Following a relatively simple strategy, the PA-8800 processor combines two PA-8700 cores on a single chip to enable symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) on a single processor.
It doesn't enable SMP "on a single processor". It provides two processors on a single die. There is a distinction.
AMD, please steal an idea...
The big rumor regarding the third version of Hammer is that it'll be a dual-CPU module. Any guesses as to Hammer's clock speed on release?
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
(I tried to post this a lot earlier but had problems with Slashdot.)
How can the war be lost when it has barely started?
With Microsoft's many monopolistic and anti-competitive initiatives in Windows XP, Linux should be poised for unprecedented growth. I think literally millions of disaffected Windows users will move the Linux camp over the next few years. Heck, even Brian Livingston at Infoworld, a die-hard Windows fan, has said he'll never install XP. When those factors are combined with XP's significantly higher cost of ownership, there is a compelling argument for migration.
This migration will be helped along quite a bit by the constantly improving software offerings available on Linux, including StarOffice 6.
I expect Windows XP will have a beneficial effect on Macintosh sales also, further spurring unix desktop market penetration. I also expect that Java desktop software development will begin to take off (finally).
In short, I think this article is way off base, and in fact Linux is now facing its best opportunity ever to succeed on the desktop, especially among the more cost-sensitive organizations.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Well, I guess now I know why Sprint wasn't returning my calls regarding our ION installation.:-p
We were getting the business plan for data-only purposes. That was $256 a month for ~1 mbps upstream and ~5 mbps downstream at our location (zone 2 out of 10 in terms of distance to the switch).
Does anyone know of any competitive alternatives (that hopefully won't die in the next couple of years!) here in the SoCal area? The closest I've seen is wireless T1 (1.5 mbps fully symmetrical) for about $600/month.
Sheesh, how disappointing!
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
What I mean is that gcj and other ahead-of-time compilers allow people to continue writing Java code as if they were writing C/C++ code: small, standalone, native-code applications that are composed of a mostly static codebase.
Certainly that is one thing that ahead-of-time compilation achieves, however it is not the only thing. Those "small" executables can of course link with traditional shared libraries (dlls) which would encompass the standard Java libraries plus (potentially) any third party libraries.
In order to achieve that, they sacrifice many of the properties that make Java interesting in the first place.
I don't agree. As I pointed out, gcj supports dynamic class loading in those few cases where it is needed.
If you take a single-process, dynamic-compilation approach, Java really shines: you can combine lots of software components at runtime, and the dynamic compiler will optimize and inline everything at runtime.
I understand that better inlining is one of the benefits of dynamic compilation. However, the just-in-time compiler (JITC) cannot perform extensive optimizations. You are paying a cost in computer time to do both the analysis and compilation every time you run the program. By the way, there is no reason you couldn't write a traditional compiler to accept profiling information and do better optimization based on those.
That's not theoretical, it really works. If you keep a single Java process running (rather than starting things up again and again), javac, jedit, and other substantial Java programs are lightning fast.
If you look at my posting history, you'll see that I've made the point that modern VMs are approaching the speeds necessary for high-performance computing.;-)
However, wouldn't it be nice if those programs a) loaded lightning fast and b) ran fast even the first time they're used? It's rather annoying to hit an intensive operation for the first time, have it take a minute, then have it run in five seconds the next time. Don't you agree? (BTW, this could be accomplished by "freezing" the program onto disk when it is closed, then "unfreezing" it back into the VM when loaded, preserving the compiled sections. The VM would discard the frozen copy when it detected a.class/.jar file version change.)
I agree that gcj is very worthwhile, and I hope its development will continue. Many people (myself included) still want to write small, stand-alone applications some of the time, and being able to use Java is nice for that.
I think gcj has many other potential uses. First, it is a great approach (given a robust compiler;) for the large applications which are of interest to the Java Grande Forum, or any others that require the absolute best performance (I know this will have to be examined carefully by benchmarks once gcj is far enough along - my guess is that gcj will win, especially given the ability to ignore array bounds checking in tested code. Also with gcj you can deterministically lock out the garbage collector if desired.) If the JDK 1.4 VM doesn't give Java enough performance to be competitive on things like 3D games and flight sims, gcj will have its chance. Finally, gcj should do well in very small embedded environments where an interpreter/VM just doesn't make sense.
