The problem is not against "writing [efficient] vertex and pixel shaders easier and more portable across graphics cards", the problem is about Microsoft and NVidia controlling the "writing [efficient] vertex and pixel shaders easier and more portable across graphics cards" for the good and benefit of all society.
It doesn't matter how much times you read the articule...this is just obvious. Unless it's a standard with representation, then it's bad for you and me (unless we own certain stock).
"In keeping with Linux tradition, NVIDIA has open-sourced certain components of the compiler, allowing content developers to add their own customizations as well."
This is as true as saying:
"In keeping with MS tradition, NVIDIA has closed-sourced certain components of the compiler, but still allowing content developers to add their own customizations as well."
Sound could be really improved. In a film, no motter how digital or whatever you always get the feeling the sounds come from the "walls" and not from the "objects". They sound great, come from a direction, but NOT from the object. If the screen is big it helps a lot to associate the object and the sound.
So we need more curved displays and not just bigger. The bigger and bigger you make a flat surface, the more you have to step away from it, hurting again the experience.
Maybe a large screen whose film KNOWs you'll be looking at the center mostly, so that the edges do not carry vital visual information, just "periferical info". If it thinks the screen is small and that you are seing ALL of it at a time, then they tend to use all the space available and you can't dive in (get close and use it as secondary info).
And targeted sounds (headphones) accounting for how far and to the edges of the screen you are, + extra bass non headphones speakers (for enviroment trembling and body feeling of that tremble) is the way to go. They need to "tune" the sound so that it's physically right.
The day realize you don't believe in reality because it could be a movie is the day we can claim to have done the right thing (well, i may be a disaster in reality:))
Do you think it's the same to go to the theather than to watch it through your television? Think of that, and then think about 3D television. Imagine a BIG display with 3D objects. True 3D, not just some depth enhanced crap. It will happen, and 2D will become adandonware or "classic" just as B&W films.
Because TV produccers apparently don't want to become LCD producers. Well, I fact, only a few companies can produce LCD displays (of whatever variant).
If TV where just an LCD display connected to a Analog2Digital interface for the good old signals and then a new digital interface that can ask what the TV resolution/depth is and then just send the data to it.
I'm not fully informed, but it all seems to be a problem. How can the computer industry display whatever at whatever resolution (projecting DVDs, Divx, VideoCD, etc. for example) without all that stupid HDTV non-sense? We just need a computerTV. Hey, sounds nice: CTV!
Just dunble a transmeta chip, a cheapo mother an LCD and bundle a TV-in card, saver and you got something that will last more than HDTV and take advange of a lot more features than any TV.
Re:Writer believes everyone is rich?
on
The Almighty Buck
·
· Score: 2
You can buy tons of food in a third world economy for what you pay for a DVD. Yet, it doesn't make you richer. They pirate the DVD (and they do well, because they are NOT printing dolars while America is) and can have food really cheap.
In terms of dollards, yes their are cheap, but not in all 3rd world economies. The problem only comes when you lend some of their corrupt goverment printed dollars they burn. After then, they become slaves forever. I would g on and argue that if a country reaches that state in it's life, they best move would be to become Americans (ie: something like Costa Rica). There's no way back after a high debt is constructed. These countries must sell all hard good (low profit, upward sloped marginal costs) to get the dollars. They will never escape. Lending money to poor countries is the best way to make Americans rich. You will have more food, more hard goods cheap. In exchange for what? Green paper.
Re:How is the Brooks article unintentionally funny
on
The Almighty Buck
·
· Score: 2
Well, I've been trying so articulate a new way to understand an economy. Particulary, taking into account WHAT people buy in different countries. The problem is mainstream is not concerned about anything that is either: 1) relevant 2) insightfull. They just want to add layers of crap and theory over whatever obvious thing some nobel said in the past. They have no clue! But as long as "everyone" in the field buys the "crap", it hold as true... it's the lens through which they understand economics.
