pushing polygons is wrong. It's a short term solution to a long term problem. Keeping to a poly budget is grunt work that should be done by the tool not by the artist. Programmers who think bitrot is bad should have a look at the "asset rot" of 3d models. The deprecation of graphics assets is so fast that it's a stretch to use the word "asset" to refer to them at all. A character model from a AAA title from six months ago has some value, to B quality games, but mostly none of them are reused.
For 3d models to earn their name as "assets" they need to be created with infinite resolution. This is not hard. Constructive Solid Geometry is a well understood technique for modeling and is typically used in CAD applications. An object described even at what would be considered a course level of detail of typical CSG modeling is orders of magnitude higher resolution than the typical game model. What's more, they can be incrementally improved, whereas the b-rep that is typical for a game model today is a one shot affair.
Today, the vast majority of CSG models are created for raytracing architectures which, although they give stunning results, are too slow for realtime applications such as games. Even the attempts to create realtime raytracing systems are aimed at rendering b-reps because of the opportunity to perform an acceleration stage which greatly reduces the scene complexity. B-reps are a win for realtime applications, but just because your application requires a b-rep doesn't mean artists need to get their hands dirty pushing polygons.
Two solutions exist which can render CSG models in realtime.
The image-based rendering algorithms with implementations (such as OpenCSG) which take advantage of z-buffer and stencil-buffer hardware in popular GPU cards. The image-based systems are more compatible than raytracing with the current 3d graphics rendering state of the art, but still require intricacies to integrate that have prevented them from appearing on the market.
The other option is the automatic generation of a b-rep from a CSG model. This has the advantage that it requires no change to the 3d graphics rendering in games and the algorithm can be parametrically tuned to produce b-reps that are fast for different applications. For example, the same CSG model can be used to generate b-reps of different Level Of Detail for when the object is close up vs far away, or for pre-rendered applications such as cut scenes or trailers.
Well, ya know, there was a time when car manufacturers tried to do a lot of silly things like this. They got sued and the courts ruled they were in violation of anti-trust laws. Now you can be pretty assured that a car won't come encumbered.
Fair enough. If you try to switch to Linux and discover it doesn't have what you need then go back.
As for considering people's ideas, yeah, great, developers do that, all the time. The problem is when the developer says "look, it won't work" and the people harp on about how right they are. That's often when the DIY attitude comes out, because nothing says "you were wrong" like running code.
Meh. I don't speak for anyone else. I speak for myself. I say if you have a need for feature X then add it. If you're not willing to invest the time (or money) to make feature X more than a "gee, I wish" request then you don't really have a *need* for it. As for this "We believe this is something everyone could and should use" crap, for a start, I don't speak for anyone but myself, and I think Free Software is something a lot of people can find a use for, and if you can't, then don't use it. If, however, you just meant that end users might have a need for feature X but they're unable or unwilling to make that feature a reality, well, that's what the commercial distros are for. Go nag your Redhat representative.
It's not just here man. Microsoft is poison. Everyone knows that. You get in bed with them and you might as well kiss your business goodbye, if not your entire part of the industry.
The project is for developing drivers with manufacturer support. So if you can get the manufacturer of your favourite device to work with the developers then, sure, you can 'nominate' that device.
How about just not being an asshole about it? Seriously.. you're like a bunch of wolves. Just because you have no confidence in anything you say doesn't mean the rest of don't.
simply shows that you're ignorant of what the semantics are. Or I forgot about the sticky bit. Thanks.
allowing them to create a link to it is not an inherent risk. 'cept it makes it looks like the owner of the file created it in that directory. What's even more neat is this:
$ ls -l bobs_file -rw------- 3 bob bob 10815 2007-05-01 18:53 bobs_file $ ln bobs_file/tmp/lock_bobs_quota $ ls -l/tmp/lock_bobs_quota -rw------- 3 bob bob 10815 2007-05-01 18:53 lock_bobs_quota
now when bob needs some space and he goes to rm -f bobs_file the link to the file will go away, but the file will hang around and unless bob looks in/tmp he'll have no idea why.
These are not security concerns, to be sure, but they are mischievous.
Hard link/usr/bin/su to ~/usr/bin/su. (Yes, you can create hard links to files which you don't own.) Yes, and there's the bug.. which hasn't been fixed for 40 years.
Look. I'm an extremist ok? I hold extreme opinions and I'm proud of it. In a way, this is what Linus and I have in common. I *try* to be less rude about it than him, though. I, personally, would rather thousands of people die and *then* have the police get involved than to have a police force which runs around trying to "prevent" crimes from happening. Why? Because the alternative is chilling effects and the slippery slope that follows.
Slashdot Mirror
Linus is never right.
He's convincing.
pushing polygons is wrong. It's a short term solution to a long term problem. Keeping to a poly budget is grunt work that should be done by the tool not by the artist. Programmers who think bitrot is bad should have a look at the "asset rot" of 3d models. The deprecation of graphics assets is so fast that it's a stretch to use the word "asset" to refer to them at all. A character model from a AAA title from six months ago has some value, to B quality games, but mostly none of them are reused.