Gcj's easy connection with C++ also is a great link to existing codebases.
You're referring to CNI, which is also a very efficient way to link to C/C++. This is also a major strength of gcj.
Nevertheless, for developing a modern desktop, I think the dynamic compilation approach is a much better way to go than ahead-of-time compilation.
It wasn't clear that your comments about gcj were strictly in reference to "developing a modern desktop". In that context, I'd tend to agree with you. However, for monolithic applications (games, productivity tools, compute servers, compilers etc.) there's a lot to be said for traditional compilation.
Its also nice that gcj is open source, and can be forked for new, experimental languages. I'd like to see that done to provide a good operator overloading facility (using different than normal Unicode symbols so that overloading can be identified easily), lightweight types and generics. Some of that can be accomplished using preprocessors with Java, but direct compiler support would be better.:-)
Thanks for the interesting discussion, and sorry it took so long to respond...
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
I think something like gcj is a crutch. It would let you write C/C++-style applications in Java, maybe even using Gtk+. That's better than nothing, and would allow for a smooth transition from something like Gnome to Java, but I think it also means giving up on some of the major advantages of Java.
I'm not sure why you think gcj (now just the Java mdoe of gcc 3.x) is a "crutch". It is no different than any other Java compiler in terms of the code you write. It, like TowerJ which is a commercial product and a Java 2 implementation, is simply an ahead-of-time traditional compiler for the Java language. It is roughly at the JDK 1.1 level right now, which is quite sufficient for many purposes. It also includes an interpreter so dynamic class loading is supported if needed. However, it is still fairly buggy, and it will also be a long time before it gets to the Java 2 level, if ever. I'm sure Cygnus could use more programmer volunteers...
Regardless, it is a worthy project and I hope it continues moving forward.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Sun already has a mature, powerful toolkit and component architecture in Java. Sun should put their money where their mouth is and sponsor the open source development of a desktop environment based on Java.
I couldn't agree more. If Sun is serious about Java on the desktop (and there has been a tremendous Sun development investment there already) why not use the OS they control as the showcase for how great Java is?
I'm a longtime Java programmer and advocate, but Sun has done a bad job with a couple aspects of desktop Java, IMO:
No system-wide shared VM, or at a minimum, significantly shared (jitted) code.
No ability to "install as machine code".
The shared VM concept would require some ingenuity, and of course very robust code since if anything broke the VM, all Java processes would fail. Multiple VMs with heavily shared code (libraries) is another worthwhile approach, and closer to what Sun is actually working on. I'm not sure when anything will show up in a shipping VM - perhaps 1.4? Java process startup would be fastest with a single, always resident, shared VM.
"Install as machine code" would do highly optimized ahead-of-time compilation once (from source or bytecode) for the exact target system, then store object code only. Sun keeps claiming that dynamic compilation is better, but I'd prefer to have the choice and see for myself. Disk is awfully cheap these days.
The 1.4 release will probably be "good enough" to do a decent desktop, given today's system speeds and cheap memory. It'll be interesting to see if 1.4 revs interest in desktop Java enough to really get the Open Source, shareware and freeware communities interested in developing desktop Java apps. I hope so!
The best thing about Sun biting the bullet and doing this would be the inevitable (and probably drastic) improvements to the usability of desktop Java as it was used widely in the real world. I hope some Sun folk read Slashdot today, and get some inspiration!;-)
BTW, there is really nothing to stop anyone from starting such a project on SourceForge. Another interesting project might be a similar Java enviroment using gcc 3.0 and the GTK/Java bindings.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Bert is simply...
on
Bert Is Evil
·
· Score: 2, Funny
deep undercover.
I'm sure he'll have a laser designator focused on bin Ladin's backside soon enough...;-)
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Yes Apaches performed well in the open desert of Iraq, but you must also acknowledge their inept deployment in Kosovo in the spring of '99.
http://www.longbow.co.uk/lb2/kosovo_apaches.html
Good link, thanks. The relevant point (to the current situation) is that they weren't employed because it was viewed as a step towards a ground war. Its fairly clear we'll have a ground war in Afghanistan.
Personally, I'd rather be on the side with the Apaches.:-) Even the 30mm chain gun with depleted U rounds is formidable.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Vastly superior munitions in general, including cluster bombs and scatterable (air/artillery deployed) mines.
