It all runs through an open-source compositor, which can render the video wherever it wants. Wayland even has "frames" built into the protocol; This is in order to avoid tearing, but it would also make it easier to re-encode the video at the correct frame rate.
Remote X11 never really worked properly anyway; It doesn't survive interruptions, and it's basically unusable over high-latency connections (you end up needing to use things like VNC). Network transparency is a nice feature, but X11 embedded it into the wrong layer, and it doesn't really work very well today anyway. Building a VNC server (or maybe something more rich based on streaming video) should be a lot easier under Wayland than it ever was under X11.
"Will wayland offer benefits as decreased power usage or better acceleration, compared to using X11?".
Based on playing around with Weston for a weekend, I think it'll get there sooner than you might think. Wayland's developers are familiar with Xorg, so they're not wasting a lot of time with NIH-syndrome rewrites of stuff that works (for instance, Weston uses the same low-level video drivers as Xorg, and xwayland is just a special build of Xorg). The protocol is specifically designed to take "frames" into account (so, no more tearing, ever), so even if it's somewhat slower (which I don't expect), it'll *feel* more responsive.
Flash in Chromium/X11 under xwayland already renders video more smoothly on my machine than it does on native Xorg (well, when rendering doesn't hang or crash xwayland). If you cut out some of the middlemen, I expect it'll only get better.
Exactly. People who dismiss Wikipedia because of its inaccuracies often forget about what we usually did *before* Wikipedia existed: We made stuff up based on our intuitions, *maybe* talked about it at a coffee shop with a small number of our friends, and believed it as fact. Sure, if we were doing academic research, we were more rigorous (and that's improved, too, IMHO), but how often did that happen? Now, with portable devices that can access the WWW, our first reponse when we're not sure about something is often to look it up.
I can't emphasize this enough: Instant access to the web is resulting in a culture shift from making stuff up to looking it up, and Wikipedia is the most important place where people go to do that.
So, yes, even though Wikipedia is a repository of groupthink (and the critics are right that we mustn't forget that), it's groupthink that takes into account the views of a much larger number of contributors, and is much more accurate than the groupthink of a small, isolated group of people.
No, people say the right thing. I've never heard anyone verbally confuse lose and loose. They just fail to transcribe it correct. Hence, it's a spelling mistake.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
I think he got into something that was way more than he expected, and he pulled a c.y.a. move and sent Manning down the river.
Exactly.
Saying he did it for the good of the Afghan people that might be named in the documents seems revisionist.
It's not just revisionist, it's obviously false. He's acting as if those documents were transmitted in secret to the Taliban, and that if it weren't for him, nobody else would know about it. In reality, Wikileaks published the documents, so those Afghan people already had just as much warning, regardless of Lamo's involvement.
Great Scott! What's in New York? WALL STREET! They're afraid of higher taxes, so they pre-emptively orchestrated this FAKE "DISASTER" in order to get us to send MONEY their way!
but when you receive mail from business people, it's usually an image embedded in a Word document, or at the very least a pdf. This is where mutt fails.
I'm not sure about images, but mutt has a really fantastic auto_view feature, which will automatically decode HTML email, PDFs, Word documents, etc into text and display it inline in your viewer. When people email me PDFs, I can not only view them without spawning an external viewer, but the PDF/MSWord text gets included in the quoted text when I hit "reply", so I can just reply to their PDF/MSWord text in-line.
Indeed. Firewalls break end-to-end connectivity, and incentivise a protocol-encapsulation arms race that is bad for the Internet. It's 2012; You have no business writing more code that speaks the Internet Protocol unless it can actually handle being on the Internet.
You seem to misunderstand what DRM, a.k.a. "copy protection", is advertised to do. It's about preventing copies of the content that is "protected" by DRM from becoming widely available to non-paying users.
The negative effects of implementing DRM systems, which is that users' devices remain out of their control (for most users), are alive and well. That doesn't mean that DRM is accomplishing its stated purpose.
The first Humble Bundle was advertised as DRM-free, and with a portion going to the EFF. So were several subsequent ones. It shouldn't be a surprise that people are pissed now.
If I come up with a concept that it is utterly new, and difficult, but it can run on a PC... Why shouldn't I be able to patent it?
Because over the past decades, we've learned that allowing people like you to patent all of these thigs actually results in a "patent thicket" that punishes innovation. Today, if you try to build your utterly new and difficult invention in the US, you have a high risk of losing a patent infringement lawsuit (or spending a ton of money defending yourself against one), because doing so would infringe on dozens of other people's patents.
That's what he's proposing. If you RTFA, he's saying that rather than defining patents as "software" or "not software", just declare that distributing software on general-purpose computers can never infringe *any* patent.
Only if you look at it from the perspective of digital 1's and 0's. If you look at it from the perspective of analog signals, you'll see square waves or sine waves on a frequency.
