While protecting competitors shouldn't be our business, neither should destroying other businesses.
With all due respect, if an actively developed, marketed, and supported product cannot withstand the horrific onslaught of an unsupported, unmarketed competitor that didn't succeed in the market in the first place, I doubt that even protection could help it or its manufacturer.
Discrete Time Simulation systems can make very good use of OOP. Events, event queues, and models are much more extensible and maintainable in this type of system. This is not surprising, given that the first somewhat OOP language, Simula, was designed for just these purposes.
However, if you're looking for flat out performance, even these kinds of simulation systems are still better done in FORTRAN. It's just that unlike fluid dynamics models, the models in most DTS's change over the lifetime of the program (just as the core algorithms don't), so maintainability is more of an issue.
Would YOU (and the others of the "well, it isn't conclusive" crowd) that trot out every time any one brings out the slightest health/environmental concern, be willing to actually have a PCB plant operated by Monsanto in your back yard? Be willing to drink water out of a stream from which the plant's effluent had been released? Every day for the rest of your life (no matter how short it might be)?
They are dividing society into two classes, the Digirati, who can understand Computers running super complicated, unintuitive OS's like OS X and Windows, and the disposessed, who just don't understand and never will.
And the alternative is to remove low cost general purpose computing machinery from the masses, replacing it with specialized harware which will perform only carefully circumscribed tasks? Talk about disempowering! At least with the current setup you can get software to do something other than to play games. And there is at least an opportunity to learn how to more with the boxes.
I look to Sony, MS and Nintendo to provide a democratic and egalitarean new computing future for all, in which everyone can share.
Oh yes! And I am sure that they will allow you to do whatever you want with them. Do you really think that they'll let people do "unauthorized programming" for these? Thanks for tuning out and turning off. Have a nice Brave New World, Mr. Gamma. Just be glad you aren't one of those Alphas or Betas who have to work so hard and never have any fun...
Geez, I never thought I'd see someone on/. that thought that dumbing down the system was a good thing. Now I have seen everything (unless you were trying to troll, in which case, you win).
"Sheesh... Why, oh why, do we need a law to protect people from doing stupid things?"
Because you're not only trying to "protect people from doing stupid things", you're also attempting to combat the criminals who take advantage of people who do stupid things. You may like to think that this is a dumb idea, but things that make crime harder also make it less likely that someone might turn to crime. In addition, remrmber that your "normal" street criminal doen't have access to gift card blanks or mag strip writers. Usually, these low-level types are merely information collectors and end-product purchasers for a more organized high-level operation. It's "penny ante" stuff like this that supports most organized crime in America.
In the end, it's not only the "people who do stupid things" or the stores that enable them that get protected (though they receive a large amount of the benefit), it's you and me. Now you can debate whether people need protection from criminals, but it is a debate you're likely to lose...
P.S. This sort of law also helps increase the use of this kind of financial instrument by increasing its security. This may actually improve the economy. And besides, I doubt that you're the one person in existance who has never done anything stupid. Maybe we all need protection from you:-).
I typically receive about 150-200 SirCam virus e-mails every day.
Gosh, at this point, I'd really look into installing a good AV filtering gateway. You won't cut bandwidth in, but at least you won't be passing the stuff on.
Oh yeah, the guy who told you kick off Windows users? He was right, too...
Check out this article to see why you are dead on and why the hardware makers hope it isn't so. The only other point I'd make is if you can make it smaller, that will be a plus, too.
But of course, these considerations do not compute in the dollar terms that are the only things filtering through your average executive's thick ears (not to mention many Congresscritters).
But, you have to understand that the media that these players represent is even more critical to Congressmen than the money they can get from the tech side. What happens if a Congressman finds it difficult to buy air time during the next election cycle? He won't be a Congressman for long. And, although the Internet has grown as an alternative information distribution medium, it can't make up for that kind of lack of access.
Another thing to remember is that the main thing that leaders need to provide are bread and circuses. You can trade off a fairly good amount of bread to have a good circus before the rubes revolt. And this is an especially tasty tradeoff if you happen to get to be head clown.
In short, never, ever assume that a politician will make a decision based solely on economic issues. In this situation, the issue hits at the heart of any politician's decision-making calculus - getting elected.
You should be able to add or remove hard drives at will. When you add RAM, you simply plug it in and the OS knows to use it; why not hard drives?
Dude, it's out there. Look at systems like IBM's OS/400. In fact, since VM is part of the disk, there is no difference between objects in memory or on disk. It's called a "single level storage" model and it rocks.