Heavier artillery.
And don't forget, God fights on the side with the heaviest artillery!;-)
Seriously, the various technologies, especially recon and night vision, should make for a very decisive advantage. The only thing that really concerns me is the idea of troops going into the caves, which sounds very perilous. I hope they come up with a better tactic for the bunkers.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
For example, I recall seeing somewhere that the Apache helicopter needed servicing so frequently it wasn't of much practical use...can anyone confirm/deny this ?
The Apache does require serious maintenance in the field, which the Army is well equipped to provide. If for some reason maintenance couldn't be done, then the Apache force's effectiveness would falter fairly quickly - but there is no indication that is will be the case anytime soon.
When well maintained, the Apache performs very effectively, as was seen in Desert Storm. Many had expressed concern about sand in the turbines, but it turned out to be a non-issue.
To give you an idea of how respected the Apache was by the Iraqis, remember that several hundred troops surrendered to a single Apache in Desert Storm. It is also the premier anti-vehicle helicopter in the world - no one disputes the effectiveness of the Hellfire missile, with a range of 6+ km.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Really, JonKatz, dreadful? The hyperbole there leaves much to be desired. Sure, a few Afghanis lost their lives, but so what? You honestly expect me to care?
I took his reference to be to the 5,000+ dead here in the US - which qualifies as dreadful in my book.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Please quote the text of The Constitution where it says everyone has the right to complete anonymity in public.
I'm not claiming I have the 'right to anonymity'. I'm claiming I have the right to not be constantly and clandestinely monitored in public places. This should come under "unreasonable search and seizure" as far as I'm concerned. In a similar vein, it was (thankfully) recently ruled that a search warrant is required to use advanced technology (like radar or IR cameras) to monitor a suspect's home. I maintain my body deserves the same rights and privileges as my house.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for catching terrorists and making America safer. Just as long as we don't throw out the baby with the bathwater...and I'm sure there are better ways that won't drastically alter our way of life.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Facial recognition cameras will take an additional burden off of our already overworked police departments, while at the same time, making the streets safer for our children. How can anyone NOT like the idea?
Damn, you're right. I always wanted to be (potentially at least) constantly monitored by the government whenever I'm in a public place. I'm sure no one operating such systems would ever abuse them, or send the KGB (er, Office of Homeland Security) to roust someone just because they were looking suspicious. And of course the error rate on facial recognition must be one in a billion...right?
Also, this erosion of our natural (and Constitutional) right to privacy wouldn't send us further down the slippery slope to ever more intrusive and totalitarian government monitoring...right?
Fool.
"Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--Ben Franklin--
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
--unknown (by me at least;)--
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Privacy is of the utmost importance. Its the freedom we need the most. The art highlighted in these article is a relevant and valuable expression of things that have come and are to come.
The article's spiked chair being useable by cardholders/citizens only and the other link to the wearable camera is an allusion to the underpinnings of fascism.
Not necessarily fascism, but totalitarianism of some sort. The communists weren't fascists, but the Lubyanka KGB headquarters wasn't a pleasant place in the old days. There are frightening possibilities in "totalitarian democracy".
I get worried about the direction the US government is taking towards us.
I agree. In my greviously undermoderated earlier post on the subject ;-) I expressed similar concerns about the inevitable knee-jerk response to recent events. Lawmakers don't have any tools besides passing laws, and laws are generally permanent (on a related topic, there should at least be a period where an existing law must be removed from the books in order to enact a new one - maybe even two should be removed for awhile).
Half my company is foreigners, and good ones at that. The plausibility that they will become suspect or deported is minimal, but given some of the new legislation in the mill, it is possible to deport resident aliens if they contributed to an organization that terrorizes or makes threats.
That isn't a bad thing necessarily...what organizations do you support that "terrorize or make threats"?
That could conceivably include Greenpeace.
You say that like its a bad thing!;-)
OK, I do see your point about being deported for supporting Greenpeace being a bit unexpected...but Greenpeace has supported things like tree spiking in the past. I suspect a logger minus an arm from a failed chain saw blade would be inclined to class such actions as "terrorist", and I find it hard to disagree. Let's not have a double standard where such acts are concerned...