The real important thing to have a RICH country like the US depends on basicaly three pillars: 1 - having enough food and jobs 2 - having a large share of the world purchasing power 3 - use the money to buy stupid* stuff inside the country (DVDs), export stupid stuff. Buy hard goods.
I will not go on exmplaing why, but it can be proved. Every time you buy a DVD, you are making yourselves richer. Trust me! It's not the point if you need the DVD or not, it's the fact you can afterwards buy hard stuff cheap from abroad by printing paper.
* "stupid stuff" is here defined as "near zero marginal" cost of production.
I can only describe a little example: suppose Bush wanted to increase the USA wealth and that he controled everyones minds in the US. He could then force all employers to pay $2000 to employees. The suppose alll those employees are forced to buy 200 DVD a year. Would ex-ante PRICES rise?!?! NO! Not a cent.
The ex-post situation depends on what Holywood does with the "extra earnings". Well, they just pay a lot of money to stars, pay for high end equipment, distribute some earnings to investors.
The stars mostly save the money or spend it in "stupid stuff" (if they could eat $5 millions bucks of local bread, you'd toasted as this would lead to inflation and thus all this "richist illusion would fall over"). The investors save it , or buy hard goods abroad, etc.
Well, the bottom line is: trust me, buy DVDs. It's the only way you can earn such high salaries! The day the US citicens (if ever) discover that their extra wealth is based in the assumption of them buying DVD, you'll see a great chaos (either bank collapse, or severe depression or high inflation).
... the benefit of easily developing stuff with GLIDE was overshadowed by the loss of a chunk of your target audience, and the developers moved away from it.
That's what Direct3D was for from the begining. But Glide was there BEFORE direct3D, so 3Dfx was not responsible for their success. May sure also know Voodoo cards where several times faster than the closest competitor...for years.
After that, companies started selling "promises" like the S3 virge cards, the RIVA crap and the like. They sold a lot. After than, some harm was done. Because everyone had crappy cards which only had Direct3D drivers. The cheapo crap market killed 3Dfx. They could get financing, they lost the edge.
Good think that Nvidia was MS funded (my guess) so at least we have their damn fine cards. But I fear promoting Cg is not a move towards better competition. It can only see it hurting other vendors, not allowing faster/better games.
My god how naive:(... I'm not trolling. I'm just suggesting to pay a little more attention to this kind of stuff, so that we can prevent having unstopable monopolies as a result.
Do you think this Cg will take most out of ATI cards? Do you think ATI likes it or it's a good thing for them? Why did Nvidia developed this thing with Microsoft help? Why wasn't ATI there? Why weren't Matrox and 3Dlabs invited?
It may be compatible for ATI cards as in beer, not as in freedom. And that beer will probably taste like you don't want a second round.
This can only hurt 3D card makers and promote Nvidia. Mirosoft ins making sure they can control it at a software level rather than a hardware level. It's the only way they have to lock you and control the market. Just like the control OEM bundling, and everything in the PC industry.
Don't complain in the future unless you can have some vision of that are the consecuences of some "innovations".
Do you even read articles? How did you get modded insightful? Do moderators read articles?
Yes, I think they do read them. There's nothing in the article that contradicts what he says. Actually, Nvidia IS IN BED with Microsoft. 3Dfx was not and got killed. 3DLabs was not and suffered.
If it werent't for Id, i'd say OpenGL will be dead right now and you would not be able to play any 3D games but loading Windows.
Now, all this can sound unsound, but if you really followed what happened in the 3D world since 1995 you will notice it's not a crazy idea.
Microsoft needs the games to run under Windows and XBox, and to NOT run on any other plataform. This is as true as the sky is blue. So the original poster does have a valid point with I'd mod as Insightfull any day.
Nvidia = Microsoft since the begining. I can say that because I know them since the NV1 (1995 i think), which I own.
