Now, in your example, nobody will need to build computers from scratch, because computer-making companies will adapt to whatever new way of distributing goods emerges. That's because, as you point out, people have a need for someone to manufacture computers for them.
How so? Having a desktop (nano-)factory will mean that a lot of manufacturers become superfluous. The only thing you'll actually need is the design, and there are already some open-source CPUs around. Open-source CPUs may eventually end up killing proprietary ones, like everywhere else.
Windows ME was obviously just an egotrip for Microsoft's marketing department; it certainly wasn't an OS, and as such it doesn't belong in this comparison.
That's a question of basis. You get the same problem - only worse - in quantum physics: There isn't any preferred basis for the axes, so you just have to pick one.
Yes, you can pick an axis that would describe the car's rotation in a single number, but then you'd have to describe the axis.;)
And, well... it isn't entirely true, at that. Depends on your point of view.
Yes; when I said "tarballed", I meant "tarballed with -cjf".
Oh, and I'm sure Google's going to take the opportunity to mix-and-match similar messages - just take a look at the rsync algorithm to see how* - but that doesn't mean they won't count the full length against *my* 1GB.
*: Yes, yes, I'm quite aware that they're unlikely to use it directly. It was meant as inspiration.
---- The first gyroscope broke two years ago as a result of a bearing failure. Two more are still operating -- the minimum required -- but one has exhibited power surges and vibrations over the past year. If another gyroscope breaks, thrusters on the docked Russian capsule and the station would have to assume control over the massive orbiting structure for as long as a year. ----
Rather, the thrusters *could* assume control over the ISS for up to a year; the repairs are in fact likely to be made a long time before that, never mind that there is currently no need for thrusters.
It's a bug-ridden, cripple nightmare to program for. Well, okay, not bug-ridden: Those problems are mostly called "features". The fact remains, it doesn't let me do a number of things that I consider basic; I'm not sure it's actually even a Lisp, truth to tell.
The true standard there is Common Lisp. It's a monster too (or maybe a mudball), but it lets me do whatever I want to. That's the point, really.
And, oh yes - Common Lisp was created by a standards organization. So much for hackish ingenuity.
(To be fair, Elisp wasn't *supposed* to be complete; it's just the subset of CL that was considered neccessary to write an editor. CL would probably be better if made by hackers, too - but that's what Arc is for.:)
Let's step back and get some perspective. There may or may not be enough customers to let "reasonable" DRM through; there definitely *won't* be enough customers if you stop them from running third-party (ulicensed) software.
I really don't think anyone is seriously considering such a system; maybe in ten years...
...there will be technology in place to prevent the owner from doing certain general purpose compututations...
No, there won't be; such a system would be expensive, slow, horribly complicated and full of holes.
What there will be is a system to allow certain licensed computations to access data (via encryption) that other computations can't, and possibly render you unable to stop some such computations; it's as simple as that, and the latter scenario is unlikely; all suggested DRM systems I've seen come with "off" switches.
Not that that isn't bad enough, but it certainly doesn't disqualify the machine from being a general-purpose computer; it really *does* only give you access to content (data or software) that other people can't access. The problem lies in the consequences.
There certainly will be no reduction in turing-completeness.
Smaller disks generally mean smaller margins of reliability, whether that's because of missing safeties or just smaller margins for error.
I bought an MP3 player a while ago (iRiver iGP-100), which has a "reduced" HD. That worked well for a while, but recently I've lost everything from the 300MB mark and up.
I don't know why this happened, and frankly I don't care; I'm just happy that I have a three-year warranty, and they're letting me upgrade to a newer model which uses a larger, and thus safer, HD. For free. (Apparenly they didn't have replacement drives in stock; the law is the law, though.)
Well, enough about me. Now, about these drives: Would you trust your data to one of them?
Asteroids move pretty quickly; to stop one you'd have to inject a lot of velocity somehow.
How much depends on where you want to park it and where it's heading, but you can be sure that it will be a lot more than the amount of momentum you'd need to move it slightly off course; if it was detected years before, that would be a very small amount of momentum. The trouble is getting it there.
There is another possibility, though: For sufficiently small asteroids in sufficiently unlikely orbits, it may be easier to crash it into Moon than to make it miss the earth-moon system entirely. Might be fun.
Well, of course there's an option. In fact, I bet there are about two thousand of them - and you have to put them together just right to make it work; otherwise the server will automatically execute any and all attachments.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, in your example, nobody will need to build computers from scratch, because computer-making companies will adapt to whatever new way of distributing goods emerges. That's because, as you point out, people have a need for someone to manufacture computers for them.
How so?
Having a desktop (nano-)factory will mean that a lot of manufacturers become superfluous. The only thing you'll actually need is the design, and there are already some open-source CPUs around. Open-source CPUs may eventually end up killing proprietary ones, like everywhere else.
...and you left out ME.
Windows ME was obviously just an egotrip for Microsoft's marketing department; it certainly wasn't an OS, and as such it doesn't belong in this comparison.
That's a question of basis. You get the same problem - only worse - in quantum physics: There isn't any preferred basis for the axes, so you just have to pick one.
;)
Yes, you can pick an axis that would describe the car's rotation in a single number, but then you'd have to describe the axis.