Expatriate resident aliens are the best people, most of the time. They are not eligible for welfare, must take care of themselves, do no vote and pay taxes. I would fight to defend the rights of my friends at work.
Personally, I'm not too happy with the powers that be importing cheap foreign labor to compete with me, in order to maintain high profit margins and high executive wages and perks. Isn't it great that the H1-B limits were increased so much last year? Of course, now the economy is tanking and many 'information workers' are out of work. Gee, I bet those low-paid H1-B folk are doing better than average at job retention...as in fact you apparently confirmed (at least in your case) with your "Half my company is foreigners" comment earlier. Just let me know when H1-B limitations are relaxed for CEOs...
The advent of the Orwellian era is near, I urge everyone to go to the EFF (www.eff.org) as soon as possible and write the senators and congressmen. And if you are from the EU or Canada or some other place, write them too. I'm still in shock about Skylarov not even getting a semblance of habeas corpus, and is being tried on laws that do not apply to him or what he did. And now the SSSCA and the Anti-Terrorism (Implement Fascism) bills by Adolph Ashcroft.
I am hurt by what happened September 11th. Black ops, special ops and "surgical" retaliation is a good thing. But suspending the rights of people who aren't even Arabic, and coining new criteria for "cyber-terrorism," proposing national ID cards and indiscriminately deporting people is NOT a smart thing to do. And developing legislation with such broad and far reaching wording is dangerous to everyone the world over.
I generally agree with all of this...if anything I think it should be made clear that all changes to Constitutional freedoms will be temporary until the present heightened threat of terrorism is ended, i.e. its an "emergency" measure.
The brain drain will begin, where mega corps of the US will have expatriates arrested for violating something inane. Soon, all the people will stop coming because they are afraid. And possible the greatest nation for development with the soundest fiscal policy will become and intellectual pariah.
Since even after such laws America will still be more free than 90% of the world, I somehow doubt this will happen anytime soon. Regardless, I'm sure we'll somehow muddle through with just the intellectual horsepower available in the US.:-)
Remember, stay moderate. Don't jump to conclusions about things, and make sure to check out the art in these articles, its an expression of what's to come.
"What's to come" only if we let it.
"Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--Ben Franklin--
"The price of
liberty is eternal vigilance."
--Thomas Jefferson--
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Wow, well that was a lot longer than originally intended. Congratulations if you made it this far...;-)
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Soon we'll have Nvidia making games tho I'm sure that will be created on a proprietary system even more stringent than where we are now. You don't think so?
No, I don't. The culture at NVIDIA comes mainly from an SGI background, so OpenGL is something of a religion there. Further, unlike some companies, NVIDIA seems to understand the positive feedback effect of open APIs (just not Open Source, yet).
So, NVIDIA will have to be content with the current situation: "It runs at 30 FPS on the Radeon, but at 80 FPS on a Geforce 3!".;-)
--- Example:... "It's the hottest game of the year and they don't take ATI." (Sung to the toon of a Visa comercial. It's in Nvidias best intrest to make this happen. Tho maybe not in the markets best interest.
The current (OpenGL) situation is one where vendor-specific extensions are used to expose advanced functionality (shaders primarily). This means diffent paths through large portions of OpenGL based rendering engines. This is actually closer to 'NVIDIA specific' games, but NVIDIA knows that ISVs will just migrate to Direct3D where those features are properly abstracted. DirectX 8.0 has incorporated these features into the base API (and NVIDIA is just another player there, although it had a hand in defining the spec - just as it will with OpenGL 2.0).
OpenGL faces losing many ISVs unless there are standard ways to access these features. THAT is the motivation behind OpenGL 2.0. If you want strong, cross-platform 3D capabilities, do whatever you can to support OpenGL. OpenGL 2.0 looks like a great evolutionary improvement, and should continue to spank Direct3D in most respects. It certainly will in the area of Linux support.;-)
Are there things that the Unix camp can be learning from Code Red and Nimbda?
Certainly! First, that such worms affecting Microsoft servers are very good for Unix/Linux business!:-)
Secondly, that 'integrating' everything under the sun into the OS leads to security holes and maintenance problems.
Finally, that Open Source is better in terms of the actual number of security holes - which will certainly decrease over time (which is apparently not the case with Microsoft products).
If you want to do a 3D live action game then do NOT use java. It is too slow. My definition of "too slow" - anything that isn't the fastest possible.
