Ill bet that 50% of Windows apps still crash and refuse to run at all on Wine. I doubt that many Wine users care about android, and would rather more advances had been made toward supporting 99% of windows apps (Windows Desktop apps on a phone, good god).
You have a really good point there. While generally I think its good for internet sites to be compelled to support SSL, there should be a way for the user to create exeption rules in the browser for these situations (as with an self signed cert). With adequate warnings similar to the self signed or expired cert screens. A setting should be included in the advanced section for setting up rules as well to permit non-SSL sites
I really do think that weaning the web off non-SSL HTTP is a good thing, I dont know how anyone can oppose protecting peoples privacy. Theres no cost any more to getting an TLS cert so theres just no excuse any more to not go HTTPS. The only issues was Lan IP addresses and maybe an exception should be made for private IP addresses. For all public IP addresses I would actually support throwing up an "insecure site" warning for all non-SSL sites that users have to click an exception button, then eventually requiring SSL of all web sites
The LAN issue is an interesting one, maybe Firefox should make an exception for the private IP addresses ranges. That would be reasonable. On the other hand, I am all for HTTPS for everything else, even eventually dropping non-SSL support altogether.
Meltdown is easier to exploit, The hacks will get better as well. So it is a very serious problem, information leaks can be very harmful, think passwords and encryption keys. These can then allow for write attacks. Don't underestimate the capabilities of people to find ways to exploit this. It may seem far fetched but time and time again far fetched things have a way of being turned into quite practical exploits.
Wasn't bitcoin always one big cluster due to the fact it eventually takes the power output of nuclear plants just to mine new coins. An activity which consumes vast physical resources for no tangible benefit, which makes the interest rates of the banking system look very reasonable in comparison. I am sure that the fact that it consumes vast resources and stressing infrastructure on something with no tangible value to society is a part of the reason China is taking it off line. A lot of hype over a fundamentally broken model, that is really not a currency anyway, but a wildly fluctuating and unstable mess, any real currency that acted this way would be a laughing stock.
This has long been a concern of direct rendering, giving direct access to video hardware to applications opens up a lot of possible bugs that did not exist.
It might be better to simply use GLX and send all of the OpenGL commands to the X server and have the X server handle the video card. Remember that the X server is being ported to use Mesa drivers with the Glamor project so the X server can send OpenGL commands through Mesa. I asked about this before , the geniuses that run X.org seem to be refusing to upgrade the GLX support to the latest OpenGL specifications, even though for situations like this it could really help and might be important for people that want to avoid the risks of direct rendering. or who want to use network transparency. Its quite foolish
Fahrenheit makes much more sense than Celsius for weather, because Fahrenheit is scaled better for weather temperature. 100 is pretty hot day and near the upper end of temperatures in many locations, and 0 is near the lower end of a weather temperature. In the Midwest US, its near perfect, most locations go up to around 100 F in summer and go down to near 0 F in winter. So you end up with less wasted scale. On Celsius, 35-100 is wasted since few places get that hot. This means when you say the 20s in Celsius, it means a wide range of temperature. If you say 80s in F its a much narrower range.
Maybe different scales for different purposes, Fahrenheit for weather, celsius for science.
With the foot, the foot always seems to be just right for measuring walls, ceilings, buildings. inches for smaller things like TVs. Centimeters are too small and meters are too big for many everyday object. So thats why with metric, you end up with either very large centimeter values or odd floating point meter values. Again, English measurements work better for everyday use.
I prefer to just stay with customary. in the USA, anyway, most containers in stores have both systems on packaging so you can use the system you prefer.
There is something artificial and Orwellian about metric, Its a synthetic system, a poor fit for everyday use, while customary measures feel more organic for everyday use. George Orwell mentioned this in relation to metric beer in 1984.
X11 is a vector protocol unlike VNC. If you use GLX over the X11 protocol, an app can send 3D OpenGL commands over the X connection over a network, this allows you to run apps on a different computer and display them to another computer and do it with a faster speed than a raster protocol. So X protocol isnt just for 2D, and its not outdated therefore, it has been able to do full 3D graphics for a very long time.
Once upon a time the fonts were rendered on the X server, the X client could just send the text and the server would render it. For whatever reason, they decided to change this. This was around the time the Render extension happened. This caused clients to switch to sending font bitmaps to the server and then composite the bitmaps together on the server for alpha transparency support. Alpha transparency could have been implemented on the server side font model, but they chose not to do this. There are some applications for the Render extension for fonts which are used inside a web page and for sending images to the X server and being able to reuse fonts and images on composite operations on the server without having to upload rasterized images everytime the applications window content layout changes, this could actually save resources for network transparency.
One thing that could have been done is to allow uploading of PNGs, JPGs and TTFs to the X server and have the X server rasterize them, this would make things work better over network connections, and allow the client to choose to use server side font rasteration with alpha transparency if the server has the font it needs. As others have mentioned, there was an X Font Server as well which the X server could download remote fonts from.
One of the things we hear from Wayland proponents is X11 hasnt been network transparent. This is not true, even Render should be useable over a network connection since you can upload your images to the server and composite them together on the server, GLX is certainly network transparent. Clients are supposed to be written so they fall back to sending any image data over the socket if shared memory is used. So shared memory while not useable for network transparency does not conflict with it since the client just falls back to sending image data over the wire.
