Unless you are a carpenter or brick layer, you will not get exercise at work. So don't even bother bringing in weights or taking the stairs instead of the elevator - that's all too low impact. Changing your diet can be very difficult. Start easy: go to McDonalds, but no more deep fried potatoes. Eat two burgers instead.
Most importantly, you have to exercise, every single day. Here are my steps to sucess, granted they require some willpower:
1) Buy an Ipod - it helps the pain go away if you're listening to tunes. I recommend gangster rap.
2) Commit to exercising 5 days/week and do not ever miss unless you are dying. Go out in bad weather. Make those adventure racers on OLN look like pussies. It will eventually become part of your routine because endorphins are just as addictive as nicotine.
3) Lifting is great, but by the sound of it you want to lose weight. Run or bike it off. You need to get your heart rate about 20% above normal: low stress cardio. Too low, and you're strolling around the block with grandma. Too high, and your body get's desperate for energy and burns muscle instead of fat.
I am an avid BitTorrent user when it comes to downloading LEGAL stuff like Linux distros. But Bytemonsoon got what was coming to them. A quick glance at the first few entries showed "Win XP Key Generator.rar" and "X-Men 2." To answer the question, "Will corporate pressure kill BitTorrent?" My answer is no, but idiots like the Bytemonsoon webmasters will.
To put it another way, too many people with technical knowledge to create or expand upon something wonderful such as BitTorrent allow their greed to cloud their judgement. It is possible to be greedy over non-physical posessions. Just think about how many people you know that horde movies and music, just to have them, most of which they have never even bothered to play.
I agree with Mike in that the article is way too compressed. It reads as if the author threw it together as a homework assignment, 5 minutes before class started. Lot's of great material, lot's of neat things to pique my curiosity about "alternate" filesystems. But, it needs to slow down, explain some concepts and then demonstrate their usefulness. The paper should have been 3 times its current length.
Having just finished an advanced degree in Computer Engineering, I feel that I may have a little more experience than Mr. Gorman in the matter of PhD-worthy work. I'd like to point out that a computer program, whether in source or binary form, is not enough to earn a PhD. A dissertation, to earn one's PhD, is a written work that documents the research and describes the methodologies used to arrive at the final product (the fiber map program, in this case). Often, when the product is a computer program, the source is included as an appendix.
Considering that it's the data in the program that is sensitive and was time-consuming to compile, the algorithms themselves are pretty harmless. Why not call his dissertation "A Method for Mapping National-Scale Fiber Optic Networks," get his degree, feed the source to his dog, and get a job with the NSA?
Here it comes... I'm going to vent. How is that./ readers (clearly amongst the most well-educated of the 'net surfing masses) always fall for the bigger == better claim? First of all, Quake, or any computer game that I can think of, does not have multi-node support. You have to rewrite the code to support the PVM (Parallel Virtual Machine) message passing library, for example.
And it's not just with clusters we seem to have this problem. Let's look at Apple computers and the G5. A 64-bit machine will simply allow you to add/subtract/multiply/etc really big integers faster. How often do think you use numbers that large? Encrypting or decrypting emails is the only thing that comes to mind for even an "above average" user. Unless you run software that supports multiple processors such as web and database servers or want to watch a DVD while you play Quake, a multiprocessor machine is not for you. The relative performance increases are negligible. It's simply a marketing ploy that allows Apple to make a high profit on the low volume of units they ship. They throw an additional $300 uP in their computers and charge an extra $1000!
But in Apple's defense, their displays rock. Any luck getting one of those running on a PC? I'm done ranting. Have a nice day.
Come to think of it, SCO reminds me of my ice hockey team in high school. Once upon a time we were just OK, then in subsequent seasons we didn't win a single game. So what do losing hockey players do in the end of the 3rd period? Earn a little respect by playing dirty and getting some penalties before hitting the showers and going home.
What I'm getting at is that SCO has essentially no products, is going to tank within a few months, and this is a last resort attempt to gain a little cash for the shareholders. I truly doubt that this action against IBM or subsequent ones against Sun, MS, Apple, *BSD, or Linux distro X will ever come to fruition.