That's nice, dogbot. Now, please point us to all of your 3D games written in hand-optimized assembly. Surely you wouldn't use the less efficient C or C++?!?;-)
Java is making tremendous performance strides all the time. Further, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that you could write a game using gcc 3.0's Java support that'd be indistinguishable performance-wise from the same game done using C++.
moving to 64 bits will most likely make it worse because Sun(tm) won't want to break compatibliity, so they'll introduce new types.
What new types? Long is already 64 bits, as is (of course) double. Memory addressing issues won't be a factor, since they are entirely hidden from the programmer.
Slashdot Mirror
Following a relatively simple strategy, the PA-8800 processor combines two PA-8700 cores on a single chip to enable symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) on a single processor.
It doesn't enable SMP "on a single processor". It provides two processors on a single die. There is a distinction.
AMD, please steal an idea...
The big rumor regarding the third version of Hammer is that it'll be a dual-CPU module. Any guesses as to Hammer's clock speed on release?
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Regardless, the Hammer will be the processor of choice once it debuts.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
How can the war be lost when it has barely started?
With Microsoft's many monopolistic and anti-competitive initiatives in Windows XP, Linux should be poised for unprecedented growth. I think literally millions of disaffected Windows users will move the Linux camp over the next few years. Heck, even Brian Livingston at Infoworld, a die-hard Windows fan, has said he'll never install XP. When those factors are combined with XP's significantly higher cost of ownership, there is a compelling argument for migration.
This migration will be helped along quite a bit by the constantly improving software offerings available on Linux, including StarOffice 6.
I expect Windows XP will have a beneficial effect on Macintosh sales also, further spurring unix desktop market penetration. I also expect that Java desktop software development will begin to take off (finally).
In short, I think this article is way off base, and in fact Linux is now facing its best opportunity ever to succeed on the desktop, especially among the more cost-sensitive organizations.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
We were getting the business plan for data-only purposes. That was $256 a month for ~1 mbps upstream and ~5 mbps downstream at our location (zone 2 out of 10 in terms of distance to the switch).
Does anyone know of any competitive alternatives (that hopefully won't die in the next couple of years!) here in the SoCal area? The closest I've seen is wireless T1 (1.5 mbps fully symmetrical) for about $600/month.
Sheesh, how disappointing!
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Certainly that is one thing that ahead-of-time compilation achieves, however it is not the only thing. Those "small" executables can of course link with traditional shared libraries (dlls) which would encompass the standard Java libraries plus (potentially) any third party libraries.
In order to achieve that, they sacrifice many of the properties that make Java interesting in the first place.
I don't agree. As I pointed out, gcj supports dynamic class loading in those few cases where it is needed.
If you take a single-process, dynamic-compilation approach, Java really shines: you can combine lots of software components at runtime, and the dynamic compiler will optimize and inline everything at runtime.
I understand that better inlining is one of the benefits of dynamic compilation. However, the just-in-time compiler (JITC) cannot perform extensive optimizations. You are paying a cost in computer time to do both the analysis and compilation every time you run the program. By the way, there is no reason you couldn't write a traditional compiler to accept profiling information and do better optimization based on those.
That's not theoretical, it really works. If you keep a single Java process running (rather than starting things up again and again), javac, jedit, and other substantial Java programs are lightning fast.
If you look at my posting history, you'll see that I've made the point that modern VMs are approaching the speeds necessary for high-performance computing. ;-)
However, wouldn't it be nice if those programs a) loaded lightning fast and b) ran fast even the first time they're used? It's rather annoying to hit an intensive operation for the first time, have it take a minute, then have it run in five seconds the next time. Don't you agree? (BTW, this could be accomplished by "freezing" the program onto disk when it is closed, then "unfreezing" it back into the VM when loaded, preserving the compiled sections. The VM would discard the frozen copy when it detected a .class/.jar file version change.)
I agree that gcj is very worthwhile, and I hope its development will continue. Many people (myself included) still want to write small, stand-alone applications some of the time, and being able to use Java is nice for that.
