1. I'll take it you've never heard of T9. Any halfwit could manage 10 WPM or so easily.
Whoa, a whole ten words in a minute; that's amazing, dude! So it's only ten times slower than using your phone to, you know, actually make a call. Added bonus is that you completely lose all inflection, tonality, and interplay that an actual human conversation can have.
2. Receiving an SMS is far less intrusive than receiving a phone call. So you don't need to think twice before messaging someone about something totally trivial. Its a great way to stay in touch with people.
Uh, so you consider the promotion of trivial relationships a selling point of SMS? I can do without, but if that's all you have to hold on to then enjoy (I guess).
3. My provider offered the same rate for messages globally...equivalent to $0.02 US... which works out quite a bit cheaper than an international call.
Yet another amusing line of reasoning. Allow me to translate: "My cellular provider ass rapes me for voice calls, so I don't feel so bad being charged somewhat less to type out in 5 minutes what I could have said in 5 seconds."
Why, because you think I'm an idiot? I somehow think my ego can withstand that level of attack. The only thing that is clear here is that you have no idea what AI is about.
Languages have domains.
If you actually believe that, you have no chance of ever writing a single program that even approaches Eliza-level intelligence. You are confusing the quality of human understanding and organization that a language may provide with the algorithms that are use to organize information internally by the program. And whatever (in)efficiencies and understanding might be abstracted into a higher level language for humans, it all gets run as a machine language representation. So next time, before going off so cocksure, try to gain an understanding of the subject matter you're talking about instead trying to appear like an authority you obviously are not.
I stand by my having said you should only have been modded up as Funny. I know I sure chuckle more with each post you make.
They are having an AI tournament, and their supported language list includes C, C++, Java, Perl, Mathematica, and something called the Gambit Command Language.
Which one isn't Turing Complete? I swear, that you got moderated up to 5 with anything other than Funny is a crying shame.
Re:how to make linux desktop good for masses
on
Ark Linux
·
· Score: 2
With the exception of Open Office, you've just described Mac OS X.
And if only these open source developers would stop with the "distribution of the week" approach and direct their efforts towards something like a simple GNUstep install, they'd actually have a shot of getting some OS X software brought over to Linux and FreeBSD.
Rips off the Mac face for the icons, uses Windows Media for the video, and posts to/. Dude, pick a market to target before you start your next ad campaign!
I believe metadata is a useful additional means to find files . . .
Ah, but what you and others like you fail to realize is that the file path is metadata. The only data involved is the file contents (and even that can contain some metadata) and your directories and filename actually represent metadata about that content. I've been working on my own system like this (see my white paper) that subsumes the hierarchy into the other metadata you have for the file.
Self-built PCs obviously aren't "standard" which is what I stated I was talking about.
And if you had cared to read what I was talking about, I made a distinction between built and bought computers. I mean, if you're actually using floppies for some critical purpose I could understand you wanting to blindly come to their defense, but then I would expect you to at least mention why they are so great for you. Otherwise, why invest the effort in defending such a dated technology?
. . . not porn or MP3's or whatever it is that you consider "key data".
You know, an adult who wants to type "text" can type "text". Odds are if they type "key data" instead, they probably have something more in mind than text. Instead of maintaining your poor position by dancing around wording, why not simply admit that it might be difficult to fit all those things into 1.4MB and move on to better territory?
Also, as for OS+GUI, on the original Macintosh you had that on a floppy.
As I am not a computer history buff, I did not know that. Please enlighten me as to how much space it took up for the OS and list the apps that were also included with it such that a completely usable environment was available for the remainder of the space on the floppy (please list that free space size, too; thanks). I look forward to you defending your position with these facts. For bonus points, you might also want to include the size of the hardware ROM that contained the bulk of the Toolbox code that was used but, hey, no pressure!
1- Floppies are, at this moment and for at least a couple of years into the future, a standard component.
Not a single computer I have purchased in the last 5 years has come with a floppy, and the last time I built a computer I felt a need to put a floppy in was early 1999 (and it's seen use maybe half a dozen times, mostly in the first year to move old data from floppies to a reliable media). A floppy drive is standard only in the same way that Windows is: some manufacturers include it as a bullet point to extract an additional profit from the clueless.
2- 1.44 MB is a lot of text.
