the answer remains 10.
I have read quite some comments, that suggested that the key to searching might lie in putting some of the load on the sites themselves. This includes ideas on how to write HTML, XML code or whatever, or including a search engine at the site itself. The problem with this is that people are lazy, If someone ones to write HTML code, they just want to write code, not worry if it can be searched. Basically HTML writers are like programmers, lazy people who will prefer if a function handled the error instead of having to write two lines of code to handle the error. We will have a successful engine when we have one that can search any content, what that means is, you don't need to write your HTML code in a particular way for it to be searched. You don't have to use special tags or what not for it to be searched, it is true that using special tags will be nice. But only.00001% of sites will use this. Search engines should never ever depend on whatever they search for how to search it, they need to determine the strucuture of the data themselves.
People just don't know how to search. Since, I have been using the internet, I have stopped making daily trips to the library. Searching is an art, The web is pretty searchable, but takes quite some effort, knowing the right search engines to use for what, knowing the right keywords and combinations.
This is great for coders in third world countries! Just think about, I will not put in 30 days to get $500 for a project. Whereas some poor guy in india, will. $500 converted over there is probably what $20,000 is to me over in US. Now, such a project is a bargain for people in places where the dollar is worth more.
If a company has patented an idea or something of that nature, and someone takes that idea and creates an opensource software. The company in most cases don't bother to sue the individual, since the work is opensource, and the individual is not making money. But when a developer gets paid, wouldn't that be asking for trouble?
If I develop an opensource program now using GIFs, I probably will not into trouble for using the "LZW"? Algorithm or whatever it was that they copyrighted about it, because I am not making money. But now, I probably would.
What if users requested tools specifically for something authoritiy views as bad? What if users where the ones who requested a tool as napster. Wouldn't authority have much reason to go after him for creating "evil" tools for money?
This is a great idea, but yet, I believe developers have to be careful. Very careful.
This technology is very revolutionary, yet, It seems a lot of people are dissing it. First of all, people are saying that it can easily be fooled. What these people forget is one, this technology is in its infancy so, yes it can be fooled today. But with time and advancement of A.I, these bugs will be worked out. For example, a person is represented as a line in this system, in the future with advancement in image recognition, we will be able to see what a person has in his or her hand. Having a key in your hand doesn't make you a thief, having a crowbar is another story.
A lot of the people bickering over this, didn't appear to read entire article. You do not get arrested just because the computer sounded an alarm. There is a human being there, when the alarm sounds, a replay of the reason the alarm is sounded is done. This human uses this to verify that you didn't do anything wrong. By the way, you are not "arrested", you are stopped and questioned, there is nothing illegal about stopping someone to question them about a strange activity.
The potential for this is great, Yes, there are fears, that perhaps one day all these cameras will be joined and controlled by one big computer, and it can track your movement from Detroit to London, sure sure. You will not be alive by then, so stop worrying. You watch too much TeeVee.
The most exciting thing about this technology is that it is showing advacenment in image recognition, 3d mapping of real world environments, artificial intelligents and many other interesting computer fields.
Oh yeah, and for those of you thinking you can have fun, by sounding false alarms. Be ready to get arrested, it is simply like sounding a false alarm that their is a fire, or calling 911 and telling them you have a heart attack.
Anyway, If this succeeds, lots of cameras will be sold, so if you have money, keep an eye on companys that make cameras. Or better yet, start such a company.;-)
No, you are wrong. The system uses a matheatical forumla, it can detect being lost and looking for a car to steal. When you are lost, you don't go to cars looking inside them, when you want to steal a car, you probably go very close to them, checking to see if the door is left open. On the other hand when you are lost, you usually stop, and look around from the same spot to see if you can spot your car. A car thief doesn't stop in a particular spot, find a car, and walk to it and steal it. It uses a matheatical pattern, these guys are not stupid for crying out loud.
As a good citizen, you should not try to do such a thing, it is the equivalent of calling 911 and telling them you are about to kill your wife, and when the cops come and arrest you, you sue them for false arrest. Totally Bull.:-) The only difference here is that you spoke with actions instead of words.