And, well... it isn't entirely true, at that. Depends on your point of view.
Not unlike the holy grail, it was created in the past and just got lost.
Lisp already does that, mostly.
Yes; when I said "tarballed", I meant "tarballed with -cjf".
Oh, and I'm sure Google's going to take the opportunity to mix-and-match similar messages - just take a look at the rsync algorithm to see how* - but that doesn't mean they won't count the full length against *my* 1GB.
*: Yes, yes, I'm quite aware that they're unlikely to use it directly. It was meant as inspiration.
And they say you can save all your email "to the end of time". Here, let me show you something:
.maildir .maildir
svein@cloud svein $ cd
svein@cloud svein $ du -s
839187
That's all my email for.. oh, around four years. Mind you, everything older than two months is tarballed.
No, Gmail just won't do it for me...
----
The first gyroscope broke two years ago as a result of a bearing failure. Two more are still operating -- the minimum required -- but one has exhibited power surges and vibrations over the past year. If another gyroscope breaks, thrusters on the docked Russian capsule and the station would have to assume control over the massive orbiting structure for as long as a year.
----
Rather, the thrusters *could* assume control over the ISS for up to a year; the repairs are in fact likely to be made a long time before that, never mind that there is currently no need for thrusters.
Well, yes.
Knowledge=power, right?
We also have power=energy, and with relativity, energy=mass.
Thus, knowledge=mass, and since Einstein was very knowledgeable he'll bend space around him more than other brains.
Also, if he starts spinning the worshippers may get to observe frame dragging!
What does Prothon do that Lisp doesn't?
Come to think of it, what does *anything* do that Lisp doesn't, except have larger market penetration?
What about Emacs Lisp?
:)
It's a bug-ridden, cripple nightmare to program for. Well, okay, not bug-ridden: Those problems are mostly called "features". The fact remains, it doesn't let me do a number of things that I consider basic; I'm not sure it's actually even a Lisp, truth to tell.
The true standard there is Common Lisp. It's a monster too (or maybe a mudball), but it lets me do whatever I want to. That's the point, really.
And, oh yes - Common Lisp was created by a standards organization. So much for hackish ingenuity.
(To be fair, Elisp wasn't *supposed* to be complete; it's just the subset of CL that was considered neccessary to write an editor. CL would probably be better if made by hackers, too - but that's what Arc is for.
The drive is physically larger, but not that much.
The main difference is that the smaller drive apparently lacks some physical safety systems that the larger drive doesn't.
Pretty sure, yes; the company I bought it from puts "refurbished" equipment in their own category, for less money.
The place is very drafty, and I never buy such equipment anyway.
I think two words sum these events up pretty neatly:
It's started.
Well, any BIOS that implements DRM certainly isn't going to let you replace it, much less read it. That would rather defeat the purpose, would't it?
-1, slashbot pandering
Let's step back and get some perspective.
There may or may not be enough customers to let "reasonable" DRM through; there definitely *won't* be enough customers if you stop them from running third-party (ulicensed) software.
I really don't think anyone is seriously considering such a system; maybe in ten years...
...there will be technology in place to prevent the owner from doing certain general purpose compututations...
No, there won't be; such a system would be expensive, slow, horribly complicated and full of holes.
What there will be is a system to allow certain licensed computations to access data (via encryption) that other computations can't, and possibly render you unable to stop some such computations; it's as simple as that, and the latter scenario is unlikely; all suggested DRM systems I've seen come with "off" switches.
Not that that isn't bad enough, but it certainly doesn't disqualify the machine from being a general-purpose computer; it really *does* only give you access to content (data or software) that other people can't access. The problem lies in the consequences.
There certainly will be no reduction in turing-completeness.
Well, obviously it's all part of the Great Publisher Conspiracy.
Computer parts get better all the time; thus, they can publish "Guiness '04", and then push "Guiness '05" as an essential upgrade two years later.
Smaller disks generally mean smaller margins of reliability, whether that's because of missing safeties or just smaller margins for error.
I bought an MP3 player a while ago (iRiver iGP-100), which has a "reduced" HD. That worked well for a while, but recently I've lost everything from the 300MB mark and up.
I don't know why this happened, and frankly I don't care; I'm just happy that I have a three-year warranty, and they're letting me upgrade to a newer model which uses a larger, and thus safer, HD. For free. (Apparenly they didn't have replacement drives in stock; the law is the law, though.)
Well, enough about me. Now, about these drives: Would you trust your data to one of them?
I don't think so.
Asteroids move pretty quickly; to stop one you'd have to inject a lot of velocity somehow.
How much depends on where you want to park it and where it's heading, but you can be sure that it will be a lot more than the amount of momentum you'd need to move it slightly off course; if it was detected years before, that would be a very small amount of momentum. The trouble is getting it there.
There is another possibility, though: For sufficiently small asteroids in sufficiently unlikely orbits, it may be easier to crash it into Moon than to make it miss the earth-moon system entirely. Might be fun.
> An option in sendmail.cf
You have *got* to be *kidding* me!
Well, of course there's an option. In fact, I bet there are about two thousand of them - and you have to put them together just right to make it work; otherwise the server will automatically execute any and all attachments.