I think gcj has many other potential uses. First, it is a great approach (given a robust compiler;) for the large applications which are of interest to the Java Grande Forum, or any others that require the absolute best performance (I know this will have to be examined carefully by benchmarks once gcj is far enough along - my guess is that gcj will win, especially given the ability to ignore array bounds checking in tested code. Also with gcj you can deterministically lock out the garbage collector if desired.) If the JDK 1.4 VM doesn't give Java enough performance to be competitive on things like 3D games and flight sims, gcj will have its chance. Finally, gcj should do well in very small embedded environments where an interpreter/VM just doesn't make sense.
Gcj's easy connection with C++ also is a great link to existing codebases.
You're referring to CNI, which is also a very efficient way to link to C/C++. This is also a major strength of gcj.
Nevertheless, for developing a modern desktop, I think the dynamic compilation approach is a much better way to go than ahead-of-time compilation.
It wasn't clear that your comments about gcj were strictly in reference to "developing a modern desktop". In that context, I'd tend to agree with you. However, for monolithic applications (games, productivity tools, compute servers, compilers etc.) there's a lot to be said for traditional compilation.
Its also nice that gcj is open source, and can be forked for new, experimental languages. I'd like to see that done to provide a good operator overloading facility (using different than normal Unicode symbols so that overloading can be identified easily), lightweight types and generics. Some of that can be accomplished using preprocessors with Java, but direct compiler support would be better. :-)
Thanks for the interesting discussion, and sorry it took so long to respond...
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
I'm not sure why you think gcj (now just the Java mdoe of gcc 3.x) is a "crutch". It is no different than any other Java compiler in terms of the code you write. It, like TowerJ which is a commercial product and a Java 2 implementation, is simply an ahead-of-time traditional compiler for the Java language. It is roughly at the JDK 1.1 level right now, which is quite sufficient for many purposes. It also includes an interpreter so dynamic class loading is supported if needed. However, it is still fairly buggy, and it will also be a long time before it gets to the Java 2 level, if ever. I'm sure Cygnus could use more programmer volunteers...
Regardless, it is a worthy project and I hope it continues moving forward.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
I couldn't agree more. If Sun is serious about Java on the desktop (and there has been a tremendous Sun development investment there already) why not use the OS they control as the showcase for how great Java is?
I'm a longtime Java programmer and advocate, but Sun has done a bad job with a couple aspects of desktop Java, IMO:
The shared VM concept would require some ingenuity, and of course very robust code since if anything broke the VM, all Java processes would fail. Multiple VMs with heavily shared code (libraries) is another worthwhile approach, and closer to what Sun is actually working on. I'm not sure when anything will show up in a shipping VM - perhaps 1.4? Java process startup would be fastest with a single, always resident, shared VM.
"Install as machine code" would do highly optimized ahead-of-time compilation once (from source or bytecode) for the exact target system, then store object code only. Sun keeps claiming that dynamic compilation is better, but I'd prefer to have the choice and see for myself. Disk is awfully cheap these days.
The 1.4 release will probably be "good enough" to do a decent desktop, given today's system speeds and cheap memory. It'll be interesting to see if 1.4 revs interest in desktop Java enough to really get the Open Source, shareware and freeware communities interested in developing desktop Java apps. I hope so!
The best thing about Sun biting the bullet and doing this would be the inevitable (and probably drastic) improvements to the usability of desktop Java as it was used widely in the real world. I hope some Sun folk read Slashdot today, and get some inspiration! ;-)
BTW, there is really nothing to stop anyone from starting such a project on SourceForge. Another interesting project might be a similar Java enviroment using gcc 3.0 and the GTK/Java bindings.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
I'm sure he'll have a laser designator focused on bin Ladin's backside soon enough... ;-)
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
http://www.longbow.co.uk/lb2/kosovo_apaches.html
Good link, thanks. The relevant point (to the current situation) is that they weren't employed because it was viewed as a step towards a ground war. Its fairly clear we'll have a ground war in Afghanistan.
Personally, I'd rather be on the side with the Apaches. :-) Even the 30mm chain gun with depleted U rounds is formidable.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Tech is giving us several strong advantages that the Afghanis lack:
- Excellent recon capability (drones, satellites, etc.).
- Night vision, ground and air
- Air superiority
- Precision guided munitions
- Vastly superior munitions in general, including cluster bombs and scatterable (air/artillery deployed) mines.
- Heavier artillery.