No more Anonymous cowards will not fix this, this guy could be doing this via an automated script, he can easily register an account with any free website, then with his script continue the stupid act. The best thing is simply to trace him and have him spanked, tho he might enjoy that.
The same law which applies in the physical world will not and never apply to the internet. You might be a laywer, You might know the law. But I am citizen, a user, I disagree with the law, and when a large bunch of us disagrees, the law becomes meaninless. The sooner people realize this, the better. I am not saying that everything should be free, I am not an anarchist or one that rebels against every authority, but I am simply saying that Laws has limits. It becomes hard to draw a boundary... We can only rely on common sense, and in this case, I think the guy is not guilty of any copyright violation.
I must disagree, copyright has its limit. This guy is not making some money or running some business. So it does not matter if he lifted the picture directly from the official site. He could have gone to a library, obtained some books, and scanned in the picture. Bush is not right technically, his words become public, his speeches become public, this is what he has to sacrifice as a politician. I know who I will not be voting for.
Slashdot Mirror
Duh!!!! They can license the algorithms to others for a small fee! Duh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yuck, I am disgusted. No! not by Goggle, but by the vast amount of cheap remarks I have read so far. I cannot believe how many of you recoil at the thought of patening software algorithms. Hah!, I dobut you could code! If you could, you would realize how important and hard it is to come up with original software algorithms. Anyone who discovers a software algorithm is free to patent it, I just hope the patent in the software world will have a limit of 2-3 years, because the software world moves at an incredibly pace. The problem of text data mining on the web is not an easy task. I have been doing slight research on it, and I will tell you, that it takes great skills to come up with something. Look at goggle, look how small they are, compared with altavista, yahoo, excite and infoseek. Imagine if these other competitors could grab their algorithms and stiff them out of the search engine world. How fair will that be? Not at all! I know I rather see goggle survive, than another lame search engine survive cuz they have money and ripped on the poor guys.
If software algorithsm shouldn't be patented, Why the hell should hardware? Cuz hardware takes work, and software doesn't take work? Good software algorithms takes years of painful, hardworking research just as software. If you don't think so, you are not a programmer and have no say in this, go take a seat my friend. Anyway, to end this off, I will like to state, that I am against stupid patents, patent of one shop clicking, something that is very obvious, something that takes no brain cells to implement, The technology behind slashdot is original and unique, if there was a patent behind it, I will not mind! Now on the other hand, if someone puts a patent on guest books, now they have to get in the same pant with me.
Paul who?
Paul erdos! The greatest mathematician of all time. He lived for mathematics and for nothing else, a very brilliant genius who was never afriad to admit weakness. He knows when he faces problems greater than him, and when this happens, he takes the small money he makes from lectures and sets up prizes for anyone that solved it. He wrote and co authored more than 1500 mathematical papers. He didn't expire at an old age, he did mathematics till the day he died, hell he collapsed at a mathematics conference when he died. Talk about Fermants theorem, Number theory and prime number, combinatorial mathematics, sure, just don't forget to thank uncle paul. I was totally blown away when I read "The Man Who Loved only Numbers" - by Paul Hoffman. But of course this is the man of the century, not mathematicain, suffice to say, I think he is even greater than Einstein. Einstein was brilliant but a man who was very wrong and stuborn, think of the progress he would have made, if he accepted humility and pursued other things within his reach, instead he wasted his life chasing after dreams. Anyway, to make this short, The man of the century is me and you. Do not let anyone else tell you otherwise, the next century depends on us, just me and you. That is right, without us, there is no tomorrow. *cheers*
I am in US, and going to http://www.hotmail.com doesn't work. But I notice that if I use Microsoft messenger, it works. Is this a move by Microsoft to force people to use their own IM?
Hrmm.