They where virtually killed by 3Dfx many times yet someone kept pumping money from "somewhere" for them. The only change in focus after their failure this: target for Direct3D.
They kept pumping money and money and selling at a loss until they bough 3Dfx. Most other players where dead already (rendition and many others) dead by then. Now they control the market with Microsoft by their side. Microsoft was always against 3Dfx, they direct3D was never "friendly" with 3Dfx cards (though it worked fine, features where really targeted for Nvidia cards).
It's like Nvidia and Microsoft developed direct3D. It's not a coincidence. Microsoft would never enjoy a monopolistic provider in a key market unless they own/control it somehow (and no, you don't need Microsoft puting money directly to own it. There are a thouthand ways to own something in an unnoticed fashion).
Remark: i know Nvidia cards are the best and excelent ones! This has nothing to do with it:) The 3D market history is full of "black holes" which you just can't understand well without some conspiracy.
Buzzzt! Guess again NOT. Most things sell "by the trend". A lot of people made money programing Java when it was hotest, a lot of contractors will make huge revenues from companies adopting.net.
The other day i was in a meeting with some CEO of a programming firm with many clients. What they do i follow the TREND. He claimed that ".net will require a lot of $$$ from companies adopting it, and that (they) will be ready for it! Huge profits to be made".
Believe me, you can make lots of money by just following the trend. Companies will adopt.net because their contractors or programming department will tell them they need it. And Microsoft will be leveraging their "hard earned" 40B plus their monopoly to make sure the argument wins.
This is just an example. The trend make you eat extra food. On the other hard, you have someone like me, which tries to make sense out of this. End result: they make money and do not help producitivity. I don't make much money and do save money. Yet, they are the heros during the "revolution" and they only care about me when they want to "cut costs".
It's really simple:
STEP 1: adopt whatever crap is on the IT mindshare at the moment. Adopt it fast and act as you believe it's true STEP 2: PROFIT STEP 3: PROFIT
The thing is Mozilla and Linux and OSS is not making Microsoft lose market. It's making them lose MONEY. Because the had everyone by the balls, and they where ready for serious PROFIT harvesting...
And now they can't, and people blame their bugs, hungs and they get bad press. They are still doing pretty well with 40B in cash. But the industry/countries are starting to discover those 40B could have been in their pockets if they have adopted OSS earlier, or promoted competition.
I am all for trying to kill Microsoft revenues at all costs than to see Linux installed in 99% of the computers. Even a low number of Linux boxes can affect MS's price-choosing abilities: they don't want to lose market share.
Sorry, the post is a bit repetitive (it's late here).
Wow, do you know how a Central Bank usually operates? The idea is protecting the Internet FROM the goverment, but beign public.
There are other examples other than a central bank, for example Regulating agencies (electricity, etc) which are goverment institutions (ie: public) yet they are funded by the market they regulate and the goverment (banks, power companies, etc). The goverment just can have direct control of the staff just like the president can't fire congressmen...
It should relate to ICANN and be independant from the goverment and never a "1 guy" operation.
It incredible, coudn't they just make it more fun to learns something? People doesn't want to learn everything in a straight line nor accomplish a "grand proyect".
Teaching with separate, well thought out examples (small or medium size each) is much better. The "grandmaster project" also needs to force usage of a lot of functionality that hurts the teaching and the intelect as well.
A lot (if not all) internet businesses will depend on DNS working fine. And just 1 guy can bring it down? Why? How?
I wouldn't like to live in SA right now. He myght be a hero now, but he may become a non-hero whenever he likes. Also, he may die with some passwords unknown (recall the s. hacker contest for the library), or ran out of resources, etc.
It should be run by an independant goverment agency with stable staff and that directly depends on ICANN. Something like an independant Central Bank, but for hosts/domains.
Unix people always like "unbloated" vim or smething like that. I'm missing some gtk app that can at last do UNDOs without breaking the code, s. highlighting, show line numbers and the usual text editing everyone needs.