X11 is more flexible than VNC since you can export single applications between different desktop sessions. There are even tools to move an X program from one X server to another so you can switch which computer or display an X program is displayed too. There are X based remote desktop tools. There were even programs like XMX that allowed you to multiplex an X application to multiple X servers simultaneously.
The legacy support in X does not consume a significant amount of resources, its very insignificant, so thats a false canard that should be soundly refuted. The core X protocol graphics primitives are simple and few in number so it takes little code to implement them. Increasingly, as well, there is a move to transition the X servers backend to use OpenGL mesa drivers so the X server will use the same drivers as the DRI programs, so these X 2D primatives will be rendered by the OpenGL driver code, which will avoid driver duplication and means the X 2D primatives and the 3D be rendered by the same code and drivers anyway, so the legacy X protocol support really does not use a significant amount of resources.
Has any solution been found to the problem that the amount of processing power needed for transactions is exploding, leading to entire nuclear power plants needed to conduct them (a little overexaggeration here).
markets can work beautifully in many cases since it allows consumers to decide how the money is spent and can allow choices and competition.
But, its time for some anti-gouging laws because this is getting outrageous. Don't confuse the issue of consumer driven choices on what they want to buy and the idea that we need some regulations here to stop the consumer from being abused by these kinds of tactics. An anti gouging law of course doesnt mandate the consumer what kind of vitamin to buy but would stop them from being gouged, so its not really a rabid anti-market thing.
Its not just this vitamin but other drugs are being hiked in this manner.
I also know that research on drugs does take place in a taxpayer funded manner. This is not a rebuke of markets since private investment can also fund many important drugs as well. Each comes with pros and cons so its a good idea to have both modes of research funding. Sometimes bureaucracies in government can hamper research and sometimes the risk averse nature of markets can so its good to be able to have one to balance the other, regarding things that are so critical in curing diseases.
One of the concerning things about it as well due to the failure of mechanical systems, it would seem such colonies would be constantly dependant on imports from earth to maintain it. Earth already has its own resource problems without supporting colonies on other planets. unless a colony can be completely self sufficient, it would damage earth's resources.
At best, it might be able to host a small scientific colony but the idea of any large scale population is really, really far fetched.
The absurdity of mars colonization can be shown that how much easier it would be to colonize antartica.
Since without magnetic field to protect from solar radiation and such the water decomposes into hydrogen which then floats up and swept away, attempts to extract water from the Mars ground could permenantly destroy what little resource remains as such it is inevitable that extracted water will leak out into the environment and be swept away gradually and eventually completely.
This also illustrates a problem with all hydrogen fuel on earth, there is little free hydrogen on earth because gravity is too weak to hold it down, so it floats up to the upper atmosphere and is swept away by solar wind, even on earth, like Helium does. So, if hydrogen is used by fusion or rockets, there are questions that needs to be answered as to if thats sustainable in the long haul, we have to stop thinking short term and start thinking long term like how our usage patterns will work out millions of years into the future. Hydrogen for fusion or rockets is often proposed to be extracted from water, basically what you are doing is burning up water, hydrogen in H20 is weighed down with oxygen keeping it down on the surface, when hydrogen is freed, it can float up into space, so you lose water. With fusion, its inevitable some will escape into the atmosphere and of course also with rockets. Might be insignificant in the short run but we need to make things sustainable in the long run and especially regarding the tendancy for these things to want to scale. Its like with Tesla and electric battery, you create the battery technology and looks good when you are shipping a few thousand cars, but once the technology is introduced it snowballs and before you know it the worlds supply of the rare earth metals in the batteries are totally depleted.
Much of these concerns could be alleviated if we could find an easter egg or a loophole in the laws of physics that could allow for huge amounts of energy to be created without the need for fuel, violating the theory of thermodynamics. This way you could for instance, set up a colony on Europa underweater, provided you have an ample energy source, you can heat it and would have plenty of water around you for making oxygen atmophere, and so on. Or,
These are not laws, theories and theories which can be imperfect. Of course its a long shot but close mindedness and dogma is on full display with allegedly objective scientists who refuse to consider the possibility of this, and make basic logical blunders to support their dogma. These blunders are that all physical laws are based on assumptions when they are extrapolated to behave in the same manner under all contexts. Let me explain. People make limited observational data and electromagnetism or gravity is measured to behave a certain way, in a limited set of expirements that they perform. These expirements they perform are tested in limited number of arrangements magnets, fields, whatever. They then extrapolate that behaviour to apply to all other arrangments of fields, magnets and so on. This is an assumption and thats why the "laws of physics" that the current ones apply to all interactions in the same way is based on assumption. Thus, if there was an effect that only arose with a very specific arrangement of magnets, perhaps a specific type of temporal, kinetic or spatial arrangement or some combination of these, such as rotating magnetic fields with specific velocity and geometry, that is one of a billion, you would not find it, espec
Thats what you get when you hire cheap third world H1B workers. You get third world code. Then we wonder why millenials are sitting in their parents basement begging for Bernie Sanders to pay off their student loans while Bernie helps more foreign aliens steal their jobs
Some of these sightings such as the Mllstadt sightings are undoubtedly testing of a radar invisible blimp. All that was seen was a slow moving fan powered blimp that exhibited characteristics of traditional blimp flight, could stand still, and move slowly. It was seen by a reputable witness, a police officer.
