Where do they get all those hundreds of thousands of votes from? This poll surely got hacked. Also check out this poll. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk got 1305357 votes? Yeah right. Or look at Scientists and Thinkers. As if 769029 people in this world actually know the name of Enrico Fermi (and to be honest, I don't know either Jonas Salk and Viktor Hambardzumian).
Re:What about OS upgrades?
on
LinModems?
·
· Score: 1
Most probably, yes, the driver will have to be updated. Not necessarily for each and every new kernel release, but now and then something will change and require a recompile and sometimes a bit of tweaking.
It is also perfectly possible that this driver will only work on, say, non-SMP linux.
Why is this article called "The Truth About SETI@HOME"? It's not more the truth than any of the usual Slashdot postings.
(Same for this flood of articles from osOpinion. Anybody, knowledgeable or not, can get his stuff published there, and all of Slashdot, LinuxToday and LWN will start a big fuss about it. It's just a waste of time.)
Libraries all over the world have MAJOR problems with the preservation of old books and documents. Actually, it's not really the books from centuries ago that are causing problems, but mainly the books from this century... we're using a different kind of paper than we used to. But regardless of what type of paper we use, it won't last forever.
An electronic archive takes up less space, it's trivial to mirror, copying the date to more modern media is easy. Yes, it will take an effort to manage this in a consistent way. However, this is a much easier process than the preservation of the millions of books that are falling apart at this moment.
(And if you insist on having a paper archive, you can always print out the electronic articles.)
1. Peer review is of fundamental importance. But that should be easy to implement, once the idea of replacing old-style publishers by free electronic archives is to some extent accepted by the scientific community. Peer review has always been fully paid by the universities (and not by the publishers), so not much will change there. The trick is to get the infrastructure working, but with the money saved by libraries that stop buying old-style journals, that should be definitely possible.
2. Yes, the scientific community needs to recognize electronic journals. Things just have to start to get rolling.
3. Why would an electronic archive be harder to maintain than a paper journal?
Subscriptions to scientific journals easily cost $3,000-$5,000 a year. For this, university libraries get a bunch of scientific articles written by scientists (who are mostly fully paid by universities and science foundations), and reviewed by the same group of people. All of this costs the publishing company about $0.00. The publisher then has to do a bit of editing and finishing up. It's practically a free lunch. And Elsevier (to name just one) is raising it prices by 10% each year.
On top of that, almost all journals demand the scientist to sign a Transfer of Copyright Agreement. If you're not careful, you could be sued for publishing your paper on your homepage.
But now there's internet. We don't even need a press anymore. Potentially, there's lots of (library) money available that can be used to replace the old-style publishers. All it takes is for scientists to unite.
I haven't looked at the patent myself, but it's probably more specific than that. Patents become invalid when there are examples of prior art, so most likely this one doesn't just describe L1 caches, but more specifically some cunning mechanism that can not be found in earlier implementations of L1 caches.
That is, if this is really about L1 cache-like stuff. I haven't checked myself.
Of course the title of the patent does not cover the content.
All aspects of the new Amiga will be different from the original machine. As far as I know, the developers are different as well. (Jay Miner is dead, Carl Sassenrath is making Rebol, don't know about the others.)
Re:Guys get your fontpath right!
on
XFree86 News
·
· Score: 1
I have it very much like you, but for example www.icq.com is just unreadable (while it is tiny but readable on windows).
They will never be able to execute x86 code at that rate. Even if this E2K was this fast, it would only be this fast at executing its native machine code. The x86 option is just there for compatibility, it's impossible to optimize that much more than AMD and intel have done.
Ken used this compression for his own collection, but that's all. Ken is a computer scientist, not an expert on audio coding! PAC was developed by a team led by Peter Kroon.
I meant to say Netscape previous to 5.0. I wrote smaller-than-sign 5, and should have sent it as Extrans instead of Plain Old Text (I guess).
Let's see if I can make it work: Netscape (5)
Actually, Netscape 5.0 might very well be closed source, if it is packaged with 3rd party components. But it'll be based on good old open source Mozilla.
They will have to release patches they make to the kernel. They will have to release programs that link to GPL'd libraries.
But it's ok to use LGPL'd libraries, it's ok to use Linux's system calls, it's ok to use XFree86, it's ok to use the gnu tools, all without opening up your own source.
If you don't want to check this from the licenses directly, then just think of all the closed source applications that are available for Linux, e.g., WordPerfect, StarOffice, Realplayer, Netscape (5), etc.
or in the driver subtrees of sites like Metalab, and notice the rate at which new ones are added.
Yeah, since 1994 about 2 drivers a year. (And I know, if you look at the kernel source it's a lot different, but it's so much easier to follow a link.)
Slashdot Mirror
And there will always be new hardware for which new drivers are needed, or in certain cases even major kernel overhauls (for example SMP).
Note that in this case it is important not to mistake bugs for features.
Damn, they misbehave like a bunch of slashdotters :)
Where do they get all those hundreds of thousands of votes from? This poll surely got hacked. Also check out this poll. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk got 1305357 votes? Yeah right. Or look at Scientists and Thinkers. As if 769029 people in this world actually know the name of Enrico Fermi (and to be honest, I don't know either Jonas Salk and Viktor Hambardzumian).