Ok, there are some alternatives. But they are ugly. I know to use vim, i just found it uncorfortable, unpleasant when not doing something as strict as c/c++...i use it complex tasks only.
I don't code in C++, just Java or for simpler stuff PHP. But anjuta seems to be getting usefull for C/C++ users. Whish there was some nice IDE for PHP without all the compile/build stuff incorporated.
Well, I separate the sports paradigm in two: 1 - Human challenge 2 - Absolute playing
For 1) you basically can outrule all the gloves and innovation. The old golf clubs where just fine, if everyone has to use an old club, noone has an advantage. So innovation only hurts the ones that can't afford the new shit.
For 2) you need innovation. Because the same person can do (following the golf example) a better score that with the ape-era clubs. So you can say golfers are improving their play (in reality, techonology is improving their play...). Nobody really gets any advantage here, cos mostly everyone in a proffesional league will adopt the innovations. Yet, it's better to see a 10 under par score than a 5 one.
One last thingie, technological advances change the way games must be played. This is not necesarily good IHMO. For example, in tennis, the serving is out of balance right know, because the net altitude is fixed and the serving square is also fixed, but the rackets are so much better. Imagine us in 2235 AD serving at 325 kmh and all the game limited to trying to win 1 non-serving game.
Technology alters games. But we must not forget that the account for a lot of the sport organization revenues, so they are always allow in a kind of managed obsolecence way.
Only partially true because only one pole will rise the sea level? I found you comment interesting:) Nnetheless, I don't think it's partially true. It's just plain true. Who cares if it's one pole or 200 million poles, if the sea level is going to be 3 metters higher than before?
Also, the effects will not be only the rising but a chain reaction of other events that we'll see how nasty they can be. I can imagine heavier rain, more CO2 liberated from deep ocean, etc (i can't say what really, but my guess is that there'll be more to it).
I know it may sound radical, but why not? Imagine a Bill and co. IRC meeting:
Bill: ok, this Linux thing is not passing away and the DoJ is costing a lot. We need to do something.
Co: yes, but what?
Bill: i don't know, but...WAIT...something comes to my mind
Co: What?!?!?
Bill: let's just talk to the DoJ and ask them to force us to bundle an alternative.
Co: WHAAAAT?
Bill: Yes, we can then "ask" our lovely oems to bundle the crapiest Linux version ever released. You know, all versions of everything that ever had a mayor bug together. Nothing will work right. Get basic the idea?
Co: Oh my god!
Bill: Yes, our god!:)... We can discuss the details tomorrow: schedule the "creative" team for tomorrow (need to polish the idea).
Well, wasn't the idea to cut costs on support? That everyone could install everything?
They claim your company should adopt IIS because they can pay you less for your job (easier job) or even fire you (no need for good cs graduates anymore. Microsoft is easy. Anyone can admin everything).
And then you come by and blame all fault on lazy admin or untrained admin and even on non-admins? I guess the problem comes right from the MS attitude towards bastardization of the entire cs degrees and the anti-good-admin lower-cost PR.
Yes, you need a good admin. No Microsoft product is going to solve the need for admins. It's unavoidable. A good admin is productive.
While you are patching IIS some guy near your town/city doing something profitable...
There are two answers. One is a fair one. Another is not fair and it's even anti-competitive.
1- To prevent piracy 2- To stop you using the system in legal ways but which do not follow their "targeted use".
#2 basically means that they sell at a loss and compensate with overpriced games. But if you want to use it as a web server, their entire "sell hardware at a loss" doesn't work anymore and they have to start charging what the equipment really costs. And then they cannot sell enough consoles and cannot dominate the market (and thus, no good games produced and never a profit).
Slashdot Mirror
Mh, again and again...
The problem is not against "writing [efficient] vertex and pixel shaders easier and more portable across graphics cards", the problem is about Microsoft and NVidia controlling the "writing [efficient] vertex and pixel shaders easier and more portable across graphics cards" for the good and benefit of all society.