This was developed back in the early 70's. Unfortunately, it makes pointers bigger so every time you revamp the hardware technology so that bigger pointers are a hardware disadvantage, the system guys keep introducing a storage hierarchy to compensate. It sucks having to keep "relearning" the same lessons - so far we've seen the same crap transitions in the mainframe, minicomputer, workstation, and microcomputer worlds. Hopefully, we won't need to see the same stuff yet again when quantum computing happens.
Oh, I dunno... How about an open, documented trust protocol so that more than one trust authorizer could be established? How about having the trust authorizer legally liable for any financial damage cause by their mismangement of trusted information? Have the providers establish bonds or insurance to cover this.
How about extending the current trust infrastructure into the digital domain rather than handing off to one company on a silver platter?
Oh yeah, I forgot... This is America 2001 - private is good, public is bad. Sorry for the slip up. I promise it won't happen again.
... was the dual register set. It was used to good advantage in embedded systems where the executive would use one set and the app would use the other. If you remember the chess program Sargon, it used one set for white's state and one for black's. It was a pretty neat machine. But like many of the 8-bit stuff out there, it didn't make the jump to 16 bits gracefully. The Z8000 was pretty dismal...
So unless someone is stupid enough to try and sneak a bomb onto a plane in one of these spheres, it's not much use to the security guards.
We could always pass a law mandating that all bombs being carried on by terrorists be enclosed in this type of sphere.
And if that didn't work, we could always require that the device be clearly labeled "BOMB". I think a $300 fine should be sufficient penalty for this, don't you? At least it would be if we were talking about corporate violators...
I'm supposed to stake my name and my company's name on an OS with comments like: "/* This is a hack..." in the kernel?
As opposed to a kernel that still has those issues, but you don't see them because you don't have the source code? All code has its less than pristine spots. At least with Linux, those places are documented and more likely to be changed by the large cadre of people working on the code. Your "sense of well-being via obliviousness" stance might be personally satisfying, but it does not, in and of itself, guarantee a better system.
If you want to bash Linux as an RTOS, there are a lot of other more appropriate technical factors to bash it with. Your aforementioned statement is not one of them.
For those of you who hope to get Linux into the government market, you should know about Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1977. This federal regulation mandated accessibility compliance for any government purchased IT systems. The government is also getting more picky about enforcing this law as of late. How do I know? The company where I work just went through a self-audit to make sure we complied...
Slashdot Mirror
With all due respect, if an actively developed, marketed, and supported product cannot withstand the horrific onslaught of an unsupported, unmarketed competitor that didn't succeed in the market in the first place, I doubt that even protection could help it or its manufacturer.
Why do you think any of them actually buy them? At least until DevStudio XP (Now With Super .NET Activation Included!!!) ships.
Not really, but there is an element of truth to that mantra
One word: SISAL.
However, if you're looking for flat out performance, even these kinds of simulation systems are still better done in FORTRAN. It's just that unlike fluid dynamics models, the models in most DTS's change over the lifetime of the program (just as the core algorithms don't), so maintainability is more of an issue.
Would YOU (and the others of the "well, it isn't conclusive" crowd) that trot out every time any one brings out the slightest health/environmental concern, be willing to actually have a PCB plant operated by Monsanto in your back yard? Be willing to drink water out of a stream from which the plant's effluent had been released? Every day for the rest of your life (no matter how short it might be)?
If not, shut up.
Well, yes, "largely" is usually the operative term, in this case. But it's not the only point...
Thought #1: Whoo hoo! This means we can go ahead with only having recreational sex!
Thought #2: Ya know, this is probabaly irrelevant to the average Slashdot reader...
Yeah, go ahead and mod this as Offtopic. It is.
And the alternative is to remove low cost general purpose computing machinery from the masses, replacing it with specialized harware which will perform only carefully circumscribed tasks? Talk about disempowering! At least with the current setup you can get software to do something other than to play games. And there is at least an opportunity to learn how to more with the boxes.
I look to Sony, MS and Nintendo to provide a democratic and egalitarean new computing future for all, in which everyone can share.
Oh yes! And I am sure that they will allow you to do whatever you want with them. Do you really think that they'll let people do "unauthorized programming" for these? Thanks for tuning out and turning off. Have a nice Brave New World, Mr. Gamma. Just be glad you aren't one of those Alphas or Betas who have to work so hard and never have any fun...
Geez, I never thought I'd see someone on /. that thought that dumbing down the system was a good thing. Now I have seen everything (unless you were trying to troll, in which case, you win).
Because you're not only trying to "protect people from doing stupid things", you're also attempting to combat the criminals who take advantage of people who do stupid things. You may like to think that this is a dumb idea, but things that make crime harder also make it less likely that someone might turn to crime. In addition, remrmber that your "normal" street criminal doen't have access to gift card blanks or mag strip writers. Usually, these low-level types are merely information collectors and end-product purchasers for a more organized high-level operation. It's "penny ante" stuff like this that supports most organized crime in America.