And don't forget, God fights on the side with the heaviest artillery!Seriously, the various technologies, especially recon and night vision, should make for a very decisive advantage. The only thing that really concerns me is the idea of troops going into the caves, which sounds very perilous. I hope they come up with a better tactic for the bunkers.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
The Apache does require serious maintenance in the field, which the Army is well equipped to provide. If for some reason maintenance couldn't be done, then the Apache force's effectiveness would falter fairly quickly - but there is no indication that is will be the case anytime soon.
When well maintained, the Apache performs very effectively, as was seen in Desert Storm. Many had expressed concern about sand in the turbines, but it turned out to be a non-issue.
To give you an idea of how respected the Apache was by the Iraqis, remember that several hundred troops surrendered to a single Apache in Desert Storm. It is also the premier anti-vehicle helicopter in the world - no one disputes the effectiveness of the Hellfire missile, with a range of 6+ km.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
I took his reference to be to the 5,000+ dead here in the US - which qualifies as dreadful in my book.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Aha...Lord Acton was the perceptive one who said this!
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
I'm not claiming I have the 'right to anonymity'. I'm claiming I have the right to not be constantly and clandestinely monitored in public places. This should come under "unreasonable search and seizure" as far as I'm concerned. In a similar vein, it was (thankfully) recently ruled that a search warrant is required to use advanced technology (like radar or IR cameras) to monitor a suspect's home. I maintain my body deserves the same rights and privileges as my house.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for catching terrorists and making America safer. Just as long as we don't throw out the baby with the bathwater...and I'm sure there are better ways that won't drastically alter our way of life.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
-atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.
That should be 'tolerance'. I guess Mensa's standards are slipping...and this was the most ironic thing in your post. ;-)
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Damn, you're right. I always wanted to be (potentially at least) constantly monitored by the government whenever I'm in a public place. I'm sure no one operating such systems would ever abuse them, or send the KGB (er, Office of Homeland Security) to roust someone just because they were looking suspicious. And of course the error rate on facial recognition must be one in a billion...right?
Also, this erosion of our natural (and Constitutional) right to privacy wouldn't send us further down the slippery slope to ever more intrusive and totalitarian government monitoring...right?
Fool.
"Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--Ben Franklin--
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
--unknown (by me at least;)--
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
But, hey, what's the problem with that? You got something to hide?!?
"Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--Ben Franklin--
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
The article's spiked chair being useable by cardholders/citizens only and the other link to the wearable camera is an allusion to the underpinnings of fascism.
Not necessarily fascism, but totalitarianism of some sort. The communists weren't fascists, but the Lubyanka KGB headquarters wasn't a pleasant place in the old days. There are frightening possibilities in "totalitarian democracy".
I get worried about the direction the US government is taking towards us.
I agree. In my greviously undermoderated earlier post on the subject ;-) I expressed similar concerns about the inevitable knee-jerk response to recent events. Lawmakers don't have any tools besides passing laws, and laws are generally permanent (on a related topic, there should at least be a period where an existing law must be removed from the books in order to enact a new one - maybe even two should be removed for awhile).
Half my company is foreigners, and good ones at that. The plausibility that they will become suspect or deported is minimal, but given some of the new legislation in the mill, it is possible to deport resident aliens if they contributed to an organization that terrorizes or makes threats.
That isn't a bad thing necessarily...what organizations do you support that "terrorize or make threats"?
That could conceivably include Greenpeace.
You say that like its a bad thing! ;-)
OK, I do see your point about being deported for supporting Greenpeace being a bit unexpected...but Greenpeace has supported things like tree spiking in the past. I suspect a logger minus an arm from a failed chain saw blade would be inclined to class such actions as "terrorist", and I find it hard to disagree. Let's not have a double standard where such acts are concerned...
Expatriate resident aliens are the best people, most of the time. They are not eligible for welfare, must take care of themselves, do no vote and pay taxes. I would fight to defend the rights of my friends at work.
Personally, I'm not too happy with the powers that be importing cheap foreign labor to compete with me, in order to maintain high profit margins and high executive wages and perks. Isn't it great that the H1-B limits were increased so much last year? Of course, now the economy is tanking and many 'information workers' are out of work. Gee, I bet those low-paid H1-B folk are doing better than average at job retention...as in fact you apparently confirmed (at least in your case) with your "Half my company is foreigners" comment earlier. Just let me know when H1-B limitations are relaxed for CEOs...