The other sightings that involve a stationary craft that then suddenly accelerates to 400 miles per hour is another matter, because obviously a blimp usually does not go 300 miles per hour, but a plane is not stationary. A helicopter does not go very fast either. Several optical illusions would need to be ruled out. If a plane is coming directly towards you, it can appear to be sort of stationary, if it veers off to the left, it can create the illusion of sudden acceleration, when in such acceleration actually occured because the movement is more visible if its headed at a 90 degree angle from you.
Another possibility for many sightings is a Fata Morgana where a temperature inversion in the atmosphere can transmit images of objects long distances. Some even report images of faraway islands floating in the sky.
Many reports were a flare technology where a flare is launched which then drifts slowly downward on a ballon or parachute.
I think that claims deserve interest, though i am a skeptic. The only thing that would rule out a terrestrial origin, is something that exhibits behaviour clearly contradictory to conventional propulsion and flight schemes, such as blimps, helicopters, balloons, parachutes and airplanes, such as an antigravity technology. That would be interesting because if an ET can build a antigravity drive, so can we, and indicate that there are fundamental oversights in our current models and extrapolations of physical laws. There are many that are false reports, many are simply blimps or other traditional aircraft.
I wouldnt be so quick to rule out the possibility of anti-gravity or artificial gravity technology. Most physical theories we have are based on limited observations of physical behaviour in certain test conditions and contexts, we then extrapolate these observations to apply to all other contexts, even though there has been no testing of these contexts. Thus, you cant really rule out the possibility because there could be an antigravity effect hiding that requires a very unusual arrangement of fields, such as a very particular arrangement of magnets of a certain strength. Its possible that such an arrangement could be one out of a million, and thus would be improbable that it would be found by accident and easy to miss. I'm not saying that this is likely, what I am pointing out is you shouldnt be quite so sure your current theories of physics are complete because there are obviously holes in your data, which have been extrapolated over, an assumption has made that the physical laws behave the same in all contexts even though many of these contexts have not been tested, of course there are billions of possible arrangements of say a magnetic field. So, it cannot be ruled out. There are possibilities for this such as a multidimensional theory, lets say our dimensions exist in a higher dimensional space, maybe there are higher dimensional geometries that can be interacted with only with a very specific geometric code. What drives discovery is imagination and wonder. Many with a more analytical mind however often lack imagination so we end up getting into a box of orthodox thinking. This can keep us from going out and looking for new discoveries and realizing that our understanding is not complete and such new discoveries might be waiting to be found. When some people looked out of an ocean, they thought it was the end of the world, and since they couldnt see any land in the distance, it didnt exist. Other wondered and had imaginations about possible distant lands that might exist on the other side of the ocean.
Musk explained it by extending the light of consciousness to other planets. A person can interact with the environment, experience it, like a robot cannot. You can send a robot for you to Hawaii but its not the same as you going there yourself. That however does bring up a another point though, mars sounds like a rather odd place to be, rather cold and nasty and with suffocating air, but I digress.
Musk probably has the most viable technologies to actually do it, since its one man with some money who wants to make this happen in his lifetime, rather than a large lumbering organizations like the government which tends to lose focus on the goal, run by committees were an individuals aspirations are subservant to an organizational morass, and was hamstrung by nonsensical congressional mandates etc.
But the backdoor could also be hidden in the operating system. IOS is closed source so there's no way to know. I know some parts are open source but much is closed source so there is no way to do your own build to rule out a backdoor.
College is really best for doctors and lawyers mainly, who need to have a high level of rote memorization functioning since they need to be able to react quickly in situations where fast decisions have to be made in life and death situations. This is the way things used to be. This is why college programs are designed to filter out most people except those with very high memory retention. And thus, colleges have 50-80% failure rates. For all other jobs, its overkill, its wasting years of peoples lives, it causes enormous social problems. It throws away large numbers of people because they don't meat the unrealistic demands and expectations of college programs. College for most people Is NOT a pathway to success, its a pathway to failure. So, given this, college is more of a problem, than a benefit that actually locks large numbers of people into poverty. We can train the workers we need without college, using self study and apprenticeships. This is why I believe corporations should be banned from asking employers in non medical and non legal fields for a college degree.
With other fields, such as software development, time is not as much of a problem, and neither is rote memorization. You can use documentation to lookup some obscure API that you need to use, and you have a debug cycle to test the code. The code can be tested and reviewed before it is deployed. There is time to think about the correct algorithm to use and the code to be contemplated.
I am in favor of abolishing college degree requirements for most run of the mill jobs, including software development, and keeping it mainly for doctors and lawyers, and abolishing the H1B program (more on this in a bit). College is a waste of time and overkill for most people. Its years of your life down the drain, often studying things you will never use or need, like French Art. Now, learning about French Art is fine, but the fact is, I can do that on my spare time and I don't need to pay something $100,000 for this.
People can effectively learn what they need to know through self study and apprenticeship programs. You can learn algorithms, programming and mathematics basically for free by buying your own books and reading them yourself. I taught myself calculus, 10 computer languages and dozens of algorithms this way. How many of us got into computer programming by tinkering with writing code on our home computers when we were young? I basically learned the entirety of what I know from self study. The fact is even in college, no one can learn for you. Your still responsible for reading and studying yourself. Your doing all of the work. So basically, your not paying anyone for anything. They are not giving you anything. You are doing all of the work. There is virtually no difference from self study, you basically study, read and learn.
