You can have no business model, no immediate prospects for profit, be crippled by lawsuits, and have the little service you offer stifled by court order - yet still walk home with $15 million extra in your pocket.
Because if you did, they should've known that prime factorization is not considered an NP-hard problem, but is more likely in neither P nor the hard subset of NP.
(Incidentally, it has been proved that either P=NP, or there exist problems that are neither in P nor NP-hard, of which prime-fac is believed to be one.)
This is slightly offtopic, but Apple had another project called Cocoa which was supposed to be a visual programming language for kids to use. Anyone know about what happened to it?
You know, I swore I was going to see the next inexplicably popular collectible item coming - classic arcade games, those postcards for defunct dotcoms from the free dispensers in coffeeshops and bars, etc. But sure enough, I miss out on the next big thing, the mighty AOL CD that has been keeping my coffee table ring-free. Just goes to show you. I'll never throw anything out again, ever.
Well, if they perform calculations N times over, they could get accuracy of 99.8% to the Nth power at 1/N the speed. That could be a useful technique in upping the accuracy while still getting reasonably fast computation.
I thought there already was one, called Interlink
on
GOVNET In the Works
·
· Score: 2
or something similar, which used the same protocols as TCP/IP, but over private lines which encrypted the data at the hardware level. Anyone have more info?
Someday Microsoft will use this power to push around the record companies, just as PC manufacturers were bullied through oppressive contracts. Someone needs to teach them some history.
Try bringing up LimeWire, BearShare, WinMX, etc. and looking for MIchael Jackson's new single (which was released with this "protection"). Count the hits you get.
I think some Mono developers would disagree with that.
"Linux is not trying to be a Windows clone, instead it is a rather successful Unix clone."
Well, "Linux" isn't trying to be anything. But the current trend is towards getting Windows users to like Linux by offering Windows-esque functionality. As others have said, what about GNOME, KDE, etc.? What is Ximian trying to do with its desktop environment?
"An operating system that addresses computing in a way that MSFT's don't? Do you mean like SE Linux [nsa.gov] or RTLinux [rtlinux.org]?"
Yes, I do, although I was thinking more along the lines of more general-purpose development. These are projects to fill specific niches.
"You are trying to encourage Linux to be "innovative" by using ideas from Microsoft? "
I'm saying that we should not be rejecting ideas because they come from Microsoft, and this may serve as an inspiration for new open-source technology. This could serve as a springboard for future development of Linux.
Of course, many of you, being established developers, would probably be opposed to adding intelligence into an OS, preferring to work at a lower level. That's fine, but I'd like to think that development doesn't need to stand still. I think that the option of a "smarter" OS is a positive development.
There are some sound ideas here for future directions in Linux development - and they've already been thought up for you here.
One big problem Linux development will face is the notion that devs are playing catch-up with MS with projects like Mono. (We blast Microsoft for its claim that it is an innovator, but has there been much innovation in Linux kernel devlelopment lately?) Instead of trying to build a Windows clone, we should build up a system that addresses computing in a way that MS system's dont.
If this is GPLed, where's the source? I couldn't find it. I downloaded the OS and tried it out a bit, and it actually seems quite good. Mind you, without a TCP/IP stack and such, it's pretty useless, of course, but whomever was behind this is clearly pretty good with the assembly. I'd love to see if the code is even remotely maintainable.
Careful about lumping MS and MSR together. The MSR department really is a separate entity from the rest of MS. I know many people who've been part of it in some fashion, and the impression one gets is that, in practice, they seem to be more about prestige and providing legitimacy to MS than providing actual innovation for future products.
The author compares writing programs to building a house - adding on unneeded features, he says, is "horrible design". However, one of the most important issues with code that is of less importance in construction is scalability. You don't expect your house to hold the proper framework for an eventual skyscraper. This is routinely expected of computer programs; software that does the job will live and grow until it ceases to perform. Thus his argument for minimality based on home design is somewhat inappropriate.
Re:software is incredibly complex...
on
Software Aesthetics
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I think that's a pretty good comparison. Organisms are also buggy creatures with security holes, serious design flaws and legacy code (e.g. the appendix). But hey, life is proprietary. You know, if God/Allah/(insert your Creator here) would just release the source code...
"Course, one has to consider he's MAKING politics by doing this. ^_~"
He's not making politics. The politics was already there; sadly, that's the way things work. We should be glad that money found its way into the hands of someone more enlightened who is willing to make an important point with it.
Slashdot Mirror
"and makes some pretty far-reaching claims (object-oriented programming)? "
The first true object-oriented programming language, Smalltalk, was developed at Xerox PARC. It's not really a far-reaching claim.
You can have no business model, no immediate prospects for profit, be crippled by lawsuits, and have the little service you offer stifled by court order - yet still walk home with $15 million extra in your pocket.
I bet Shawn Fanning has no regrets.
Guess it's time to find that one-way function whose inverse is EXPSPACE-complete!
