When I try to use photoshop I can FEEL myself getting older. IMO, 256 x2 DIMM is not enough RAM for all of these awesome apps I have on it.
Photoshop is emulated and that apparently sucks extra RAM. I don't have an Intel Mac, but I'm reading recommendations that you want 2GB (!) if you're seriously using the rosetta emulator. On my PPC, I'm happy with 1GB, not so happy with 512MB.
Hollywood is full of rich social liberals that do a lot of political fundrasing. The position isn't consistent, but then again copyright reform is not exactly a mainstream political issue.
Memory protection is overrated anyway. We should all go back to using MacOS 9, where every program was pretty much an "extension" of every other program. In fact, maybe Firefox should be extended to include a complete MacOS Toolbox API, and then we can run all of our software within Firefox. As long as programmers don't create bugs, it would work great.
I should follow up and say that I actually am a strong supporter of most of the EFF's goals. It's their methods and rhetoric which I find to be largely bogus and incredulous.
Because they wear their goals on their sleeve and aren't pretending to have some bogus policy wonk solution to make everybody happy. Does the EFF really support some mandatory RIAA Tax, or are they just trying to condone piracy with a wink? They're not fooling anybody.
And, I'm pretty sure the Piracy Party is not supposed to be a 100% serious organization.
You assume the political establishment sees the EFF as legit. At best they're perceived as gadflies or the ACLU B-Team. At worst, pirates or piracy sympathies.
It's all about the cash. Votes are just something to make you feel like you have a representative government.
Just a quick reality check to counter this sort of complete cyncism -- Crappy popular culture is pretty much the only thing of value that the US exports nowdays. The entertainment business is a critical national industry. So, of course politicians naturally support it.
Not to mention Hollywood being the largest industry in California, the most populous state. I can tell you that here in CA politicans aren't pro-*AA because of the money, but simply because that's what the jobs and economy is based on.
Entertainment is pretty much the perfect political storm -- you've got unions, you've got social liberals, you've got big business, you've got finance, you've got cultural imperalists, and a host of other groups supporting them. It's perfectly natural they have a ton of political power -- they don't *need* to bribe people.
There needs to be opposition to educate people and prevent the draconian types of proposals that always seem to be floating around in congressional committees. But ultimately is the US political establishment going to do anything to undermine entertainment? Never. What's good for Hollywood is good for America.
And the Supreme Court has ruled that those terms mean whatever Congress thinks they should mean, no matter how stupid. Which makes it a purely political problem right now. At least for the next decade or two when you might get a SC with a different attitude.
I actually have a lot more respect for Pirates that wear it on their sleeve than the usual Slashdot Bitch about RIAA/MPAA/BitTorrent/DRM/etc that tries to dance around the issue or pretend it isn't really about downloading whatever you please for free.
Take the EFF -- one one hand they try to be a legit public policy/civil rights organization, and on the other they wink and nod to downloaders with slick ads in Wired magazine. It's duplicitious and undermines their credibility. It's better to be honest and say ARRR. Go Pirate Party!
The folks like yourself that think this is about google searches, myspace, and ebay don't get it. It's not about web content. It's about who you'll be buying your pay-per-view television content from, or where your phone service comes from.
AT&T wants to roll out 10mbs connections specifically for their own content. 1.5mbs for everything else. If Google wants in on the fast pipe, AT&T wants to make them pay. That's the issue.
My question for Hakon: HTML became popular because it was so simple to use that everyone could use it. CSS by contrast is so complicated that only fulltime professionals understand it. Will CSS stay an elite thing?
Yeah, HTML was originally designed to have simple tags such as B, I, U, and then some PhD Wanker Extreme (sorry Hakon, but it's true) came along and decided they needed at least three different properties: font-weight, font-style, and text-decoration. I'm sure many late nights were spent debating the exact genus and species of something that's never been modeled as more than one property in a GUI program. And that's just the font styles, it gets more and more wankerish as you delve into the complicated stuff.
A total disregard for consistency. Every HTML page contains 3 languages for the same thing: HTML, CSS and javascript.
Nutscrape had something called JavaScript Style Sheets... and even though the implementation was problematic and proprietary, I can't help to think that everything would have nicer if the style model was built on the browser's scripting capabilities. Not only would having variables and so on be nice, it would nicely blur the lines between a hack and a solution removing a lot of the distastful academic purity from layout implementations.
It still feels like a cop-out or a kludge. As if they neglected a whole series of use-cases when designing CSS2... and then at the last minute just hacked in "DUH, HTML Tables Work, So Act Like A Table" rather than breaking out those features as seperate properties.
(Note that there's a whole set of complicated display rules with HTML table cells that one might not want if they are just simply trying horizontally centering something.)
In a way it's good that IE doesn't support this, because it's forced people to learn how to do columns and all sorts of other interesting tricks using only basic CSS-P. Otherwise sites would still be built on the table model, only using "display:table-cell" rather than "TD".