Ah ah, what crap are you talking? How can you ever ask if you can create a "full and good operating system"(like Linux) with Java. Java is not a low level language thus, asking if you can create operating system out of it is crazy. Linux is not a full and good operating system because it was done in C, It could have been done in Lisp or some other language. Linux is "full and good" because of the mind behind it, because of the philisophy behind it. What are you talking about substitution? Java was not designed to replace C. Has C replaced assembly? No, C was not designed to replace assembly, C was designed to make life easier, and as far as Java makes life easier than C, all will be well with it.
I am very very worried. I am worried about how this will hurt Linux and open source. It is very sad, but inevitable that sooner or later some fucking bastards will try to exploit us and this is a clear case. A lot of people today, who do not know much about the market or linux, !(me and you), are going to dump their money if Linuxone goes IPO. Now, what do you think will happen? After a short while, people will realize that this company is a hoax and will loose a lot of money! If a lot of people loose money in this, what will this say? Linux is not happening?! Linux is a hoax? I am not talking about what you will think, but what the average joe will. people will throw there money when this goes IPO if it ever does, they will do it, not to invest , but to make very quick money! THe outcome worries me.
Open source is good and what not, but if I was doing this, I will not use Linux, I will use one of the BSD's, because I will like to keep the code.
a simple main() { while(1) fork(); } will not bring down any Unix box. Have you ever heard of resources? With Unix we can control the amount of CPU you get, the amount of Memory you use, the maximum number of processes you run and such. Almost all unix boxes come with these turned off, but if you have a clue, you can enable these settings and your fork() bomb will only be a waste of your time.
Everyone who has reversed the original quake binary knew it was done with GNU djgpp. Why did ID clean it up to use visual C? hrmmm. I don't have windows, and gawd knows I am not switching to windows or dos to work on quake.
If you know the amount of time that game programmers put into work, you will understand that ID has no time to write design docs. As a matter of fact, I dobut they use design docs that much, gee, this is ID not IBM. As a programmer, I will tell you that the hardest thing to do after writing code is to write docs. I write code 10x more than write a doc. So usually, I try very hard to make my code my documenatation. And I belive the quake code is a great documentation. First of all, ignore the asm source, use the c part. Start out with the header files, from here you will have a great idea of the data strucutres they game will be operating on. It might sound hard, but when you do this over and over again, it becomes really easier than you think. If Quake was a console only game ie for dreamcast only. the only way to figure it out will be by reversring and pouring through the assembly source code, sounds crazy? I know guys that do such daily. :)
Why don't you add one of these things? Or are you one of those, who only lame around while others code.
Yes, "if they can get that 2nd pair of eyes to go program something else". Notice the word, IF. Sadly, most programmers are not disciplened enough to work on their own in large projects. If you have a project that is going to be 20,000 lines of code. It will be much faster having a two people work together as a pair, then having each go his way and code seperate 10,000. This problem is like the classic problem, of 1 towel takes 10 minutes to try, how long does 2 towel take? some will answer 5, some will answer 20, the answer remains 10.
I have read quite some comments, that suggested that the key to searching might lie in putting some of the load on the sites themselves. This includes ideas on how to write HTML, XML code or whatever, or including a search engine at the site itself. The problem with this is that people are lazy, If someone ones to write HTML code, they just want to write code, not worry if it can be searched. Basically HTML writers are like programmers, lazy people who will prefer if a function handled the error instead of having to write two lines of code to handle the error. We will have a successful engine when we have one that can search any content, what that means is, you don't need to write your HTML code in a particular way for it to be searched. You don't have to use special tags or what not for it to be searched, it is true that using special tags will be nice. But only .00001% of sites will use this. Search engines should never ever depend on whatever they search for how to search it, they need to determine the strucuture of the data
themselves.
People just don't know how to search.
Since, I have been using the internet, I have stopped making daily trips to the library. Searching is an art, The web is pretty searchable, but takes quite some effort, knowing the right search engines to use for what, knowing the right keywords and combinations.
This is great for coders in third world countries!
Just think about, I will not put in 30 days to get $500 for a project. Whereas some poor guy in india, will. $500 converted over there is probably what $20,000 is to me over in US. Now, such a project is a bargain for people in places where the dollar is worth more.