For 3d models to earn their name as "assets" they need to be created with infinite resolution. This is not hard. Constructive Solid Geometry is a well understood technique for modeling and is typically used in CAD applications. An object described even at what would be considered a course level of detail of typical CSG modeling is orders of magnitude higher resolution than the typical game model. What's more, they can be incrementally improved, whereas the b-rep that is typical for a game model today is a one shot affair.
Today, the vast majority of CSG models are created for raytracing architectures which, although they give stunning results, are too slow for realtime applications such as games. Even the attempts to create realtime raytracing systems are aimed at rendering b-reps because of the opportunity to perform an acceleration stage which greatly reduces the scene complexity. B-reps are a win for realtime applications, but just because your application requires a b-rep doesn't mean artists need to get their hands dirty pushing polygons.
Two solutions exist which can render CSG models in realtime.
The image-based rendering algorithms with implementations (such as OpenCSG) which take advantage of z-buffer and stencil-buffer hardware in popular GPU cards. The image-based systems are more compatible than raytracing with the current 3d graphics rendering state of the art, but still require intricacies to integrate that have prevented them from appearing on the market.
The other option is the automatic generation of a b-rep from a CSG model. This has the advantage that it requires no change to the 3d graphics rendering in games and the algorithm can be parametrically tuned to produce b-reps that are fast for different applications. For example, the same CSG model can be used to generate b-reps of different Level Of Detail for when the object is close up vs far away, or for pre-rendered applications such as cut scenes or trailers.
It just happens to be really hard.
Well, ya know, there was a time when car manufacturers tried to do a lot of silly things like this. They got sued and the courts ruled they were in violation of anti-trust laws. Now you can be pretty assured that a car won't come encumbered.
Fair enough. If you try to switch to Linux and discover it doesn't have what you need then go back.
As for considering people's ideas, yeah, great, developers do that, all the time. The problem is when the developer says "look, it won't work" and the people harp on about how right they are. That's often when the DIY attitude comes out, because nothing says "you were wrong" like running code.
Meh. I don't speak for anyone else. I speak for myself. I say if you have a need for feature X then add it. If you're not willing to invest the time (or money) to make feature X more than a "gee, I wish" request then you don't really have a *need* for it. As for this "We believe this is something everyone could and should use" crap, for a start, I don't speak for anyone but myself, and I think Free Software is something a lot of people can find a use for, and if you can't, then don't use it. If, however, you just meant that end users might have a need for feature X but they're unable or unwilling to make that feature a reality, well, that's what the commercial distros are for. Go nag your Redhat representative.
The US is trillions of dollars in debt. By any sensible measure it is already "broke". Personally I prefer the term "bankrupt".
Huh? What? Why?
I hear Intel has some engineers who you could get to implement this. If you don't completely botch it, you might even get it into Linus' tree.
It's Free Software, you can add whatever you want.
It's not just here man. Microsoft is poison. Everyone knows that. You get in bed with them and you might as well kiss your business goodbye, if not your entire part of the industry.
Novell should have known this better than most.
I bet employees of Novell will read your post and shake their heads.. maybe mutter the word "Slashdot" with an explicative prefixed.
But this is what your management has done to your brand. Congratulations.
The project is for developing drivers with manufacturer support. So if you can get the manufacturer of your favourite device to work with the developers then, sure, you can 'nominate' that device.
Denver? Shit man, I'm sorry, you've been punished enough already.
So you're in the US? I go there 5 times a year man.
Drop me an email, we'll arrange a meet.
So is that a no?
You're a big man when you've got your anonymity to hide behind.
If you're so fuckin' tough, how about we meet up and discuss this personally? Chicken shit.
How about just not being an asshole about it? Seriously.. you're like a bunch of wolves. Just because you have no confidence in anything you say doesn't mean the rest of don't.
$ ls -l bobs_file
-rw------- 3 bob bob 10815 2007-05-01 18:53 bobs_file
$ ln bobs_file
$ ls -l
-rw------- 3 bob bob 10815 2007-05-01 18:53 lock_bobs_quota
now when bob needs some space and he goes to rm -f bobs_file the link to the file will go away, but the file will hang around and unless bob looks in
These are not security concerns, to be sure, but they are mischievous.
actually, my recommendation would be to make ln /bin/bash foo fail.
No hardlinks to files you don't own.
Well there's kernel exploits for a start.. but yeah, ok, close enough.
try for yourself:
$ id
uid=1000(you) gid=1000(you)
$ cd
$ ls -l
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 700560 2007-04-11 09:32
$ ln
$ ls -l foo
-rwxr-xr-x 2 root root 700560 2007-04-11 09:32 foo
Uhhh, why is a regular user allowed to create a file owned by root?
$ rm -f
rm: cannot remove `/bin/bash': Permission denied
$ rm -f foo
rm: cannot remove `foo': Operation not permitted
Awesome, the semantics of directory permissions are not even honored anymore.. anyone else smell a kludge here?
Obviously they involve privilege escalation.
A process running as a regular user can break out too. There's a variety of tricks. Virtualization solutions are much more secure.
Look. I'm an extremist ok? I hold extreme opinions and I'm proud of it. In a way, this is what Linus and I have in common. I *try* to be less rude about it than him, though. I, personally, would rather thousands of people die and *then* have the police get involved than to have a police force which runs around trying to "prevent" crimes from happening. Why? Because the alternative is chilling effects and the slippery slope that follows.