1) There is a time and a place for computer clubs (and drugs)... it's called college. It's the one place where both nerdy and self-destructive behavior can be enjoyed without the scrutiny of your peers.
2) Why not join a local LUG? Last I heard there were no age or height requirements.
I know it's not very nerd-like to say that Linus is wrong and that AMD sucks, but in the case of the Itanium, that is exactly how I feel. Intel/HP's Itanium architecture is perhaps the most advanced processor to hit the market and has tremendous potential (from a Computer Architecture point of view). Because it's so new, its performance will be aweful, but shall improve with time. Anyone remember the SuperSparc? It performed horribly and was soon replaced by the UltraSparc. As will the Itanium II replace the Itanium.
As for the emulation/legacy code argument, I say screw it. gcc is already ported to IA-64. And as a Linux user, most of my favorite open source programs can be ported with little difficulty.
GNU is not Unix. Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. Anyone who has ever done system programming for a Linux system could tell you that although it is close to the SVR4 conventions (such as in the acclaimed O'Reilly 'lion' book) it disobeys many of them because it's not quite System 5 compliant.
Is this really happening or is it early in the morning and I'm a sucker to a hoax?
People still use ICQ? Although I always believed ICQ to be vastly superior to AIM, nobody uses it anymore! Once day about two years ago I realized that I was only person actually online according to my ICQ contact list.
Anyone who knowns anything about Minix beyond the name of its famous creator and his battle with Linus, would tell you that it's all about the educational value. Had Tanenbaum allowed developers to do as they pleased with it, yeah it would be able to run RTCW and Mozilla, but Minix would lose it's ability to educate CS students. It would be spaghetti code similiar to the GNU/Linux kernel.
As far as I know, Minix is the only OS that comes with a textbook that teaches you how to hack it.
Itanium does have backwards compatibility: Q10. Will Itanium processor-based systems be compatible with IA-32 systems? Will IT be able to effortlessly migrate their systems to Itanium processor-based systems?
A10. Optimal performance for Itanium processor-based systems will be achieved with 64-bit software. The Intel Itanium processor supports 32-bit binary compatibility in hardware.
I honestly think we (the IBM PC users of Earth) should ditch IA-32 and use IA-64 as a stepping stone (future Itaniums will not have the binary compatibilty). The backwards compatibility is killing PC performance. Look at how high an x86 CPU has to be clocked just to achieve equal performance with a RISC computer. And higher clock rates == more heat and more power consumption.
~ SleezyG
"RISC: any computer announced after 1985."
-- Steven Przybylski
I have to agree, it's the economy that is responsible for lower music sales, not the lack of Napster. There are two obvious reasons that the poster failed to recognize (which are probably redundant by the time I manage to click the submit button):
1) You can still get anything you want on Gnutella.
2) We (the USA) are experiencing decade-high unemployment rates, which means less people have less money to spend on "stuff."
I don't think it really matters whether you're writing an engineering program, a game, or even an embedded application. It's a question of execution speed and code size versus the ability to manage the project. If you want something quick and dirty, procedural languages are the way to go. However, as the complexity and size of your code increases, the benefits of OOP (ease of debugging, high level of abstraction) far outweigh the extra development time and additional execution overhead in the compiled code.
Assuming that one agrees with the above statements (they are only theories about OOP vs. procedural languages), it should also be noted that the most expensive aspect of developing software is man-power. Thus, if a project is large, with lot's of people working on it, it becomes crucial to reduce the amount of time programmers spend communicating with each other. It follows that if OOP is easier to understand than procedural code, then you want to lower your costs by using OOP to reduce development time (because time == dollars paid to programmers). Naturally, there is an antithesis to this idea. If your project is small, with few programmers and already easy to understand, then using a procedural language will get the job done quickly, once again mimimizing programmer time.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless you are a carpenter or brick layer, you will not get exercise at work. So don't even bother bringing in weights or taking the stairs instead of the elevator - that's all too low impact. Changing your diet can be very difficult. Start easy: go to McDonalds, but no more deep fried potatoes. Eat two burgers instead.