The advent of the Orwellian era is near, I urge everyone to go to the EFF (www.eff.org) as soon as possible and write the senators and congressmen. And if you are from the EU or Canada or some other place, write them too. I'm still in shock about Skylarov not even getting a semblance of habeas corpus, and is being tried on laws that do not apply to him or what he did. And now the SSSCA and the Anti-Terrorism (Implement Fascism) bills by Adolph Ashcroft.
I am hurt by what happened September 11th. Black ops, special ops and "surgical" retaliation is a good thing. But suspending the rights of people who aren't even Arabic, and coining new criteria for "cyber-terrorism," proposing national ID cards and indiscriminately deporting people is NOT a smart thing to do. And developing legislation with such broad and far reaching wording is dangerous to everyone the world over.
I generally agree with all of this...if anything I think it should be made clear that all changes to Constitutional freedoms will be temporary until the present heightened threat of terrorism is ended, i.e. its an "emergency" measure.
The brain drain will begin, where mega corps of the US will have expatriates arrested for violating something inane. Soon, all the people will stop coming because they are afraid. And possible the greatest nation for development with the soundest fiscal policy will become and intellectual pariah.
Since even after such laws America will still be more free than 90% of the world, I somehow doubt this will happen anytime soon. Regardless, I'm sure we'll somehow muddle through with just the intellectual horsepower available in the US. :-)
Remember, stay moderate. Don't jump to conclusions about things, and make sure to check out the art in these articles, its an expression of what's to come.
"What's to come" only if we let it.
"Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--Ben Franklin--
"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."
--Thomas Jefferson--
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Wow, well that was a lot longer than originally intended. Congratulations if you made it this far... ;-)
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
No, I don't. The culture at NVIDIA comes mainly from an SGI background, so OpenGL is something of a religion there. Further, unlike some companies, NVIDIA seems to understand the positive feedback effect of open APIs (just not Open Source, yet).
So, NVIDIA will have to be content with the current situation: "It runs at 30 FPS on the Radeon, but at 80 FPS on a Geforce 3!". ;-)
--- Example: ... "It's the hottest game of the year and they don't take ATI." (Sung to the toon of a Visa comercial. It's in Nvidias best intrest to make this happen. Tho maybe not in the markets best interest.
The current (OpenGL) situation is one where vendor-specific extensions are used to expose advanced functionality (shaders primarily). This means diffent paths through large portions of OpenGL based rendering engines. This is actually closer to 'NVIDIA specific' games, but NVIDIA knows that ISVs will just migrate to Direct3D where those features are properly abstracted. DirectX 8.0 has incorporated these features into the base API (and NVIDIA is just another player there, although it had a hand in defining the spec - just as it will with OpenGL 2.0).
OpenGL faces losing many ISVs unless there are standard ways to access these features. THAT is the motivation behind OpenGL 2.0. If you want strong, cross-platform 3D capabilities, do whatever you can to support OpenGL. OpenGL 2.0 looks like a great evolutionary improvement, and should continue to spank Direct3D in most respects. It certainly will in the area of Linux support. ;-)
If you're interested in OpenGL programming, there are many great resources on the web, including the The Official OpenGL Site and The OpenGL GameDev Mailing List.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Certainly! First, that such worms affecting Microsoft servers are very good for Unix/Linux business! :-)
Secondly, that 'integrating' everything under the sun into the OS leads to security holes and maintenance problems.
Finally, that Open Source is better in terms of the actual number of security holes - which will certainly decrease over time (which is apparently not the case with Microsoft products).
186,282 mi/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
186,282 mi/s...not just a good idea
That's nice, dogbot. Now, please point us to all of your 3D games written in hand-optimized assembly. Surely you wouldn't use the less efficient C or C++?!? ;-)
Java is making tremendous performance strides all the time. Further, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that you could write a game using gcc 3.0's Java support that'd be indistinguishable performance-wise from the same game done using C++.
A couple of relevant links:
Arkanae
Grand Canyon Demo
186,282 mi/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
What new types? Long is already 64 bits, as is (of course) double. Memory addressing issues won't be a factor, since they are entirely hidden from the programmer.
186,282 mi/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
186,282 mi/s...not just a good idea, its the law!