Secondly for most jobs memory refresher as for some obscure detail, like some obscure API, is perfectly acceptable, that is, learning as you go. In fact, learning by doing and as you go is fine for many jobs in regards to many obscure details , and the best way to keep people interested and engaged because there is an accomplishment reward feedback happening.
College has led to many social problems, including high levels of student debt, protracted periods of ones life being taken away that is not productive and income earning, delayed home purchasing and family initiation, making it too difficult and expensive to raise children due to high college costs, etc.
Instead, we should use for the majority of jobs apprenticeship and on the job training programs, self study and test certificates (such as CompTIA). One of the problems as well which has so distorted the US labor market is the availability of H1B visa holders from third world colleges, where they spent a fraciton of an American on their college degrees. This distorts the market and makes it harder for the job market to keep the demands of corporations for college degrees more in check, since essentially they can get Indian H1B visa holders who
Actually, its primaraly to benefit users. There are technical advantages to the new standard. OFDM modulation allows for 1) Multipath interference resistance 2) Repeater stations 3) Mobile TV (Finally) 4) HEVC compression will mean that the channel capacity will be doubled on the same 6 mhz channel.
Also 1) Broadcast is not bidirectional. Just dont plug the TV into the internet port and there will be no tracking of any kind. I bet most of the people who are getting riled up use netflix or Youtube. So your going to avoid broadcast TV and instead use youtube and netflix where you WILL be tracked. Doesnt make a damn bit of sense 2) You dont have to buy a new TV, at most, a new tuning adapter. $50 well worth the doubling the number of channels, compared to hundreds of dollars people pay for pay tv.
The article was misleading. 1) You wont be required to buy a new TV, at most, a new tuning adapter. 2) The ads targeting is nonsense. Broadcast is not bidirectional. All you need to do is not plug the TV into the internet and it can't happen. Also, you don't think its happening when you use YouTube or Netflix? Think again. The broadcast TV actually provides more privacy because its not bidirectional. So your going to not use broadcast and instead use an internet streaming service where they are gauranteed to collect usage data? Doesnt make a damn bit of sense.
Secondly, the main reason this is being done is because of technical reasons and doesnt have a damn thing to do with advertising. 1) Mobile TVs will be able to work 2) better multipath resistance 3) repeater stations in fringe areas will be possible 4) stronger compression will increase the number of channels that can be offered dramatically. To get mobile TV and the repeater stations, the new modulation scheme, OFDM, was necessary. A hardware upgrade would have been necessary anyway for the new video compression to replace aging MPEG-2, with HEVC. Who can argue with doubling channel capacity?
There are actually technical advantages to the new standard 1) Mobile TV reception 2) better multipath resistance 3) repeater stations to cover fringe areas 4) better compression so more channels can be offered. I think the ads stuff is mainly FUD. Broadcast TV is not bidirectional. You dont think we you use youtube or netflix that they are collecting data for ads? With broadcast, all you need to do is not plug the TV into the internet
Secondly, you won't be required to buy a new TV, there will be tuning adapters.
Overall, if you like free TV, its a benefit, and a far better value than spending $10-50 per month on pay TV subscriptions (whether cable or netflix). Using better compression will allow more channels to be crammed in. The new modulation scheme allows for mobile TV use, and better resist multipath interference which is a big problem in cities. Also, the modulation scheme will allow repeater stations to be set up so that they can bring a better signal out to fringe areas. .
I would be pretty sure, that tuner adapters will be marketed for being able to decode off the air ATSC 3.0 and feed in to an older TVs ports. Getting dozens of new channels will be well worth the one time $50 for an adapter (compare to the hundreds of dollars people spend per year on pay TV (internet or traditional) subscriptions).
The advertising issue should be put in perspective, every time you use Youtube or Netflix, you dont think that this is happening? Broadcast TV is also not bidirectional, so you would need to have an Internet connection. Just don't plug the TV into the internet if it bothers you. So its easier to avoid the privacy issue than internet services. In this way, its somewhat better than Youtube since you can still get the TV signal without sending any data the other way by simply not plugging the TV to the internet.
I am surprised about how much Oath has been closing. It seems, mainly for show. I really doubt that AIM or Compuserve Forums were consuming many resources, given they could be/are moved onto a cloud server that is shared with other systems. Things could be set up so it costs near nothing to run them. It really is sad that they are shutting these things down, and pretty pointless.
I used compuserve for a few years. They had some interesting features, such as being able to login with PPP via the GO PPP command and then launch the online service over the internet to gateway.compuserve.com. This way you could use it as an actual ISP with your own dialer and PPP implementation. The WinCIM client had a very unique feel to it that I have fond memories of, it was quirky thing.
Remember that Compuserve Classic was closed down many years ago, this was Compuserves own protocols such as the Host Micro Interface protocol. Compuserve had a failed project called Red Dog which was an HTML based user interface used in Compuserve 3.0. Since it lacked some UI functionality, this was still pre web-2.0 and web browsers were pretty primative, they switched back to the traditional HMI based system . Compuserve tried to break into AOLs market with Wow. But it was too little, too late. At that time, broadband Internet was around the corner, which with cable company monopolies over distribution, the online services were locked out.
Compuserve, also did not remain competitive with other services, Prodigy had better pricing, as did AOL. It didnt make much difference in the long run as broadband did them all in.
I can't imagine doing this. I prefer to have a bookmarks list with date, title, etc columns with being able to sort the bookmarks by selecting the sorting column.