It doesn't matter how much times you read the articule...this is just obvious. Unless it's a standard with representation, then it's bad for you and me (unless we own certain stock).
"In keeping with Linux tradition, NVIDIA has open-sourced certain components of the compiler, allowing content developers to add their own customizations as well."
This is as true as saying:
"In keeping with MS tradition, NVIDIA has closed-sourced certain components of the compiler, but still allowing content developers to add their own customizations as well."
Sound could be really improved. In a film, no motter how digital or whatever you always get the feeling the sounds come from the "walls" and not from the "objects". They sound great, come from a direction, but NOT from the object. If the screen is big it helps a lot to associate the object and the sound.
:))
So we need more curved displays and not just bigger. The bigger and bigger you make a flat surface, the more you have to step away from it, hurting again the experience.
Maybe a large screen whose film KNOWs you'll be looking at the center mostly, so that the edges do not carry vital visual information, just "periferical info". If it thinks the screen is small and that you are seing ALL of it at a time, then they tend to use all the space available and you can't dive in (get close and use it as secondary info).
And targeted sounds (headphones) accounting for how far and to the edges of the screen you are, + extra bass non headphones speakers (for enviroment trembling and body feeling of that tremble) is the way to go. They need to "tune" the sound so that it's physically right.
The day realize you don't believe in reality because it could be a movie is the day we can claim to have done the right thing (well, i may be a disaster in reality
Do you think it's the same to go to the theather than to watch it through your television? Think of that, and then think about 3D television. Imagine a BIG display with 3D objects. True 3D, not just some depth enhanced crap. It will happen, and 2D will become adandonware or "classic" just as B&W films.
I think they should have about 360 degrees of viewing angle, after all, we are talking about 3D movies here :)
Because TV produccers apparently don't want to become LCD producers. Well, I fact, only a few companies can produce LCD displays (of whatever variant).
If TV where just an LCD display connected to a Analog2Digital interface for the good old signals and then a new digital interface that can ask what the TV resolution/depth is and then just send the data to it.
I'm not fully informed, but it all seems to be a problem. How can the computer industry display whatever at whatever resolution (projecting DVDs, Divx, VideoCD, etc. for example) without all that stupid HDTV non-sense? We just need a computerTV. Hey, sounds nice: CTV!
Just dunble a transmeta chip, a cheapo mother an LCD and bundle a TV-in card, saver and you got something that will last more than HDTV and take advange of a lot more features than any TV.
You can buy tons of food in a third world economy for what you pay for a DVD. Yet, it doesn't make you richer. They pirate the DVD (and they do well, because they are NOT printing dolars while America is) and can have food really cheap.
In terms of dollards, yes their are cheap, but not in all 3rd world economies. The problem only comes when you lend some of their corrupt goverment printed dollars they burn. After then, they become slaves forever. I would g on and argue that if a country reaches that state in it's life, they best move would be to become Americans (ie: something like Costa Rica). There's no way back after a high debt is constructed. These countries must sell all hard good (low profit, upward sloped marginal costs) to get the dollars. They will never escape. Lending money to poor countries is the best way to make Americans rich. You will have more food, more hard goods cheap. In exchange for what? Green paper.
Well, I've been trying so articulate a new way to understand an economy. Particulary, taking into account WHAT people buy in different countries. The problem is mainstream is not concerned about anything that is either: 1) relevant 2) insightfull. They just want to add layers of crap and theory over whatever obvious thing some nobel said in the past. They have no clue! But as long as "everyone" in the field buys the "crap", it hold as true ... it's the lens through which they understand economics.
The real important thing to have a RICH country like the US depends on basicaly three pillars:
1 - having enough food and jobs
2 - having a large share of the world purchasing power
3 - use the money to buy stupid* stuff inside the country (DVDs), export stupid stuff. Buy hard goods.