If a company has patented an idea or something of that nature, and someone takes that idea and creates an opensource software. The company in most cases don't bother to sue the individual, since the work is opensource, and the individual is not making money. But when a developer gets paid, wouldn't that be asking for trouble?
If I develop an opensource program now using GIFs, I probably will not into trouble for using the "LZW"? Algorithm or whatever it was that they copyrighted about it, because I am not making money. But now, I probably would.
What if users requested tools specifically for something authoritiy views as bad? What if users where the ones who requested a tool as napster. Wouldn't authority have much reason to go after him for creating "evil" tools for money?
This is a great idea, but yet, I believe developers have to be careful. Very careful.
This technology is very revolutionary, yet, It seems a lot of people are dissing it. First of all, people are saying that it can easily be fooled. What these people forget is one, this technology is in its infancy so, yes it can be fooled today. But with time and advancement of A.I, these bugs will be worked out. For example, a person is represented as a line in this system, in the future with advancement in image recognition, we will be able to see what a person has in his or her hand. Having a key in your hand doesn't make you a thief, having a crowbar is another story.
;-)
A lot of the people bickering over this, didn't appear to read entire article. You do not get arrested just because the computer sounded an alarm. There is a human being there, when the alarm sounds, a replay of the reason the alarm is sounded is done. This human uses this to verify that you didn't do anything wrong. By the way, you are not "arrested", you are stopped and questioned, there is nothing illegal about stopping someone to question them about a strange activity.
The potential for this is great, Yes, there are fears, that perhaps one day all these cameras will be joined and controlled by one big computer, and it can track your movement from Detroit to London, sure sure. You will not be alive by then, so stop worrying. You watch too much TeeVee.
The most exciting thing about this technology is that it is showing advacenment in image recognition, 3d mapping of real world environments, artificial intelligents and many other interesting computer fields.
Oh yeah, and for those of you thinking you can have fun, by sounding false alarms. Be ready to get arrested, it is simply like sounding a false alarm that their is a fire, or calling 911 and telling them you have a heart attack.
Anyway, If this succeeds, lots of cameras will be sold, so if you have money, keep an eye on companys that make cameras. Or better yet, start such a company.
No, you are wrong. The system uses a matheatical forumla, it can detect being lost and looking for a car to steal. When you are lost, you don't go to cars looking inside them, when you want to steal a car, you probably go very close to them, checking to see if the door is left open. On the other hand when you are lost, you usually stop, and look around from the same spot to see if you can spot your car. A car thief doesn't stop in a particular spot, find a car, and walk to it and steal it. It uses a matheatical pattern, these guys are not stupid for crying out loud.
Nah, you are very wrong. False alarms is only a bug, with time and A.I the system will grow to recgonize when you are trying to trigger a false alarm.
As a good citizen, you should not try to do such a thing, it is the equivalent of calling 911 and telling them you are about to kill your wife, and when the cops come and arrest you, you sue them for false arrest. Totally Bull. :-) The only difference here is that you spoke with actions instead of words.
No more Anonymous cowards will not fix this, this guy could be doing this via an automated script, he can easily register an account with any free website, then with his script continue the stupid act. The best thing is simply to trace him and have him spanked, tho he might enjoy that.
The same law which applies in the physical world will not and never apply to the internet. You might be a laywer, You might know the law. But I am citizen, a user, I disagree with the law, and when a large bunch of us disagrees, the law becomes meaninless. The sooner people realize this, the better. I am not saying that everything should be free, I am not an anarchist or one that rebels against every authority, but I am simply saying that Laws has limits. It becomes hard to draw a boundary... We can only rely on common sense, and in this case, I think the guy is not guilty of any copyright violation.
Woohoo, a perfect score! What did I win?
I must disagree, copyright has its limit. This guy is not making some money or running some business. So it does not matter if he lifted the picture directly from the official site. He could have gone to a library, obtained some books, and scanned in the picture. Bush is not right technically, his words become public, his speeches become public, this is what he has to sacrifice as a politician. I know who I will not be voting for.
I am dumping all my loot in AMD! :-)