Why is it like I'm the only one who saw that the OP wanted an OS+GUI on that same floppy? Why is it I'm the only one who read key data to possibly, just possibly, mean something other than plain text?
I had DOS boot disks with Norton Commander, Wordstar, and odds and ends that I could do basic work from.
So the guy is busting his hump to get what was common circa 1990? Oh, that must be encoraging . . .
Fuck knows how big MS Office will be when DVD becomes the standard distribution medium.
My Office installation size hasn't changed in a decade. It started out at 0K and it's holding steady. But your statement does sort of beg the question of why you're bothering with the bloat if your boot floppy did everything you needed.
Keep in mind the OP wanted a bootable OS+GUI on the very same disk. You'll also need a way to make that data useful, and even something like ed runs over 48K. Also, talking about using gzip to save space immediately introduces a roughly 64K overhead just to have that tool around. Considering that their data could indeed be something more dense than simple ASCII (e.g., a picture), an encoded piece of paper probably will be a better medium than their one floppy solution. So it's a mentally interesting puzzle to work on, but not that practical.
Don't mean to point out the obvious, but a floppy is pretty much crap media these days, and your efforts will only be useful as long as companies ship computers with them, which will probably stop right at about the time you're finishing up.
It would be really nice if I could carry around all of my key data on a self booting floppy . . .
If you can honestly keep your key data on the same floppy you've squeezed an OS+GUI on, why not spring for the single piece of paper that can hold that same information? There is simply nothing a floppy can do for me any more. Even USB keychain drives beat them, and that's only one of many options that make a floppy look silly.
Because, once armed with a decision in their favor, the DVD CCA can use it to strong-arm ISPs and individuals and intimidate them into taking down the information.
Actually, no, they can't. All they'll do is succeed it into more of a free speech issue. And I don't mean some legal, bullshit free speech issue, I mean a "My drunk skinhead neighbor is going on about niggers again, but I'm glad I know he's a racist" issue. Any such decision by the courts to stifle expression simply drives people underground. And nobody can do underground data quite like geeks can. Stop by DataFetish and try to find the DeCSS code. There are so many ways information can be encoded and obfuscated that the only effective legal decision is to completely take away all a citizen's rights.
As a gift, especially for parents, it probably depends on how tech-saavy they are. If they're still not comfortable with programming a VCR, then a non-service TiVo is not the way to go. Like I said, it works for me because my issues with the VCR were not of the programming/setting the clock variety, but with the constant tape changes and the limited scheduling. So if they're mostly happy with the way a VCR works, gift them with just the unit. If they're the kind of people that really enjoy TV entertainment but have trouble with technology, the TiVo service is actually well worth the money. Compare what is the price of a dozen DVDs to how many trouble-free hours of broadcast viewing they could do and make your decision.
Are there any good PVRs out there that you don't need to pay a monthly service fee to use?
Uh, yeah, there's this one called TiVo that you just might have heard about. I got one and decided after a bit that I wasn't really getting much out of the service, so I cancelled it. As their web site states: "Without the TiVo service, a TiVo DVR has extremely limited functionality." It works just fine for me as, essentially, a tapeless VCR that has the ability to schedule more than 6 events, which is all I really needed. So if your needs are like mine and within the realm of what is considered "limited functionality", check out a TiVo.
Why is it you think this is a good thing? I mean, what is it audiophiles are really trying to achieve? I would assume they're trying to reproduce what the artist's intended work is, but unless they know exactly what sound the artist heard and was going for, they have absolutely no way to know if what their system is producing is what the artist's system was producing. If you're only going for a faith reproduction of what is on the media, I have to wonder why you think it's better to hear the pops and glitches that are present on the media but were not intended to be part of the work. In short, why does the audiophile think there is one "right" sound?
To a great extent AI is psychological. You read into things what you want.
In your rant, the use of A is extraneous, though I wager no moderator will see my post as insightful as some think yours was. Just as you no doubt see moderations to your comment as a sign of I instead of "Ah ha! A Markov Model was used to associate the text of my post with other, similar posts that were highly rated!" Shucks, you probably think the Turing Test is just about the computer's intelligence, too.
