AMD seems to be using the buzzwords that attract geeks ("linux", "open", any cpu that isn't pentium or athlon) instead of buzzwords that attract money ("XML", ".NET") although they do mention "java" but I think that one detracts from both sides of the buzzword fanbase
hense the "I have a question" post, you're right I don't know how it works. I'm curious and would like to know. someone on slashdot MUST know.. right? apparently not
humans do not understand infinity. their feeble minds simply can not comprehend it. thus they try to attach a beginning and an end just like their short, pointless lives.
listen to them: "the universe is infinite!".. "the universe is expanding!".. "the universe will end!"
oh so you have to develope AND distribute.. charging for distribution and not development. thats the same thing as charging for the software unless the distributor and the developer are different people. so tell me how does the DEVELOPER pay HIS bills if the only people making any money are the people distributing?
boy, people are just touchy as all hell on this subject aren't they? here I've been getting modded down on just about every post, and people responding with absolutely nothing to say but call me a troll or an asshole or something.
guess I'll think twice before making fun of people living in their parent's basements on slashdot eh
so how often do you actually look at the source code of the software your using? proprietary software doesn't hide anything from you, its just not necessary for you to have the code in order to use the app - in the same way you don't need the blue prints for your car. I've never had a problem with giving out the source to my apps on request, but that is (and should be) considered an extremely large gratis on the part of the developer
I mainly write asm optimized graphics routines (DSP filters/analysis/occasional special effects) and I can't wait to get my hands on a 64bit cpu. the basic strategy behind writing efficient filters is to process a register at time (32bit register = 4 8bit pixels, 2 16bit pixels, 1 and 1/3 24bit pixels or 1 32bit pixel)
mmx gives you some 64bit registers but you can only use a handful of instructions with these. with 64bit registers I should be able to double the performance on any filter that isn't already saturating the memory bandwidth (and cut cpu cycles in half regardless). not to mention the new instructions.. ah, anyways what I'm getting at is 64bits will be an extreme improvement in anything dspish (fft/mpeg encoding/streaming music/video/photoshop/filters/effects/etc/etc) but not instantly. most of this stuff is already hand optimized for 32bit mmx/sse and will need to be reoptimized for 64bit. I doubt recompiling some c++ with a 64bit compiler is going to get you any free performance.. maybe on database apps
its not as bad as it seems. as much as it sounds like another extension, x86-64 really is innovative. the memory controller is built into the cpu now, there are tons of new instructions, and 64bit registers are something every programmer longs for.
I think introducing some radically different architecture will never work out (intel kind of proved that), amd is going the right direction innovating inside the box
better yet, charge for the source code. this has been going on in the delphi/bcb community for years. visual components that will save you plenty of development time cost money, the source almost always comes with a premium (and you'll want to buy it because its nice to have the compile time flexability and debugging information, and its nice to pay that developer for his efforts (especially when your companys footing the bill))
all the fuss about free software in the oss community really makes me wonder if any of these people have actually paid another developer for their product.
yea from this entire thread every single one of my posts has been modded down (way down).. apparently some zealot with moderator points has an agenda (probably actually lives in his parent's basement:)
seriously I think the mods need to read the guidelines. mod a post down when you feel other people should not see it, not because your a zealot and don't like what the poster has to say.
As a professional software developer I'm not alone in my confusion of the motivation/incentives behind developing free software. What good comes from a free software alternative 'taking off'? All I see is that the free software developers would continue to not make any money while the professionals find it harder to make money (due to unfair competition). The only way I can see this being a good thing to the open software developers is that they are all communist hippies and think that us professionals are capatalist pigs.. which I find particularly insulting. When your good at what you do you can charge money for doing it. This is what makes the world go around, hippies!
Sell free software (+ $0)
Send the invoice (- $0.35)
Get the check (check for $0?)
Go to the bank (- $gas)
Pay my bills
now, unless your bills are less than negative 35 cents plus gas I am still confused as to how its possible to make a living on free software. unless of course you live in your parent's basement
so is that what this free software is all about.. a bunch of people who are not professional software developers but like to dabble in code on their spare time?