I will not go on exmplaing why, but it can be proved. Every time you buy a DVD, you are making yourselves richer. Trust me! It's not the point if you need the DVD or not, it's the fact you can afterwards buy hard stuff cheap from abroad by printing paper.
* "stupid stuff" is here defined as "near zero marginal" cost of production.
I can only describe a little example: suppose Bush wanted to increase the USA wealth and that he controled everyones minds in the US. He could then force all employers to pay $2000 to employees. The suppose alll those employees are forced to buy 200 DVD a year. Would ex-ante PRICES rise?!?! NO! Not a cent.
The ex-post situation depends on what Holywood does with the "extra earnings". Well, they just pay a lot of money to stars, pay for high end equipment, distribute some earnings to investors.
The stars mostly save the money or spend it in "stupid stuff" (if they could eat $5 millions bucks of local bread, you'd toasted as this would lead to inflation and thus all this "richist illusion would fall over"). The investors save it , or buy hard goods abroad, etc.
Well, the bottom line is: trust me, buy DVDs. It's the only way you can earn such high salaries! The day the US citicens (if ever) discover that their extra wealth is based in the assumption of them buying DVD, you'll see a great chaos (either bank collapse, or severe depression or high inflation).
... the benefit of easily developing stuff with GLIDE was overshadowed by the loss of a chunk of your target audience, and the developers moved away from it.
That's what Direct3D was for from the begining. But Glide was there BEFORE direct3D, so 3Dfx was not responsible for their success. May sure also know Voodoo cards where several times faster than the closest competitor...for years.
After that, companies started selling "promises" like the S3 virge cards, the RIVA crap and the like. They sold a lot. After than, some harm was done. Because everyone had crappy cards which only had Direct3D drivers. The cheapo crap market killed 3Dfx. They could get financing, they lost the edge.
Good think that Nvidia was MS funded (my guess) so at least we have their damn fine cards. But I fear promoting Cg is not a move towards better competition. It can only see it hurting other vendors, not allowing faster/better games.
My god how naive :( ... I'm not trolling. I'm just suggesting to pay a little more attention to this kind of stuff, so that we can prevent having unstopable monopolies as a result.
Do you think this Cg will take most out of ATI cards? Do you think ATI likes it or it's a good thing for them? Why did Nvidia developed this thing with Microsoft help? Why wasn't ATI there? Why weren't Matrox and 3Dlabs invited?
It may be compatible for ATI cards as in beer, not as in freedom. And that beer will probably taste like you don't want a second round.
This can only hurt 3D card makers and promote Nvidia. Mirosoft ins making sure they can control it at a software level rather than a hardware level. It's the only way they have to lock you and control the market. Just like the control OEM bundling, and everything in the PC industry.
Don't complain in the future unless you can have some vision of that are the consecuences of some "innovations".
Do you even read articles? How did you get modded insightful? Do moderators read articles?
Yes, I think they do read them. There's nothing in the article that contradicts what he says. Actually, Nvidia IS IN BED with Microsoft. 3Dfx was not and got killed. 3DLabs was not and suffered.
If it werent't for Id, i'd say OpenGL will be dead right now and you would not be able to play any 3D games but loading Windows.
Now, all this can sound unsound, but if you really followed what happened in the 3D world since 1995 you will notice it's not a crazy idea.
Microsoft needs the games to run under Windows and XBox, and to NOT run on any other plataform. This is as true as the sky is blue. So the original poster does have a valid point with I'd mod as Insightfull any day.
Nvidia = Microsoft since the begining. I can say that because I know them since the NV1 (1995 i think), which I own.
:) The 3D market history is full of "black holes" which you just can't understand well without some conspiracy.
They where virtually killed by 3Dfx many times yet someone kept pumping money from "somewhere" for them. The only change in focus after their failure this: target for Direct3D.