Slashdot Mirror
Ill bet that 50% of Windows apps still crash and refuse to run at all on Wine. I doubt that many Wine users care about android, and would rather more advances had been made toward supporting 99% of windows apps (Windows Desktop apps on a phone, good god).
maybe a little robot would come down off a ramp and carry the pizza to your door
You have a really good point there. While generally I think its good for internet sites to be compelled to support SSL, there should be a way for the user to create exeption rules in the browser for these situations (as with an self signed cert). With adequate warnings similar to the self signed or expired cert screens. A setting should be included in the advanced section for setting up rules as well to permit non-SSL sites
I really do think that weaning the web off non-SSL HTTP is a good thing, I dont know how anyone can oppose protecting peoples privacy. Theres no cost any more to getting an TLS cert so theres just no excuse any more to not go HTTPS. The only issues was Lan IP addresses and maybe an exception should be made for private IP addresses. For all public IP addresses I would actually support throwing up an "insecure site" warning for all non-SSL sites that users have to click an exception button, then eventually requiring SSL of all web sites
The LAN issue is an interesting one, maybe Firefox should make an exception for the private IP addresses ranges. That would be reasonable. On the other hand, I am all for HTTPS for everything else, even eventually dropping non-SSL support altogether.
Meltdown is easier to exploit, The hacks will get better as well. So it is a very serious problem, information leaks can be very harmful, think passwords and encryption keys. These can then allow for write attacks. Don't underestimate the capabilities of people to find ways to exploit this. It may seem far fetched but time and time again far fetched things have a way of being turned into quite practical exploits.
Wasn't bitcoin always one big cluster due to the fact it eventually takes the power output of nuclear plants just to mine new coins. An activity which consumes vast physical resources for no tangible benefit, which makes the interest rates of the banking system look very reasonable in comparison. I am sure that the fact that it consumes vast resources and stressing infrastructure on something with no tangible value to society is a part of the reason China is taking it off line. A lot of hype over a fundamentally broken model, that is really not a currency anyway, but a wildly fluctuating and unstable mess, any real currency that acted this way would be a laughing stock.
This has long been a concern of direct rendering, giving direct access to video hardware to applications opens up a lot of possible bugs that did not exist.
It might be better to simply use GLX and send all of the OpenGL commands to the X server and have the X server handle the video card. Remember that the X server is being ported to use Mesa drivers with the Glamor project so the X server can send OpenGL commands through Mesa. I asked about this before , the geniuses that run X.org seem to be refusing to upgrade the GLX support to the latest OpenGL specifications, even though for situations like this it could really help and might be important for people that want to avoid the risks of direct rendering. or who want to use network transparency. Its quite foolish
Fahrenheit makes much more sense than Celsius for weather, because Fahrenheit is scaled better for weather temperature. 100 is pretty hot day and near the upper end of temperatures in many locations, and 0 is near the lower end of a weather temperature. In the Midwest US, its near perfect, most locations go up to around 100 F in summer and go down to near 0 F in winter. So you end up with less wasted scale. On Celsius, 35-100 is wasted since few places get that hot. This means when you say the 20s in Celsius, it means a wide range of temperature. If you say 80s in F its a much narrower range.
Maybe different scales for different purposes, Fahrenheit for weather, celsius for science.
With the foot, the foot always seems to be just right for measuring walls, ceilings, buildings. inches for smaller things like TVs. Centimeters are too small and meters are too big for many everyday object. So thats why with metric, you end up with either very large centimeter values or odd floating point meter values. Again, English measurements work better for everyday use.
I prefer to just stay with customary. in the USA, anyway, most containers in stores have both systems on packaging so you can use the system you prefer.
There is something artificial and Orwellian about metric, Its a synthetic system, a poor fit for everyday use, while customary measures feel more organic for everyday use. George Orwell mentioned this in relation to metric beer in 1984.
X11 is a vector protocol unlike VNC. If you use GLX over the X11 protocol, an app can send 3D OpenGL commands over the X connection over a network, this allows you to run apps on a different computer and display them to another computer and do it with a faster speed than a raster protocol. So X protocol isnt just for 2D, and its not outdated therefore, it has been able to do full 3D graphics for a very long time.
Once upon a time the fonts were rendered on the X server, the X client could just send the text and the server would render it. For whatever reason, they decided to change this. This was around the time the Render extension happened. This caused clients to switch to sending font bitmaps to the server and then composite the bitmaps together on the server for alpha transparency support. Alpha transparency could have been implemented on the server side font model, but they chose not to do this. There are some applications for the Render extension for fonts which are used inside a web page and for sending images to the X server and being able to reuse fonts and images on composite operations on the server without having to upload rasterized images everytime the applications window content layout changes, this could actually save resources for network transparency.
One thing that could have been done is to allow uploading of PNGs, JPGs and TTFs to the X server and have the X server rasterize them, this would make things work better over network connections, and allow the client to choose to use server side font rasteration with alpha transparency if the server has the font it needs. As others have mentioned, there was an X Font Server as well which the X server could download remote fonts from.
One of the things we hear from Wayland proponents is X11 hasnt been network transparent. This is not true, even Render should be useable over a network connection since you can upload your images to the server and composite them together on the server, GLX is certainly network transparent. Clients are supposed to be written so they fall back to sending any image data over the socket if shared memory is used. So shared memory while not useable for network transparency does not conflict with it since the client just falls back to sending image data over the wire.