Why should anybody create a distributed application when a simple library API is almost always sufficient.
People rarely start out with the goal of buiding a distributed application. It's either a question of scalability, or simply requirements issues such as interaction with multiple systems, distributed transactions etc.
Also, in the Java and DCOM/MTS systems, there's not an enormous difference between using the distributed component and using a library API, which is also component-based. The simplicity is in the abstraction.
Either that or the Origami devices that actually showed up are all underwhelming, ugly, and expensive. Really not much to hype right now... wait for version 3.
Why shouldn't a driver malfunction just cause a brief screen flicker... followed by the OS detecting that something improper has happened, followed by a driver and hardware reset, continue merrily on its way?
XP does this, at least sometimes -- you end up with the SVGA driver and a dialog box that your video card has crashed.
Talk about not knowing your history. IBM PCs were aroun $10,000, while the Apple ][ was about $2,000. On top of that, the 80s personal computer market had MANY other players besides Apple and IBM.
The Apple ][ (and most other PCs of the era) shipped with Microsoft software, so that doesn't really speak to the point.
Too much paranoia. None of the stuff that gives Apple a competitive advantage was open sourced. (You may have noticed the ads talk about iPhoto and not Mach messaging.) In fact the OS X kernel is probably the weakest part of the whole system, and probably offers very little to Microsoft who already has a decent OS kernel. This has nothing to do with Microsoft and everything to do with piracy potentially cutting into their hardware revenues.
Brilliant engineers? Most datacenters are staffed with operation monkeys and rent-a-cops. You don't really need a lot of highly paid geniuses actually on site. I bet a lot of the jobs will be local, and Google will (or have) set up offices in Portland for the folks who don't have to be staring at wires all day.
If, however, you pick a handful of co-operative package repositories (e.g. dag + rpmforge only, or fedora extras + livna only, or ATrpms only), things work out pretty well.
You're the only person in this thread to state the problem succinctly and accurately. The third party repositories for Fedora are funky and incompatible. If there was a single "universe" repository, I don't think there would be that much difference from the end user's POV.
Slashdot Mirror
Caught me talking out of my ass. Perhaps technology is larger as well.
When I try to use photoshop I can FEEL myself getting older. IMO, 256 x2 DIMM is not enough RAM for all of these awesome apps I have on it.
Photoshop is emulated and that apparently sucks extra RAM. I don't have an Intel Mac, but I'm reading recommendations that you want 2GB (!) if you're seriously using the rosetta emulator. On my PPC, I'm happy with 1GB, not so happy with 512MB.
Well, that's US consumer spending. But what's the export economy?
Hollywood is full of rich social liberals that do a lot of political fundrasing. The position isn't consistent, but then again copyright reform is not exactly a mainstream political issue.
Memory protection is overrated anyway. We should all go back to using MacOS 9, where every program was pretty much an "extension" of every other program. In fact, maybe Firefox should be extended to include a complete MacOS Toolbox API, and then we can run all of our software within Firefox. As long as programmers don't create bugs, it would work great.
I should follow up and say that I actually am a strong supporter of most of the EFF's goals. It's their methods and rhetoric which I find to be largely bogus and incredulous.
Yes, that is just it. They'll have a lot of trouble connecting their national platform to a local agenda in any coherent manner.
Because they wear their goals on their sleeve and aren't pretending to have some bogus policy wonk solution to make everybody happy. Does the EFF really support some mandatory RIAA Tax, or are they just trying to condone piracy with a wink? They're not fooling anybody.
And, I'm pretty sure the Piracy Party is not supposed to be a 100% serious organization.
You assume the political establishment sees the EFF as legit. At best they're perceived as gadflies or the ACLU B-Team. At worst, pirates or piracy sympathies.
What sort of IP Reform is needed in a New Jersey town? This platform is inheritly national.
It's all about the cash. Votes are just something to make you feel like you have a representative government.
Just a quick reality check to counter this sort of complete cyncism -- Crappy popular culture is pretty much the only thing of value that the US exports nowdays. The entertainment business is a critical national industry. So, of course politicians naturally support it.
Not to mention Hollywood being the largest industry in California, the most populous state. I can tell you that here in CA politicans aren't pro-*AA because of the money, but simply because that's what the jobs and economy is based on.
Entertainment is pretty much the perfect political storm -- you've got unions, you've got social liberals, you've got big business, you've got finance, you've got cultural imperalists, and a host of other groups supporting them. It's perfectly natural they have a ton of political power -- they don't *need* to bribe people.
There needs to be opposition to educate people and prevent the draconian types of proposals that always seem to be floating around in congressional committees. But ultimately is the US political establishment going to do anything to undermine entertainment? Never. What's good for Hollywood is good for America.