The PERL needs AppleScript to talk to iTunes. It doesn't do it on it's own...been there and doing the same thing with PHP:)
Yeah, the only problem is you're doing the same, tired "look what I can play" garbage. There has only been one really useful application of iTunes scripting: iSing, and even that is questionable if you survey your surroundings when the song is over.:-)
My company has been doing this sort of thing for years, only we decided to call it Serviceware to more accurately reflect that it is based on the model of software as a service, where the code is made free once that service is paid for. So it's good others are seeing value in the concept, but it's a shame the publicity goes to someone that names it so poorly.
Given that this is for a home network, the storage needs shouldn't be greater than can fit on something like an iPod, and if an event happens that messes up both your desktop and something on your person, your problems are bigger than a backup can solve. Oh, and an encrypted disk image is your friend!
"If it's not going to lead to increased revenues for the company, it simply shouldn't be on the table."
Wow, way to be a dogmatically rational business suit. Maybe it hasn't occurred to you that profit can be reaped in other forms than maximizing immediate shareholder value?
Maybe it didn't occur to you to actually read what I had written. Nowhere did I mention "immediate shareholder value". I said it should turn a profit; didn't say how or in what period of time. It's up to that business unit to show how they think that would happen. Hint: that would not be by saying no Linux geeks are going to buy the product! You fail to grasp I'm actually on your side; I'm just pointing out that the poster had flaws in their reasoning against open source that could be applied to the whole project, open source or not.
You forgot:...an army of competitors in the same market who now have your source code which they can use to make their product compatible with your own, while you are stuck spending tons of research dollars on reverse engineering their product to compete.
Why? If they move to support your product, they inadvertently make you the market leader. They also raise issues of their code now having been derived from your code, and thus required to be GPL'd itself. On the whole, no smart competitor would touch anything you put under the GPL.
I believe you grossly overestimate the army of geeks who will supposedly buy his product.
Of course, if that were true, I'd question the business decision to support Linux in the first place. If it's not going to lead to increased revenues for the company, it simply shouldn't be on the table. Linux zealots will likely mod me down, but the business people know I'm right.
Slashdot Mirror
1. I'll take it you've never heard of T9. Any halfwit could manage 10 WPM or so easily.
Whoa, a whole ten words in a minute; that's amazing, dude! So it's only ten times slower than using your phone to, you know, actually make a call. Added bonus is that you completely lose all inflection, tonality, and interplay that an actual human conversation can have.
2. Receiving an SMS is far less intrusive than receiving a phone call. So you don't need to think twice before messaging someone about something totally trivial. Its a great way to stay in touch with people.
Uh, so you consider the promotion of trivial relationships a selling point of SMS? I can do without, but if that's all you have to hold on to then enjoy (I guess).
3. My provider offered the same rate for messages globally...equivalent to $0.02 US... which works out quite a bit cheaper than an international call.
Yet another amusing line of reasoning. Allow me to translate: "My cellular provider ass rapes me for voice calls, so I don't feel so bad being charged somewhat less to type out in 5 minutes what I could have said in 5 seconds."
Congrajulations! You are now officially an idiot!
Why, because you think I'm an idiot? I somehow think my ego can withstand that level of attack. The only thing that is clear here is that you have no idea what AI is about.
Languages have domains.
If you actually believe that, you have no chance of ever writing a single program that even approaches Eliza-level intelligence. You are confusing the quality of human understanding and organization that a language may provide with the algorithms that are use to organize information internally by the program. And whatever (in)efficiencies and understanding might be abstracted into a higher level language for humans, it all gets run as a machine language representation. So next time, before going off so cocksure, try to gain an understanding of the subject matter you're talking about instead trying to appear like an authority you obviously are not.
I stand by my having said you should only have been modded up as Funny. I know I sure chuckle more with each post you make.
They are having an AI tournament, and their supported language list includes C, C++, Java, Perl, Mathematica, and something called the Gambit Command Language.
Which one isn't Turing Complete? I swear, that you got moderated up to 5 with anything other than Funny is a crying shame.
With the exception of Open Office, you've just described Mac OS X.
And if only these open source developers would stop with the "distribution of the week" approach and direct their efforts towards something like a simple GNUstep install, they'd actually have a shot of getting some OS X software brought over to Linux and FreeBSD.
If you have more money than sense, I appeal to you: Purchase me this case!
And if you do have as much sense as you have money, buy him a PowerMac, which still wipes the floor with every PC case I've ever seen.
How long until they get sued by a certain company [paramount.com] protecting their trademark [startrek.com]?