Most importantly, you have to exercise, every single day. Here are my steps to sucess, granted they require some willpower:
1) Buy an Ipod - it helps the pain go away if you're listening to tunes. I recommend gangster rap.
2) Commit to exercising 5 days/week and do not ever miss unless you are dying. Go out in bad weather. Make those adventure racers on OLN look like pussies. It will eventually become part of your routine because endorphins are just as addictive as nicotine.
3) Lifting is great, but by the sound of it you want to lose weight. Run or bike it off. You need to get your heart rate about 20% above normal: low stress cardio. Too low, and you're strolling around the block with grandma. Too high, and your body get's desperate for energy and burns muscle instead of fat.
I am an avid BitTorrent user when it comes to downloading LEGAL stuff like Linux distros. But Bytemonsoon got what was coming to them. A quick glance at the first few entries showed "Win XP Key Generator.rar" and "X-Men 2." To answer the question, "Will corporate pressure kill BitTorrent?" My answer is no, but idiots like the Bytemonsoon webmasters will.
To put it another way, too many people with technical knowledge to create or expand upon something wonderful such as BitTorrent allow their greed to cloud their judgement. It is possible to be greedy over non-physical posessions. Just think about how many people you know that horde movies and music, just to have them, most of which they have never even bothered to play.
I agree with Mike in that the article is way too compressed. It reads as if the author threw it together as a homework assignment, 5 minutes before class started. Lot's of great material, lot's of neat things to pique my curiosity about "alternate" filesystems. But, it needs to slow down, explain some concepts and then demonstrate their usefulness. The paper should have been 3 times its current length.
Having just finished an advanced degree in Computer Engineering, I feel that I may have a little more experience than Mr. Gorman in the matter of PhD-worthy work. I'd like to point out that a computer program, whether in source or binary form, is not enough to earn a PhD. A dissertation, to earn one's PhD, is a written work that documents the research and describes the methodologies used to arrive at the final product (the fiber map program, in this case). Often, when the product is a computer program, the source is included as an appendix.
Considering that it's the data in the program that is sensitive and was time-consuming to compile, the algorithms themselves are pretty harmless. Why not call his dissertation "A Method for Mapping National-Scale Fiber Optic Networks," get his degree, feed the source to his dog, and get a job with the NSA?
I'm your neighbor and I just started reading Slashdot, you insensitive clod.
Here it comes... I'm going to vent. How is that ./ readers (clearly amongst the most well-educated of the 'net surfing masses) always fall for the bigger == better claim? First of all, Quake, or any computer game that I can think of, does not have multi-node support. You have to rewrite the code to support the PVM (Parallel Virtual Machine) message passing library, for example.
And it's not just with clusters we seem to have this problem. Let's look at Apple computers and the G5. A 64-bit machine will simply allow you to add/subtract/multiply/etc really big integers faster. How often do think you use numbers that large? Encrypting or decrypting emails is the only thing that comes to mind for even an "above average" user. Unless you run software that supports multiple processors such as web and database servers or want to watch a DVD while you play Quake, a multiprocessor machine is not for you. The relative performance increases are negligible. It's simply a marketing ploy that allows Apple to make a high profit on the low volume of units they ship. They throw an additional $300 uP in their computers and charge an extra $1000!
But in Apple's defense, their displays rock. Any luck getting one of those running on a PC? I'm done ranting. Have a nice day.
Come to think of it, SCO reminds me of my ice hockey team in high school. Once upon a time we were just OK, then in subsequent seasons we didn't win a single game. So what do losing hockey players do in the end of the 3rd period? Earn a little respect by playing dirty and getting some penalties before hitting the showers and going home.
What I'm getting at is that SCO has essentially no products, is going to tank within a few months, and this is a last resort attempt to gain a little cash for the shareholders. I truly doubt that this action against IBM or subsequent ones against Sun, MS, Apple, *BSD, or Linux distro X will ever come to fruition.