They kept pumping money and money and selling at a loss until they bough 3Dfx. Most other players where dead already (rendition and many others) dead by then. Now they control the market with Microsoft by their side. Microsoft was always against 3Dfx, they direct3D was never "friendly" with 3Dfx cards (though it worked fine, features where really targeted for Nvidia cards).
It's like Nvidia and Microsoft developed direct3D. It's not a coincidence. Microsoft would never enjoy a monopolistic provider in a key market unless they own/control it somehow (and no, you don't need Microsoft puting money directly to own it. There are a thouthand ways to own something in an unnoticed fashion).
Remark: i know Nvidia cards are the best and excelent ones! This has nothing to do with it
Buzzzt! Guess again NOT. Most things sell "by the trend". A lot of people made money programing Java when it was hotest, a lot of contractors will make huge revenues from companies adopting .net.
.net because their contractors or programming department will tell them they need it. And Microsoft will be leveraging their "hard earned" 40B plus their monopoly to make sure the argument wins.
The other day i was in a meeting with some CEO of a programming firm with many clients. What they do i follow the TREND. He claimed that ".net will require a lot of $$$ from companies adopting it, and that (they) will be ready for it! Huge profits to be made".
Believe me, you can make lots of money by just following the trend. Companies will adopt
This is just an example. The trend make you eat extra food. On the other hard, you have someone like me, which tries to make sense out of this. End result: they make money and do not help producitivity. I don't make much money and do save money. Yet, they are the heros during the "revolution" and they only care about me when they want to "cut costs".
It's really simple:
STEP 1: adopt whatever crap is on the IT mindshare at the moment. Adopt it fast and act as you believe it's true
STEP 2: PROFIT
STEP 3: PROFIT
The thing is Mozilla and Linux and OSS is not making Microsoft lose market. It's making them lose MONEY. Because the had everyone by the balls, and they where ready for serious PROFIT harvesting...
And now they can't, and people blame their bugs, hungs and they get bad press. They are still doing pretty well with 40B in cash. But the industry/countries are starting to discover those 40B could have been in their pockets if they have adopted OSS earlier, or promoted competition.
I am all for trying to kill Microsoft revenues at all costs than to see Linux installed in 99% of the computers. Even a low number of Linux boxes can affect MS's price-choosing abilities: they don't want to lose market share.
Sorry, the post is a bit repetitive (it's late here).
Wow, do you know how a Central Bank usually operates? The idea is protecting the Internet FROM the goverment, but beign public.
There are other examples other than a central bank, for example Regulating agencies (electricity, etc) which are goverment institutions (ie: public) yet they are funded by the market they regulate and the goverment (banks, power companies, etc). The goverment just can have direct control of the staff just like the president can't fire congressmen...
It should relate to ICANN and be independant from the goverment and never a "1 guy" operation.
(something the Java guys obsess over, something the Microsoft guys and the PHP guys don't seem to consider much).
All the Java apps I have tried run so slow I can't even use them. Great, It's well designed and I *could* run it anywhere, but would I *want* to?
I am talking about LimeWire, Phex, PanoTools and apps of that size (well, Panotools is great, as slow as irreplaceable).
It incredible, coudn't they just make it more fun to learns something? People doesn't want to learn everything in a straight line nor accomplish a "grand proyect".
Teaching with separate, well thought out examples (small or medium size each) is much better. The "grandmaster project" also needs to force usage of a lot of functionality that hurts the teaching and the intelect as well.
A lot (if not all) internet businesses will depend on DNS working fine. And just 1 guy can bring it down? Why? How?
I wouldn't like to live in SA right now. He myght be a hero now, but he may become a non-hero whenever he likes. Also, he may die with some passwords unknown (recall the s. hacker contest for the library), or ran out of resources, etc.
It should be run by an independant goverment agency with stable staff and that directly depends on ICANN. Something like an independant Central Bank, but for hosts/domains.