X11 is more flexible than VNC since you can export single applications between different desktop sessions. There are even tools to move an X program from one X server to another so you can switch which computer or display an X program is displayed too. There are X based remote desktop tools. There were even programs like XMX that allowed you to multiplex an X application to multiple X servers simultaneously.
The legacy support in X does not consume a significant amount of resources, its very insignificant, so thats a false canard that should be soundly refuted. The core X protocol graphics primitives are simple and few in number so it takes little code to implement them. Increasingly, as well, there is a move to transition the X servers backend to use OpenGL mesa drivers so the X server will use the same drivers as the DRI programs, so these X 2D primatives will be rendered by the OpenGL driver code, which will avoid driver duplication and means the X 2D primatives and the 3D be rendered by the same code and drivers anyway, so the legacy X protocol support really does not use a significant amount of resources.
Has any solution been found to the problem that the amount of processing power needed for transactions is exploding, leading to entire nuclear power plants needed to conduct them (a little overexaggeration here).
markets can work beautifully in many cases since it allows consumers to decide how the money is spent and can allow choices and competition.
But, its time for some anti-gouging laws because this is getting outrageous. Don't confuse the issue of consumer driven choices on what they want to buy and the idea that we need some regulations here to stop the consumer from being abused by these kinds of tactics. An anti gouging law of course doesnt mandate the consumer what kind of vitamin to buy but would stop them from being gouged, so its not really a rabid anti-market thing.
Its not just this vitamin but other drugs are being hiked in this manner.
I also know that research on drugs does take place in a taxpayer funded manner. This is not a rebuke of markets since private investment can also fund many important drugs as well. Each comes with pros and cons so its a good idea to have both modes of research funding. Sometimes bureaucracies in government can hamper research and sometimes the risk averse nature of markets can so its good to be able to have one to balance the other, regarding things that are so critical in curing diseases.
One of the concerning things about it as well due to the failure of mechanical systems, it would seem such colonies would be constantly dependant on imports from earth to maintain it. Earth already has its own resource problems without supporting colonies on other planets. unless a colony can be completely self sufficient, it would damage earth's resources.
At best, it might be able to host a small scientific colony but the idea of any large scale population is really, really far fetched.
The absurdity of mars colonization can be shown that how much easier it would be to colonize antartica.
Since without magnetic field to protect from solar radiation and such the water decomposes into hydrogen which then floats up and swept away, attempts to extract water from the Mars ground could permenantly destroy what little resource remains as such it is inevitable that extracted water will leak out into the environment and be swept away gradually and eventually completely.
This also illustrates a problem with all hydrogen fuel on earth, there is little free hydrogen on earth because gravity is too weak to hold it down, so it floats up to the upper atmosphere and is swept away by solar wind, even on earth, like Helium does. So, if hydrogen is used by fusion or rockets, there are questions that needs to be answered as to if thats sustainable in the long haul, we have to stop thinking short term and start thinking long term like how our usage patterns will work out millions of years into the future. Hydrogen for fusion or rockets is often proposed to be extracted from water, basically what you are doing is burning up water, hydrogen in H20 is weighed down with oxygen keeping it down on the surface, when hydrogen is freed, it can float up into space, so you lose water. With fusion, its inevitable some will escape into the atmosphere and of course also with rockets. Might be insignificant in the short run but we need to make things sustainable in the long run and especially regarding the tendancy for these things to want to scale. Its like with Tesla and electric battery, you create the battery technology and looks good when you are shipping a few thousand cars, but once the technology is introduced it snowballs and before you know it the worlds supply of the rare earth metals in the batteries are totally depleted.
Much of these concerns could be alleviated if we could find an easter egg or a loophole in the laws of physics that could allow for huge amounts of energy to be created without the need for fuel, violating the theory of thermodynamics. This way you could for instance, set up a colony on Europa underweater, provided you have an ample energy source, you can heat it and would have plenty of water around you for making oxygen atmophere, and so on. Or,
These are not laws, theories and theories which can be imperfect. Of course its a long shot but close mindedness and dogma is on full display with allegedly objective scientists who refuse to consider the possibility of this, and make basic logical blunders to support their dogma. These blunders are that all physical laws are based on assumptions when they are extrapolated to behave in the same manner under all contexts. Let me explain. People make limited observational data and electromagnetism or gravity is measured to behave a certain way, in a limited set of expirements that they perform. These expirements they perform are tested in limited number of arrangements magnets, fields, whatever. They then extrapolate that behaviour to apply to all other arrangments of fields, magnets and so on. This is an assumption and thats why the "laws of physics" that the current ones apply to all interactions in the same way is based on assumption. Thus, if there was an effect that only arose with a very specific arrangement of magnets, perhaps a specific type of temporal, kinetic or spatial arrangement or some combination of these, such as rotating magnetic fields with specific velocity and geometry, that is one of a billion, you would not find it, espec
No magnetic field either
Thats what you get when you hire cheap third world H1B workers. You get third world code. Then we wonder why millenials are sitting in their parents basement begging for Bernie Sanders to pay off their student loans while Bernie helps more foreign aliens steal their jobs
Some of these sightings such as the Mllstadt sightings are undoubtedly testing of a radar invisible blimp. All that was seen was a slow moving fan powered blimp that exhibited characteristics of traditional blimp flight, could stand still, and move slowly. It was seen by a reputable witness, a police officer.