Probably quite some time. I know we sure have been waiting a long time since our STEnterprise release. :-)
If I had to venture a guess, I'd say the magazine is probably set to sell at $2500, the cost of The Original Macintosh itself.
Rips off the Mac face for the icons, uses Windows Media for the video, and posts to /.
Dude, pick a market to target before you start your next ad campaign!
I believe metadata is a useful additional means to find files . . .
Ah, but what you and others like you fail to realize is that the file path is metadata. The only data involved is the file contents (and even that can contain some metadata) and your directories and filename actually represent metadata about that content. I've been working on my own system like this (see my white paper) that subsumes the hierarchy into the other metadata you have for the file.
Self-built PCs obviously aren't "standard" which is what I stated I was talking about.
And if you had cared to read what I was talking about, I made a distinction between built and bought computers. I mean, if you're actually using floppies for some critical purpose I could understand you wanting to blindly come to their defense, but then I would expect you to at least mention why they are so great for you. Otherwise, why invest the effort in defending such a dated technology?
. . . not porn or MP3's or whatever it is that you consider "key data".
You know, an adult who wants to type "text" can type "text". Odds are if they type "key data" instead, they probably have something more in mind than text. Instead of maintaining your poor position by dancing around wording, why not simply admit that it might be difficult to fit all those things into 1.4MB and move on to better territory?
Also, as for OS+GUI, on the original Macintosh you had that on a floppy.
As I am not a computer history buff, I did not know that. Please enlighten me as to how much space it took up for the OS and list the apps that were also included with it such that a completely usable environment was available for the remainder of the space on the floppy (please list that free space size, too; thanks). I look forward to you defending your position with these facts. For bonus points, you might also want to include the size of the hardware ROM that contained the bulk of the Toolbox code that was used but, hey, no pressure!
1- Floppies are, at this moment and for at least a couple of years into the future, a standard component.
Not a single computer I have purchased in the last 5 years has come with a floppy, and the last time I built a computer I felt a need to put a floppy in was early 1999 (and it's seen use maybe half a dozen times, mostly in the first year to move old data from floppies to a reliable media). A floppy drive is standard only in the same way that Windows is: some manufacturers include it as a bullet point to extract an additional profit from the clueless.
2- 1.44 MB is a lot of text.
Why is it like I'm the only one who saw that the OP wanted an OS+GUI on that same floppy? Why is it I'm the only one who read key data to possibly, just possibly, mean something other than plain text?
I had DOS boot disks with Norton Commander, Wordstar, and odds and ends that I could do basic work from.
So the guy is busting his hump to get what was common circa 1990? Oh, that must be encoraging . . .
Fuck knows how big MS Office will be when DVD becomes the standard distribution medium.
My Office installation size hasn't changed in a decade. It started out at 0K and it's holding steady. But your statement does sort of beg the question of why you're bothering with the bloat if your boot floppy did everything you needed.
You can, of course, skew your argument by . . .
Keep in mind the OP wanted a bootable OS+GUI on the very same disk. You'll also need a way to make that data useful, and even something like ed runs over 48K. Also, talking about using gzip to save space immediately introduces a roughly 64K overhead just to have that tool around. Considering that their data could indeed be something more dense than simple ASCII (e.g., a picture), an encoded piece of paper probably will be a better medium than their one floppy solution. So it's a mentally interesting puzzle to work on, but not that practical.
I'm about halfway done with it.
Don't mean to point out the obvious, but a floppy is pretty much crap media these days, and your efforts will only be useful as long as companies ship computers with them, which will probably stop right at about the time you're finishing up.
It would be really nice if I could carry around all of my key data on a self booting floppy . . .
If you can honestly keep your key data on the same floppy you've squeezed an OS+GUI on, why not spring for the single piece of paper that can hold that same information? There is simply nothing a floppy can do for me any more. Even USB keychain drives beat them, and that's only one of many options that make a floppy look silly.
Because, once armed with a decision in their favor, the DVD CCA can use it to strong-arm ISPs and individuals and intimidate them into taking down the information.
Actually, no, they can't. All they'll do is succeed it into more of a free speech issue. And I don't mean some legal, bullshit free speech issue, I mean a "My drunk skinhead neighbor is going on about niggers again, but I'm glad I know he's a racist" issue. Any such decision by the courts to stifle expression simply drives people underground. And nobody can do underground data quite like geeks can. Stop by DataFetish and try to find the DeCSS code. There are so many ways information can be encoded and obfuscated that the only effective legal decision is to completely take away all a citizen's rights.