I can see it now.. why pay $40k for a BMW when you can get a carnix for free?! oh sure, the carnix is designed and manufactured by mcdonald's workers on their spare time but it has four wheels and drives!
the problem with that is when the customer turns around and sees 10 isles of software, none of which will run on his new computer because they are all windows titles.
until the OS and applications are disassociated it will always be pretty impossible to 'choose' your OS. there should be an rfc for an application file format that you need to implement in your OS. OS's should be written for applications, applications shouldn't be written for the OS.
if anything it proves that the world is NOT infinitely divisable (because if it were, the paradoxes hold true) but obviously those paradoxes are not true so the world DOES have a round off point. personally I think the round off is just such an extremely large number of decimal places that we are fooled into thinking it is infinitely small but that is only because we lack the computing power to reach the end of the number. so we may as well be in the matrix
the guy is right, you can't pinpoint a position in time. this doesn't set it apart from spatial dimensions however, because you can't pinpoint a position in those either. only in models can an 'atomic' position be addressed because models fail to account for the infinite amount of fractal dimensions. what so many people seem to miss though is that it doesn't matter, whatever precision is rounded off in order to address a position is either a) too small for us to measure or b) too small to matter. and in the real world those are two very valid reasons to ignore it entirely
some kid philosophizing about stuff without any understanding of chaos theory. if you know your chaos you know the entire subject of this paper is a non-issue.
Slashdot Mirror
AMD seems to be using the buzzwords that attract geeks ("linux", "open", any cpu that isn't pentium or athlon) instead of buzzwords that attract money ("XML", ".NET") although they do mention "java" but I think that one detracts from both sides of the buzzword fanbase
hense the "I have a question" post, you're right I don't know how it works. I'm curious and would like to know. someone on slashdot MUST know.. right? apparently not
humans do not understand infinity. their feeble minds simply can not comprehend it. thus they try to attach a beginning and an end just like their short, pointless lives.
listen to them: "the universe is infinite!".. "the universe is expanding!".. "the universe will end!"
fools.
silly humans. always thinking in terms of beginnings and ends, start and finish, creation and destruction. bah!
when will you learn there is no beginning and there is no end
Libraries give things away for free (well, loan for free), and still have paid employees
libraries are funded by the city
National Public Radio produces free radio, is widely regarded as having extremely high-quality news, and somehow manages to pay their reporters.
paid for by advertisements and subsidized by the city
Similary, PBS produces very high quality television, gives it away for free, and manages to have a paid staff.
again same as radio... show me someone, ANYONE making money by giving things away for free and I sware to god I'll eat my keyboard
oh so you have to develope AND distribute.. charging for distribution and not development. thats the same thing as charging for the software unless the distributor and the developer are different people. so tell me how does the DEVELOPER pay HIS bills if the only people making any money are the people distributing?
oh I see that you are a communist as well. another peice to the puzzle.. hmmmm
boy, people are just touchy as all hell on this subject aren't they? here I've been getting modded down on just about every post, and people responding with absolutely nothing to say but call me a troll or an asshole or something.
guess I'll think twice before making fun of people living in their parent's basements on slashdot eh
so how often do you actually look at the source code of the software your using? proprietary software doesn't hide anything from you, its just not necessary for you to have the code in order to use the app - in the same way you don't need the blue prints for your car. I've never had a problem with giving out the source to my apps on request, but that is (and should be) considered an extremely large gratis on the part of the developer
I mainly write asm optimized graphics routines (DSP filters/analysis/occasional special effects) and I can't wait to get my hands on a 64bit cpu. the basic strategy behind writing efficient filters is to process a register at time (32bit register = 4 8bit pixels, 2 16bit pixels, 1 and 1/3 24bit pixels or 1 32bit pixel)
mmx gives you some 64bit registers but you can only use a handful of instructions with these. with 64bit registers I should be able to double the performance on any filter that isn't already saturating the memory bandwidth (and cut cpu cycles in half regardless). not to mention the new instructions.. ah, anyways what I'm getting at is 64bits will be an extreme improvement in anything dspish (fft/mpeg encoding/streaming music/video/photoshop/filters/effects/etc/etc) but not instantly. most of this stuff is already hand optimized for 32bit mmx/sse and will need to be reoptimized for 64bit. I doubt recompiling some c++ with a 64bit compiler is going to get you any free performance.. maybe on database apps
its not as bad as it seems. as much as it sounds like another extension, x86-64 really is innovative. the memory controller is built into the cpu now, there are tons of new instructions, and 64bit registers are something every programmer longs for.