Or better yet, undecidable altogether. Good luck on that one.
Because if you did, they should've known that prime factorization is not considered an NP-hard problem, but is more likely in neither P nor the hard subset of NP.
(Incidentally, it has been proved that either P=NP, or there exist problems that are neither in P nor NP-hard, of which prime-fac is believed to be one.)
This is slightly offtopic, but Apple had another project called Cocoa which was supposed to be a visual programming language for kids to use. Anyone know about what happened to it?
You know, I swore I was going to see the next inexplicably popular collectible item coming - classic arcade games, those postcards for defunct dotcoms from the free dispensers in coffeeshops and bars, etc. But sure enough, I miss out on the next big thing, the mighty AOL CD that has been keeping my coffee table ring-free. Just goes to show you. I'll never throw anything out again, ever.
They could plausibly get INaccuracy of .2% to the Nth power. Whoops That's more like it. :-)
Well, if they perform calculations N times over, they could get accuracy of 99.8% to the Nth power at 1/N the speed. That could be a useful technique in upping the accuracy while still getting reasonably fast computation.
a man turned his back to the camera and opened wide ...
or something similar, which used the same protocols as TCP/IP, but over private lines which encrypted the data at the hardware level. Anyone have more info?
Someday Microsoft will use this power to push around the record companies, just as PC manufacturers were bullied through oppressive contracts. Someone needs to teach them some history.
Try bringing up LimeWire, BearShare, WinMX, etc. and looking for MIchael Jackson's new single (which was released with this "protection"). Count the hits you get.
Whoops. Guess that didn't work so well.
Now all the Microdroids will scream "HA! See?! Linux users can get worms too!"
"Mono has nothing to do with Linux development. "
I think some Mono developers would disagree with that.
"Linux is not trying to be a Windows clone, instead it is a rather successful Unix clone."
Well, "Linux" isn't trying to be anything. But the current trend is towards getting Windows users to like Linux by offering Windows-esque functionality. As others have said, what about GNOME, KDE, etc.? What is Ximian trying to do with its desktop environment?
"An operating system that addresses computing in a way that MSFT's don't? Do you mean like SE Linux [nsa.gov] or RTLinux [rtlinux.org]?"
Yes, I do, although I was thinking more along the lines of more general-purpose development. These are projects to fill specific niches.
"You are trying to encourage Linux to be "innovative" by using ideas from Microsoft? "
I'm saying that we should not be rejecting ideas because they come from Microsoft, and this may serve as an inspiration for new open-source technology. This could serve as a springboard for future development of Linux.
Of course, many of you, being established developers, would probably be opposed to adding intelligence into an OS, preferring to work at a lower level. That's fine, but I'd like to think that development doesn't need to stand still. I think that the option of a "smarter" OS is a positive development.
There are some sound ideas here for future directions in Linux development - and they've already been thought up for you here.
One big problem Linux development will face is the notion that devs are playing catch-up with MS with projects like Mono. (We blast Microsoft for its claim that it is an innovator, but has there been much innovation in Linux kernel devlelopment lately?) Instead of trying to build a Windows clone, we should build up a system that addresses computing in a way that MS system's dont.
Perhaps, but there's another problem: air. You'd need a hole somewhere, or some sort of ventilation, or they'd have asphyxated by now.
No jab at VA intended, but wouldn't $10 million practically be their entire market cap now?
"and the anniversary of the start of the 1978 Camp David Peace Accord talks... "
Ironic? How about intentional?
If this is GPLed, where's the source? I couldn't find it. I downloaded the OS and tried it out a bit, and it actually seems quite good. Mind you, without a TCP/IP stack and such, it's pretty useless, of course, but whomever was behind this is clearly pretty good with the assembly. I'd love to see if the code is even remotely maintainable.
Careful about lumping MS and MSR together. The MSR department really is a separate entity from the rest of MS. I know many people who've been part of it in some fashion, and the impression one gets is that, in practice, they seem to be more about prestige and providing legitimacy to MS than providing actual innovation for future products.
The author compares writing programs to building a house - adding on unneeded features, he says, is "horrible design". However, one of the most important issues with code that is of less importance in construction is scalability. You don't expect your house to hold the proper framework for an eventual skyscraper. This is routinely expected of computer programs; software that does the job will live and grow until it ceases to perform. Thus his argument for minimality based on home design is somewhat inappropriate.
I think that's a pretty good comparison. Organisms are also buggy creatures with security holes, serious design flaws and legacy code (e.g. the appendix). But hey, life is proprietary. You know, if God/Allah/(insert your Creator here) would just release the source code ...
I think the poster was just referring to the billionaire's club, of which Bill is probably the most notable member.
"Course, one has to consider he's MAKING politics by doing this. ^_~"
He's not making politics. The politics was already there; sadly, that's the way things work. We should be glad that money found its way into the hands of someone more enlightened who is willing to make an important point with it.