As a gift, especially for parents, it probably depends on how tech-saavy they are. If they're still not comfortable with programming a VCR, then a non-service TiVo is not the way to go. Like I said, it works for me because my issues with the VCR were not of the programming/setting the clock variety, but with the constant tape changes and the limited scheduling. So if they're mostly happy with the way a VCR works, gift them with just the unit. If they're the kind of people that really enjoy TV entertainment but have trouble with technology, the TiVo service is actually well worth the money. Compare what is the price of a dozen DVDs to how many trouble-free hours of broadcast viewing they could do and make your decision.
Are there any good PVRs out there that you don't need to pay a monthly service fee to use?
Uh, yeah, there's this one called TiVo that you just might have heard about. I got one and decided after a bit that I wasn't really getting much out of the service, so I cancelled it. As their web site states: "Without the TiVo service, a TiVo DVR has extremely limited functionality." It works just fine for me as, essentially, a tapeless VCR that has the ability to schedule more than 6 events, which is all I really needed. So if your needs are like mine and within the realm of what is considered "limited functionality", check out a TiVo.
I heard things on a CD I didn't know were there
Why is it you think this is a good thing? I mean, what is it audiophiles are really trying to achieve? I would assume they're trying to reproduce what the artist's intended work is, but unless they know exactly what sound the artist heard and was going for, they have absolutely no way to know if what their system is producing is what the artist's system was producing. If you're only going for a faith reproduction of what is on the media, I have to wonder why you think it's better to hear the pops and glitches that are present on the media but were not intended to be part of the work. In short, why does the audiophile think there is one "right" sound?
To a great extent AI is psychological. You read into things what you want.
In your rant, the use of A is extraneous, though I wager no moderator will see my post as insightful as some think yours was. Just as you no doubt see moderations to your comment as a sign of I instead of "Ah ha! A Markov Model was used to associate the text of my post with other, similar posts that were highly rated!" Shucks, you probably think the Turing Test is just about the computer's intelligence, too.
The PERL needs AppleScript to talk to iTunes. It doesn't do it on it's own...been there and doing the same thing with PHP :)
Yeah, the only problem is you're doing the same, tired "look what I can play" garbage. There has only been one really useful application of iTunes scripting: iSing, and even that is questionable if you survey your surroundings when the song is over. :-)
Links to (in addition to various other iCal sites) about 700 calendars, including a calendar of its own new calendars! Worth a look: iCalShare.
My company has been doing this sort of thing for years, only we decided to call it Serviceware to more accurately reflect that it is based on the model of software as a service, where the code is made free once that service is paid for. So it's good others are seeing value in the concept, but it's a shame the publicity goes to someone that names it so poorly.
Given that this is for a home network, the storage needs shouldn't be greater than can fit on something like an iPod, and if an event happens that messes up both your desktop and something on your person, your problems are bigger than a backup can solve. Oh, and an encrypted disk image is your friend!
"If it's not going to lead to increased revenues for the company, it simply shouldn't be on the table."
Wow, way to be a dogmatically rational business suit. Maybe it hasn't occurred to you that profit can be reaped in other forms than maximizing immediate shareholder value?
Maybe it didn't occur to you to actually read what I had written. Nowhere did I mention "immediate shareholder value". I said it should turn a profit; didn't say how or in what period of time. It's up to that business unit to show how they think that would happen. Hint: that would not be by saying no Linux geeks are going to buy the product! You fail to grasp I'm actually on your side; I'm just pointing out that the poster had flaws in their reasoning against open source that could be applied to the whole project, open source or not.
You forgot: ...an army of competitors in the same market who now have your source code which they can use to make their product compatible with your own, while you are stuck spending tons of research dollars on reverse engineering their product to compete.
Why? If they move to support your product, they inadvertently make you the market leader. They also raise issues of their code now having been derived from your code, and thus required to be GPL'd itself. On the whole, no smart competitor would touch anything you put under the GPL.
I believe you grossly overestimate the army of geeks who will supposedly buy his product.
Of course, if that were true, I'd question the business decision to support Linux in the first place. If it's not going to lead to increased revenues for the company, it simply shouldn't be on the table. Linux zealots will likely mod me down, but the business people know I'm right.