I'm not :)
Unix people always like "unbloated" vim or smething like that. I'm missing some gtk app that can at last do UNDOs without breaking the code, s. highlighting, show line numbers and the usual text editing everyone needs.
Ok, there are some alternatives. But they are ugly. I know to use vim, i just found it uncorfortable, unpleasant when not doing something as strict as c/c++...i use it complex tasks only.
I don't code in C++, just Java or for simpler stuff PHP. But anjuta seems to be getting usefull for C/C++ users. Whish there was some nice IDE for PHP without all the compile/build stuff incorporated.
http://anjuta.sourceforge.net
Fede
Well, I separate the sports paradigm in two:
1 - Human challenge
2 - Absolute playing
For 1) you basically can outrule all the gloves and innovation. The old golf clubs where just fine, if everyone has to use an old club, noone has an advantage. So innovation only hurts the ones that can't afford the new shit.
For 2) you need innovation. Because the same person can do (following the golf example) a better score that with the ape-era clubs. So you can say golfers are improving their play (in reality, techonology is improving their play...). Nobody really gets any advantage here, cos mostly everyone in a proffesional league will adopt the innovations. Yet, it's better to see a 10 under par score than a 5 one.
One last thingie, technological advances change the way games must be played. This is not necesarily good IHMO. For example, in tennis, the serving is out of balance right know, because the net altitude is fixed and the serving square is also fixed, but the rackets are so much better. Imagine us in 2235 AD serving at 325 kmh and all the game limited to trying to win 1 non-serving game.
Technology alters games. But we must not forget that the account for a lot of the sport organization revenues, so they are always allow in a kind of managed obsolecence way.
Only partially true because only one pole will rise the sea level? I found you comment interesting :) Nnetheless, I don't think it's partially true. It's just plain true. Who cares if it's one pole or 200 million poles, if the sea level is going to be 3 metters higher than before?
Also, the effects will not be only the rising but a chain reaction of other events that we'll see how nasty they can be. I can imagine heavier rain, more CO2 liberated from deep ocean, etc (i can't say what really, but my guess is that there'll be more to it).
I know it may sound radical, but why not? Imagine a Bill and co. IRC meeting:
:) ... We can discuss the details tomorrow: schedule the "creative" team for tomorrow (need to polish the idea).
Bill: ok, this Linux thing is not passing away and the DoJ is costing a lot. We need to do something.
Co: yes, but what?
Bill: i don't know, but...WAIT...something comes to my mind
Co: What?!?!?
Bill: let's just talk to the DoJ and ask them to force us to bundle an alternative.
Co: WHAAAAT?
Bill: Yes, we can then "ask" our lovely oems to bundle the crapiest Linux version ever released. You know, all versions of everything that ever had a mayor bug together. Nothing will work right. Get basic the idea?
Co: Oh my god!
Bill: Yes, our god!
Co: Oh Bill. You know we love you!
Bill: Oh yeah!
Well, wasn't the idea to cut costs on support? That everyone could install everything?
They claim your company should adopt IIS because they can pay you less for your job (easier job) or even fire you (no need for good cs graduates anymore. Microsoft is easy. Anyone can admin everything).
And then you come by and blame all fault on lazy admin or untrained admin and even on non-admins? I guess the problem comes right from the MS attitude towards bastardization of the entire cs degrees and the anti-good-admin lower-cost PR.
Yes, you need a good admin. No Microsoft product is going to solve the need for admins. It's unavoidable. A good admin is productive.
While you are patching IIS some guy near your town/city doing something profitable...
There are two answers. One is a fair one. Another is not fair and it's even anti-competitive.
1- To prevent piracy
2- To stop you using the system in legal ways but which do not follow their "targeted use".
#2 basically means that they sell at a loss and compensate with overpriced games. But if you want to use it as a web server, their entire "sell hardware at a loss" doesn't work anymore and they have to start charging what the equipment really costs. And then they cannot sell enough consoles and cannot dominate the market (and thus, no good games produced and never a profit).