And the Supreme Court has ruled that those terms mean whatever Congress thinks they should mean, no matter how stupid. Which makes it a purely political problem right now. At least for the next decade or two when you might get a SC with a different attitude.
I actually have a lot more respect for Pirates that wear it on their sleeve than the usual Slashdot Bitch about RIAA/MPAA/BitTorrent/DRM/etc that tries to dance around the issue or pretend it isn't really about downloading whatever you please for free.
Take the EFF -- one one hand they try to be a legit public policy/civil rights organization, and on the other they wink and nod to downloaders with slick ads in Wired magazine. It's duplicitious and undermines their credibility. It's better to be honest and say ARRR. Go Pirate Party!
The folks like yourself that think this is about google searches, myspace, and ebay don't get it. It's not about web content. It's about who you'll be buying your pay-per-view television content from, or where your phone service comes from.
AT&T wants to roll out 10mbs connections specifically for their own content. 1.5mbs for everything else. If Google wants in on the fast pipe, AT&T wants to make them pay. That's the issue.
My question for Hakon: HTML became popular because it was so simple to use that everyone could use it. CSS by contrast is so complicated that only fulltime professionals understand it. Will CSS stay an elite thing?
... and even though the implementation was problematic and proprietary, I can't help to think that everything would have nicer if the style model was built on the browser's scripting capabilities. Not only would having variables and so on be nice, it would nicely blur the lines between a hack and a solution removing a lot of the distastful academic purity from layout implementations.
Yeah, HTML was originally designed to have simple tags such as B, I, U, and then some PhD Wanker Extreme (sorry Hakon, but it's true) came along and decided they needed at least three different properties: font-weight, font-style, and text-decoration. I'm sure many late nights were spent debating the exact genus and species of something that's never been modeled as more than one property in a GUI program. And that's just the font styles, it gets more and more wankerish as you delve into the complicated stuff.
A total disregard for consistency. Every HTML page contains 3 languages for the same thing: HTML, CSS and javascript.
Nutscrape had something called JavaScript Style Sheets
It still feels like a cop-out or a kludge. As if they neglected a whole series of use-cases when designing CSS2 ... and then at the last minute just hacked in "DUH, HTML Tables Work, So Act Like A Table" rather than breaking out those features as seperate properties.
(Note that there's a whole set of complicated display rules with HTML table cells that one might not want if they are just simply trying horizontally centering something.)
In a way it's good that IE doesn't support this, because it's forced people to learn how to do columns and all sorts of other interesting tricks using only basic CSS-P. Otherwise sites would still be built on the table model, only using "display:table-cell" rather than "TD".
Why should anybody create a distributed application when a simple library API is almost always sufficient.
People rarely start out with the goal of buiding a distributed application. It's either a question of scalability, or simply requirements issues such as interaction with multiple systems, distributed transactions etc.
Also, in the Java and DCOM/MTS systems, there's not an enormous difference between using the distributed component and using a library API, which is also component-based. The simplicity is in the abstraction.
Either that or the Origami devices that actually showed up are all underwhelming, ugly, and expensive. Really not much to hype right now ... wait for version 3.
Why shouldn't a driver malfunction just cause a brief screen flicker... followed by the OS detecting that something improper has happened, followed by a driver and hardware reset, continue merrily on its way?
XP does this, at least sometimes -- you end up with the SVGA driver and a dialog box that your video card has crashed.
Talk about not knowing your history. IBM PCs were aroun $10,000, while the Apple ][ was about $2,000. On top of that, the 80s personal computer market had MANY other players besides Apple and IBM.
The Apple ][ (and most other PCs of the era) shipped with Microsoft software, so that doesn't really speak to the point.
Sort of. They started out writing the whole thing themselves, but soon were licensing BASIC (which was the user interface) from Microsoft.
Thank you for showing up to post something informative and not astroturfy, Dave.
Too much paranoia. None of the stuff that gives Apple a competitive advantage was open sourced. (You may have noticed the ads talk about iPhoto and not Mach messaging.) In fact the OS X kernel is probably the weakest part of the whole system, and probably offers very little to Microsoft who already has a decent OS kernel. This has nothing to do with Microsoft and everything to do with piracy potentially cutting into their hardware revenues.
Brilliant engineers? Most datacenters are staffed with operation monkeys and rent-a-cops. You don't really need a lot of highly paid geniuses actually on site. I bet a lot of the jobs will be local, and Google will (or have) set up offices in Portland for the folks who don't have to be staring at wires all day.
If, however, you pick a handful of co-operative package repositories (e.g. dag + rpmforge only, or fedora extras + livna only, or ATrpms only), things work out pretty well.
You're the only person in this thread to state the problem succinctly and accurately. The third party repositories for Fedora are funky and incompatible. If there was a single "universe" repository, I don't think there would be that much difference from the end user's POV.