The other sightings that involve a stationary craft that then suddenly accelerates to 400 miles per hour is another matter, because obviously a blimp usually does not go 300 miles per hour, but a plane is not stationary. A helicopter does not go very fast either. Several optical illusions would need to be ruled out. If a plane is coming directly towards you, it can appear to be sort of stationary, if it veers off to the left, it can create the illusion of sudden acceleration, when in such acceleration actually occured because the movement is more visible if its headed at a 90 degree angle from you.
Another possibility for many sightings is a Fata Morgana where a temperature inversion in the atmosphere can transmit images of objects long distances. Some even report images of faraway islands floating in the sky.
Many reports were a flare technology where a flare is launched which then drifts slowly downward on a ballon or parachute.
I think that claims deserve interest, though i am a skeptic. The only thing that would rule out a terrestrial origin, is something that exhibits behaviour clearly contradictory to conventional propulsion and flight schemes, such as blimps, helicopters, balloons, parachutes and airplanes, such as an antigravity technology. That would be interesting because if an ET can build a antigravity drive, so can we, and indicate that there are fundamental oversights in our current models and extrapolations of physical laws. There are many that are false reports, many are simply blimps or other traditional aircraft.
I wouldnt be so quick to rule out the possibility of anti-gravity or artificial gravity technology. Most physical theories we have are based on limited observations of physical behaviour in certain test conditions and contexts, we then extrapolate these observations to apply to all other contexts, even though there has been no testing of these contexts. Thus, you cant really rule out the possibility because there could be an antigravity effect hiding that requires a very unusual arrangement of fields, such as a very particular arrangement of magnets of a certain strength. Its possible that such an arrangement could be one out of a million, and thus would be improbable that it would be found by accident and easy to miss. I'm not saying that this is likely, what I am pointing out is you shouldnt be quite so sure your current theories of physics are complete because there are obviously holes in your data, which have been extrapolated over, an assumption has made that the physical laws behave the same in all contexts even though many of these contexts have not been tested, of course there are billions of possible arrangements of say a magnetic field. So, it cannot be ruled out. There are possibilities for this such as a multidimensional theory, lets say our dimensions exist in a higher dimensional space, maybe there are higher dimensional geometries that can be interacted with only with a very specific geometric code. What drives discovery is imagination and wonder. Many with a more analytical mind however often lack imagination so we end up getting into a box of orthodox thinking. This can keep us from going out and looking for new discoveries and realizing that our understanding is not complete and such new discoveries might be waiting to be found. When some people looked out of an ocean, they thought it was the end of the world, and since they couldnt see any land in the distance, it didnt exist. Other wondered and had imaginations about possible distant lands that might exist on the other side of the ocean.
Musk explained it by extending the light of consciousness to other planets. A person can interact with the environment, experience it, like a robot cannot. You can send a robot for you to Hawaii but its not the same as you going there yourself. That however does bring up a another point though, mars sounds like a rather odd place to be, rather cold and nasty and with suffocating air, but I digress.
Musk probably has the most viable technologies to actually do it, since its one man with some money who wants to make this happen in his lifetime, rather than a large lumbering organizations like the government which tends to lose focus on the goal, run by committees were an individuals aspirations are subservant to an organizational morass, and was hamstrung by nonsensical congressional mandates etc.
But the backdoor could also be hidden in the operating system. IOS is closed source so there's no way to know. I know some parts are open source but much is closed source so there is no way to do your own build to rule out a backdoor.
College is really best for doctors and lawyers mainly, who need to have a high level of rote memorization functioning since they need to be able to react quickly in situations where fast decisions have to be made in life and death situations. This is the way things used to be. This is why college programs are designed to filter out most people except those with very high memory retention. And thus, colleges have 50-80% failure rates. For all other jobs, its overkill, its wasting years of peoples lives, it causes enormous social problems. It throws away large numbers of people because they don't meat the unrealistic demands and expectations of college programs. College for most people Is NOT a pathway to success, its a pathway to failure. So, given this, college is more of a problem, than a benefit that actually locks large numbers of people into poverty. We can train the workers we need without college, using self study and apprenticeships. This is why I believe corporations should be banned from asking employers in non medical and non legal fields for a college degree.
With other fields, such as software development, time is not as much of a problem, and neither is rote memorization. You can use documentation to lookup some obscure API that you need to use, and you have a debug cycle to test the code. The code can be tested and reviewed before it is deployed. There is time to think about the correct algorithm to use and the code to be contemplated.
I am in favor of abolishing college degree requirements for most run of the mill jobs, including software development, and keeping it mainly for doctors and lawyers, and abolishing the H1B program (more on this in a bit). College is a waste of time and overkill for most people. Its years of your life down the drain, often studying things you will never use or need, like French Art. Now, learning about French Art is fine, but the fact is, I can do that on my spare time and I don't need to pay something $100,000 for this .
People can effectively learn what they need to know through self study and apprenticeship programs. You can learn algorithms, programming and mathematics basically for free by buying your own books and reading them yourself. I taught myself calculus, 10 computer languages and dozens of algorithms this way. How many of us got into computer programming by tinkering with writing code on our home computers when we were young? I basically learned the entirety of what I know from self study. The fact is even in college, no one can learn for you. Your still responsible for reading and studying yourself. Your doing all of the work. So basically, your not paying anyone for anything. They are not giving you anything. You are doing all of the work. There is virtually no difference from self study, you basically study, read and learn.