I think introducing some radically different architecture will never work out (intel kind of proved that), amd is going the right direction innovating inside the box
why would you post this? seriously.
better yet, charge for the source code. this has been going on in the delphi/bcb community for years. visual components that will save you plenty of development time cost money, the source almost always comes with a premium (and you'll want to buy it because its nice to have the compile time flexability and debugging information, and its nice to pay that developer for his efforts (especially when your companys footing the bill))
all the fuss about free software in the oss community really makes me wonder if any of these people have actually paid another developer for their product.
yea from this entire thread every single one of my posts has been modded down (way down).. apparently some zealot with moderator points has an agenda (probably actually lives in his parent's basement :)
take a shower, hippie
seriously I think the mods need to read the guidelines. mod a post down when you feel other people should not see it, not because your a zealot and don't like what the poster has to say.
As a professional software developer I'm not alone in my confusion of the motivation/incentives behind developing free software. What good comes from a free software alternative 'taking off'? All I see is that the free software developers would continue to not make any money while the professionals find it harder to make money (due to unfair competition). The only way I can see this being a good thing to the open software developers is that they are all communist hippies and think that us professionals are capatalist pigs.. which I find particularly insulting. When your good at what you do you can charge money for doing it. This is what makes the world go around, hippies!
Sell free software (+ $0)
Send the invoice (- $0.35)
Get the check (check for $0?)
Go to the bank (- $gas)
Pay my bills
now, unless your bills are less than negative 35 cents plus gas I am still confused as to how its possible to make a living on free software. unless of course you live in your parent's basement
so is that what this free software is all about.. a bunch of people who are not professional software developers but like to dabble in code on their spare time?
I can see it now.. why pay $40k for a BMW when you can get a carnix for free?! oh sure, the carnix is designed and manufactured by mcdonald's workers on their spare time but it has four wheels and drives!
the problem with that is when the customer turns around and sees 10 isles of software, none of which will run on his new computer because they are all windows titles.
until the OS and applications are disassociated it will always be pretty impossible to 'choose' your OS. there should be an rfc for an application file format that you need to implement in your OS. OS's should be written for applications, applications shouldn't be written for the OS.
how bout the developers get their shit together and charge for the software. what did they think was going to happen giving it away for free?
for anybody out there making a living writing free software.
how do you pay your bills? or do you all live in your parent's basement?
if anything it proves that the world is NOT infinitely divisable (because if it were, the paradoxes hold true) but obviously those paradoxes are not true so the world DOES have a round off point. personally I think the round off is just such an extremely large number of decimal places that we are fooled into thinking it is infinitely small but that is only because we lack the computing power to reach the end of the number. so we may as well be in the matrix
the guy is right, you can't pinpoint a position in time. this doesn't set it apart from spatial dimensions however, because you can't pinpoint a position in those either. only in models can an 'atomic' position be addressed because models fail to account for the infinite amount of fractal dimensions. what so many people seem to miss though is that it doesn't matter, whatever precision is rounded off in order to address a position is either a) too small for us to measure or b) too small to matter. and in the real world those are two very valid reasons to ignore it entirely
some kid philosophizing about stuff without any understanding of chaos theory. if you know your chaos you know the entire subject of this paper is a non-issue.
holy animated gifs and midi soundtracks.. snopes.com looks like my mom's first website