Most probably, yes, the driver will have to be updated. Not necessarily for each and every new kernel release, but now and then something will change and require a recompile and sometimes a bit of tweaking.
It is also perfectly possible that this driver will only work on, say, non-SMP linux.
Is it true? Will we one day have LinNICs?
Why is this article called "The Truth About SETI@HOME"? It's not more the truth than any of the usual Slashdot postings.
(Same for this flood of articles from osOpinion. Anybody, knowledgeable or not, can get his stuff published there, and all of Slashdot, LinuxToday and LWN will start a big fuss about it. It's just a waste of time.)
Or rather, should not be a problem. The money saved by cutting short the greedy publishers is more than enough to solve problems like this.
Libraries all over the world have MAJOR problems with the preservation of old books and documents. Actually, it's not really the books from centuries ago that are causing problems, but mainly the books from this century... we're using a different kind of paper than we used to. But regardless of what type of paper we use, it won't last forever.
An electronic archive takes up less space, it's trivial to mirror, copying the date to more modern media is easy. Yes, it will take an effort to manage this in a consistent way. However, this is a much easier process than the preservation of the millions of books that are falling apart at this moment.
(And if you insist on having a paper archive, you can always print out the electronic articles.)
1. Peer review is of fundamental importance. But that should be easy to implement, once the idea of replacing old-style publishers by free electronic archives is to some extent accepted by the scientific community. Peer review has always been fully paid by the universities (and not by the publishers), so not much will change there. The trick is to get the infrastructure working, but with the money saved by libraries that stop buying old-style journals, that should be definitely possible.
2. Yes, the scientific community needs to recognize electronic journals. Things just have to start to get rolling.
3. Why would an electronic archive be harder to maintain than a paper journal?
4. Scientists of this world, unite!!!
Subscriptions to scientific journals easily cost $3,000-$5,000 a year. For this, university libraries get a bunch of scientific articles written by scientists (who are mostly fully paid by universities and science foundations), and reviewed by the same group of people. All of this costs the publishing company about $0.00. The publisher then has to do a bit of editing and finishing up. It's practically a free lunch. And Elsevier (to name just one) is raising it prices by 10% each year.
On top of that, almost all journals demand the scientist to sign a Transfer of Copyright Agreement. If you're not careful, you could be sued for publishing your paper on your homepage.
But now there's internet. We don't even need a press anymore. Potentially, there's lots of (library) money available that can be used to replace the old-style publishers. All it takes is for scientists to unite.
I haven't looked at the patent myself, but it's probably more specific than that. Patents become invalid when there are examples of prior art, so most likely this one doesn't just describe L1 caches, but more specifically some cunning mechanism that can not be found in earlier implementations of L1 caches.
That is, if this is really about L1 cache-like stuff. I haven't checked myself.
Of course the title of the patent does not cover the content.
All aspects of the new Amiga will be different from the original machine. As far as I know, the developers are different as well. (Jay Miner is dead, Carl Sassenrath is making Rebol, don't know about the others.)
I have it very much like you, but for example www.icq.com is just unreadable (while it is tiny but readable on windows).
They will never be able to execute x86 code at that rate. Even if this E2K was this fast, it would only be this fast at executing its native machine code. The x86 option is just there for compatibility, it's impossible to optimize that much more than AMD and intel have done.
Ken used this compression for his own collection, but that's all. Ken is a computer scientist, not an expert on audio coding! PAC was developed by a team led by Peter Kroon.
Wrong. They can call it Amiga because they own the trademark.
Weird! It doesn't work. I'm not going to look up how to write a smaller-than-sign in correct HTML, though.
I meant to say Netscape previous to 5.0. I wrote smaller-than-sign 5, and should have sent it as Extrans instead of Plain Old Text (I guess).
Let's see if I can make it work: Netscape (5)
Actually, Netscape 5.0 might very well be closed source, if it is packaged with 3rd party components. But it'll be based on good old open source Mozilla.
NO
:)
They will have to release patches they make to the kernel. They will have to release programs that link to GPL'd libraries.
But it's ok to use LGPL'd libraries, it's ok to use Linux's system calls, it's ok to use XFree86, it's ok to use the gnu tools, all without opening up your own source.
If you don't want to check this from the licenses directly, then just think of all the closed source applications that are available for Linux, e.g., WordPerfect, StarOffice, Realplayer, Netscape (5), etc.
Aren't we glad that Sony is located outside the US.
It's a laser beam going from roof to roof. Eavesdroppers will have to intercept this beam. It's much easier to dig up a cable and tap that.
Yeah, since 1994 about 2 drivers a year. (And I know, if you look at the kernel source it's a lot different, but it's so much easier to follow a link.)
Ok, thanks for the explanation!! :))
(and yes, you should keep those doors closed
Ehm, which Milli Vanilli are you referring to, the the guys from the video clips, or the guys who did the actual singing...:)
But I agree, they are all victims of the industry.