Secondly for most jobs memory refresher as for some obscure detail, like some obscure API, is perfectly acceptable, that is, learning as you go. In fact, learning by doing and as you go is fine for many jobs in regards to many obscure details , and the best way to keep people interested and engaged because there is an accomplishment reward feedback happening.
College has led to many social problems, including high levels of student debt, protracted periods of ones life being taken away that is not productive and income earning, delayed home purchasing and family initiation, making it too difficult and expensive to raise children due to high college costs, etc.
Instead, we should use for the majority of jobs apprenticeship and on the job training programs, self study and test certificates (such as CompTIA). One of the problems as well which has so distorted the US labor market is the availability of H1B visa holders from third world colleges, where they spent a fraciton of an American on their college degrees. This distorts the market and makes it harder for the job market to keep the demands of corporations for college degrees more in check, since essentially they can get Indian H1B visa holders who
Actually, its primaraly to benefit users. There are technical advantages to the new standard. OFDM modulation allows for 1) Multipath interference resistance 2) Repeater stations 3) Mobile TV (Finally) 4) HEVC compression will mean that the channel capacity will be doubled on the same 6 mhz channel.
Also 1) Broadcast is not bidirectional. Just dont plug the TV into the internet port and there will be no tracking of any kind. I bet most of the people who are getting riled up use netflix or Youtube. So your going to avoid broadcast TV and instead use youtube and netflix where you WILL be tracked. Doesnt make a damn bit of sense 2) You dont have to buy a new TV, at most, a new tuning adapter. $50 well worth the doubling the number of channels, compared to hundreds of dollars people pay for pay tv.
The article was misleading. 1) You wont be required to buy a new TV, at most, a new tuning adapter. 2) The ads targeting is nonsense. Broadcast is not bidirectional. All you need to do is not plug the TV into the internet and it can't happen. Also, you don't think its happening when you use YouTube or Netflix? Think again. The broadcast TV actually provides more privacy because its not bidirectional. So your going to not use broadcast and instead use an internet streaming service where they are gauranteed to collect usage data? Doesnt make a damn bit of sense.
Secondly, the main reason this is being done is because of technical reasons and doesnt have a damn thing to do with advertising. 1) Mobile TVs will be able to work 2) better multipath resistance 3) repeater stations in fringe areas will be possible 4) stronger compression will increase the number of channels that can be offered dramatically. To get mobile TV and the repeater stations, the new modulation scheme, OFDM, was necessary. A hardware upgrade would have been necessary anyway for the new video compression to replace aging MPEG-2, with HEVC. Who can argue with doubling channel capacity?
There are actually technical advantages to the new standard 1) Mobile TV reception 2) better multipath resistance 3) repeater stations to cover fringe areas 4) better compression so more channels can be offered. I think the ads stuff is mainly FUD. Broadcast TV is not bidirectional. You dont think we you use youtube or netflix that they are collecting data for ads? With broadcast, all you need to do is not plug the TV into the internet
Secondly, you won't be required to buy a new TV, there will be tuning adapters.
Overall, if you like free TV, its a benefit, and a far better value than spending $10-50 per month on pay TV subscriptions (whether cable or netflix). Using better compression will allow more channels to be crammed in. The new modulation scheme allows for mobile TV use, and better resist multipath interference which is a big problem in cities. Also, the modulation scheme will allow repeater stations to be set up so that they can bring a better signal out to fringe areas. .
I would be pretty sure, that tuner adapters will be marketed for being able to decode off the air ATSC 3.0 and feed in to an older TVs ports. Getting dozens of new channels will be well worth the one time $50 for an adapter (compare to the hundreds of dollars people spend per year on pay TV (internet or traditional) subscriptions).
The advertising issue should be put in perspective, every time you use Youtube or Netflix, you dont think that this is happening? Broadcast TV is also not bidirectional, so you would need to have an Internet connection. Just don't plug the TV into the internet if it bothers you. So its easier to avoid the privacy issue than internet services. In this way, its somewhat better than Youtube since you can still get the TV signal without sending any data the other way by simply not plugging the TV to the internet.
I am surprised about how much Oath has been closing. It seems, mainly for show. I really doubt that AIM or Compuserve Forums were consuming many resources, given they could be/are moved onto a cloud server that is shared with other systems. Things could be set up so it costs near nothing to run them. It really is sad that they are shutting these things down, and pretty pointless.
I used compuserve for a few years. They had some interesting features, such as being able to login with PPP via the GO PPP command and then launch the online service over the internet to gateway.compuserve.com. This way you could use it as an actual ISP with your own dialer and PPP implementation. The WinCIM client had a very unique feel to it that I have fond memories of, it was quirky thing.
Remember that Compuserve Classic was closed down many years ago, this was Compuserves own protocols such as the Host Micro Interface protocol. Compuserve had a failed project called Red Dog which was an HTML based user interface used in Compuserve 3.0. Since it lacked some UI functionality, this was still pre web-2.0 and web browsers were pretty primative, they switched back to the traditional HMI based system . Compuserve tried to break into AOLs market with Wow. But it was too little, too late. At that time, broadband Internet was around the corner, which with cable company monopolies over distribution, the online services were locked out.
Compuserve, also did not remain competitive with other services, Prodigy had better pricing, as did AOL. It didnt make much difference in the long run as broadband did them all in.
I can't imagine doing this. I prefer to have a bookmarks list with date, title, etc columns with being able to sort the bookmarks by selecting the sorting column.