In the end, it's not only the "people who do stupid things" or the stores that enable them that get protected (though they receive a large amount of the benefit), it's you and me. Now you can debate whether people need protection from criminals, but it is a debate you're likely to lose...
P.S. This sort of law also helps increase the use of this kind of financial instrument by increasing its security. This may actually improve the economy. And besides, I doubt that you're the one person in existance who has never done anything stupid. Maybe we all need protection from you :-).
Gosh, at this point, I'd really look into installing a good AV filtering gateway. You won't cut bandwidth in, but at least you won't be passing the stuff on.
Oh yeah, the guy who told you kick off Windows users? He was right, too...
Check out this article to see why you are dead on and why the hardware makers hope it isn't so. The only other point I'd make is if you can make it smaller, that will be a plus, too.
But, you have to understand that the media that these players represent is even more critical to Congressmen than the money they can get from the tech side. What happens if a Congressman finds it difficult to buy air time during the next election cycle? He won't be a Congressman for long. And, although the Internet has grown as an alternative information distribution medium, it can't make up for that kind of lack of access.
Another thing to remember is that the main thing that leaders need to provide are bread and circuses. You can trade off a fairly good amount of bread to have a good circus before the rubes revolt. And this is an especially tasty tradeoff if you happen to get to be head clown.
In short, never, ever assume that a politician will make a decision based solely on economic issues. In this situation, the issue hits at the heart of any politician's decision-making calculus - getting elected.
Punk Froyd is gleat. Dalk Sido of the Moon locks, dude! Too bad Logel Watels reft the band. They was ichiban.
Yousa no shoulda use a tip jar. Yousa use Jar Jar. Ha Ha Ha...
Dude, it's out there. Look at systems like IBM's OS/400. In fact, since VM is part of the disk, there is no difference between objects in memory or on disk. It's called a "single level storage" model and it rocks.
This was developed back in the early 70's. Unfortunately, it makes pointers bigger so every time you revamp the hardware technology so that bigger pointers are a hardware disadvantage, the system guys keep introducing a storage hierarchy to compensate. It sucks having to keep "relearning" the same lessons - so far we've seen the same crap transitions in the mainframe, minicomputer, workstation, and microcomputer worlds. Hopefully, we won't need to see the same stuff yet again when quantum computing happens.
How about Richard Feynman? Geek extraordinaire, Nobel prize winner, but still liked to party down.
Though, you probably wouldn't want to meet him now, his being dead a few years...
Oh, I dunno... How about an open, documented trust protocol so that more than one trust authorizer could be established? How about having the trust authorizer legally liable for any financial damage cause by their mismangement of trusted information? Have the providers establish bonds or insurance to cover this.
How about extending the current trust infrastructure into the digital domain rather than handing off to one company on a silver platter?
Oh yeah, I forgot... This is America 2001 - private is good, public is bad. Sorry for the slip up. I promise it won't happen again.
Publish everything to the web and let Google cache do it for you...
Hey, this is Oz. It has to be flying monkeys.
I'll get you, my pretty... And you little 'roo, too!
... was the dual register set. It was used to good advantage in embedded systems where the executive would use one set and the app would use the other. If you remember the chess program Sargon, it used one set for white's state and one for black's. It was a pretty neat machine. But like many of the 8-bit stuff out there, it didn't make the jump to 16 bits gracefully. The Z8000 was pretty dismal...
Well, his buisness practices do seem to screw both males and females equally...
Focus on the future and dwell not so much on the past.
The Oracle has spoken. That'll be $39.95 deposited into Larry Ellison's account...
We could always pass a law mandating that all bombs being carried on by terrorists be enclosed in this type of sphere.
And if that didn't work, we could always require that the device be clearly labeled "BOMB". I think a $300 fine should be sufficient penalty for this, don't you? At least it would be if we were talking about corporate violators...
As opposed to a kernel that still has those issues, but you don't see them because you don't have the source code? All code has its less than pristine spots. At least with Linux, those places are documented and more likely to be changed by the large cadre of people working on the code. Your "sense of well-being via obliviousness" stance might be personally satisfying, but it does not, in and of itself, guarantee a better system.
If you want to bash Linux as an RTOS, there are a lot of other more appropriate technical factors to bash it with. Your aforementioned statement is not one of them.
For those of you who hope to get Linux into the government market, you should know about Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1977. This federal regulation mandated accessibility compliance for any government purchased IT systems. The government is also getting more picky about enforcing this law as of late. How do I know? The company where I work just went through a self-audit to make sure we complied...