1) There is a time and a place for computer clubs (and drugs)... it's called college. It's the one place where both nerdy and self-destructive behavior can be enjoyed without the scrutiny of your peers.
2) Why not join a local LUG? Last I heard there were no age or height requirements.
I know it's not very nerd-like to say that Linus is wrong and that AMD sucks, but in the case of the Itanium, that is exactly how I feel. Intel/HP's Itanium architecture is perhaps the most advanced processor to hit the market and has tremendous potential (from a Computer Architecture point of view). Because it's so new, its performance will be aweful, but shall improve with time. Anyone remember the SuperSparc? It performed horribly and was soon replaced by the UltraSparc. As will the Itanium II replace the Itanium.
As for the emulation/legacy code argument, I say screw it. gcc is already ported to IA-64. And as a Linux user, most of my favorite open source programs can be ported with little difficulty.
GNU is not Unix.
Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. Anyone who has ever done system programming for a Linux system could tell you that although it is close to the SVR4 conventions (such as in the acclaimed O'Reilly 'lion' book) it disobeys many of them because it's not quite System 5 compliant.
Is this really happening or is it early in the morning and I'm a sucker to a hoax?
Well, talking to my dumbass friends sure beats talking to myself.
People still use ICQ? Although I always believed ICQ to be vastly superior to AIM, nobody uses it anymore! Once day about two years ago I realized that I was only person actually online according to my ICQ contact list.
Anyone who knowns anything about Minix beyond the name of its famous creator and his battle with Linus, would tell you that it's all about the educational value. Had Tanenbaum allowed developers to do as they pleased with it, yeah it would be able to run RTCW and Mozilla, but Minix would lose it's ability to educate CS students. It would be spaghetti code similiar to the GNU/Linux kernel.
As far as I know, Minix is the only OS that comes with a textbook that teaches you how to hack it.
Itanium does have backwards compatibility:
Q10. Will Itanium processor-based systems be compatible with IA-32 systems? Will IT be able to effortlessly migrate their systems to Itanium processor-based systems? A10. Optimal performance for Itanium processor-based systems will be achieved with 64-bit software. The Intel Itanium processor supports 32-bit binary compatibility in hardware.
from this link
I honestly think we (the IBM PC users of Earth) should ditch IA-32 and use IA-64 as a stepping stone (future Itaniums will not have the binary compatibilty). The backwards compatibility is killing PC performance. Look at how high an x86 CPU has to be clocked just to achieve equal performance with a RISC computer. And higher clock rates == more heat and more power consumption.
~ SleezyG
"RISC: any computer announced after 1985." -- Steven Przybylski
I have to agree, it's the economy that is responsible for lower music sales, not the lack of Napster. There are two obvious reasons that the poster failed to recognize (which are probably redundant by the time I manage to click the submit button):
1) You can still get anything you want on Gnutella.
2) We (the USA) are experiencing decade-high unemployment rates, which means less people have less money to spend on "stuff."
I don't think it really matters whether you're writing an engineering program, a game, or even an embedded application. It's a question of execution speed and code size versus the ability to manage the project. If you want something quick and dirty, procedural languages are the way to go. However, as the complexity and size of your code increases, the benefits of OOP (ease of debugging, high level of abstraction) far outweigh the extra development time and additional execution overhead in the compiled code.
Assuming that one agrees with the above statements (they are only theories about OOP vs. procedural languages), it should also be noted that the most expensive aspect of developing software is man-power. Thus, if a project is large, with lot's of people working on it, it becomes crucial to reduce the amount of time programmers spend communicating with each other. It follows that if OOP is easier to understand than procedural code, then you want to lower your costs by using OOP to reduce development time (because time == dollars paid to programmers). Naturally, there is an antithesis to this idea. If your project is small, with few programmers and already easy to understand, then using a procedural language will get the job done quickly, once again mimimizing programmer time.