Actually, if you're using something like direct-sequence spread spectrum modulation over a wide bandwidth, it's really going to just look like noise that's *quieter* than the noise floor at the receiver. Unless you know what you're looking for, you're not going to be able to distinguish the signal from the background noise.
Of course, if aliens are at least as concerned about battery life as we are, they aren't going to be transmitting signals with so much excess power and with so much redundancy that the signals will reach us AND that we'll be able to decode them.
How about......enabling users to upgrade the devices themselves?
No kidding. The fragmentation problem with Android comes from the fact that every hardware manufacturer effectively spins its own Linux distro for each device that they manufacture. There should be one or two Android distributions in the world, just like we have with desktop Linux distros.
It's probably related to this comment by Linus (in the same thread where he threatened to stop merging ARM patches altogether):
The long-term situation should be that you should be able to have ONE binary kernel "just work". That's where we are on x86. Really.
[...]
Now, some of it is quite understandable - ie real drivers for real hardware. But a _lot_ of it seems to be just descriptor tables, and I'm getting the very strong feeling that ARM people aren't even _trying_ to make it sane, and trying to standardize things, or trying to aim for the whole notion of "one kernel image, with much more hw description done elsewhere".
Slashdot Mirror
No, NeXTSTEP.
Remote X11 never really worked properly anyway; It doesn't survive interruptions, and it's basically unusable over high-latency connections (you end up needing to use things like VNC). Network transparency is a nice feature, but X11 embedded it into the wrong layer, and it doesn't really work very well today anyway. Building a VNC server (or maybe something more rich based on streaming video) should be a lot easier under Wayland than it ever was under X11.
"Will wayland offer benefits as decreased power usage or better acceleration, compared to using X11?".
Based on playing around with Weston for a weekend, I think it'll get there sooner than you might think. Wayland's developers are familiar with Xorg, so they're not wasting a lot of time with NIH-syndrome rewrites of stuff that works (for instance, Weston uses the same low-level video drivers as Xorg, and xwayland is just a special build of Xorg). The protocol is specifically designed to take "frames" into account (so, no more tearing, ever), so even if it's somewhat slower (which I don't expect), it'll *feel* more responsive.
Flash in Chromium/X11 under xwayland already renders video more smoothly on my machine than it does on native Xorg (well, when rendering doesn't hang or crash xwayland). If you cut out some of the middlemen, I expect it'll only get better.
Being disintegrated makes me very angry.
Very angry indeed.
Exactly. People who dismiss Wikipedia because of its inaccuracies often forget about what we usually did *before* Wikipedia existed: We made stuff up based on our intuitions, *maybe* talked about it at a coffee shop with a small number of our friends, and believed it as fact. Sure, if we were doing academic research, we were more rigorous (and that's improved, too, IMHO), but how often did that happen? Now, with portable devices that can access the WWW, our first reponse when we're not sure about something is often to look it up.
I can't emphasize this enough: Instant access to the web is resulting in a culture shift from making stuff up to looking it up, and Wikipedia is the most important place where people go to do that.
So, yes, even though Wikipedia is a repository of groupthink (and the critics are right that we mustn't forget that), it's groupthink that takes into account the views of a much larger number of contributors, and is much more accurate than the groupthink of a small, isolated group of people.
They just dumped those chemicals very quickly.
*correctly
No, people say the right thing. I've never heard anyone verbally confuse lose and loose. They just fail to transcribe it correct. Hence, it's a spelling mistake.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
I think he got into something that was way more than he expected, and he pulled a c.y.a. move and sent Manning down the river.
Exactly.
Saying he did it for the good of the Afghan people that might be named in the documents seems revisionist.
It's not just revisionist, it's obviously false. He's acting as if those documents were transmitted in secret to the Taliban, and that if it weren't for him, nobody else would know about it. In reality, Wikileaks published the documents, so those Afghan people already had just as much warning, regardless of Lamo's involvement.
I agree, but we'll have to wait for XP to die to switch everyone over to IPv6, too. :)
Sheeple! Wake up!
Maybe, but I see it as more of an online payments system that scales down to micropayments and up to large, multi-million dollar transactions.
but when you receive mail from business people, it's usually an image embedded in a Word document, or at the very least a pdf. This is where mutt fails.
I'm not sure about images, but mutt has a really fantastic auto_view feature, which will automatically decode HTML email, PDFs, Word documents, etc into text and display it inline in your viewer. When people email me PDFs, I can not only view them without spawning an external viewer, but the PDF/MSWord text gets included in the quoted text when I hit "reply", so I can just reply to their PDF/MSWord text in-line.
Indeed. Firewalls break end-to-end connectivity, and incentivise a protocol-encapsulation arms race that is bad for the Internet. It's 2012; You have no business writing more code that speaks the Internet Protocol unless it can actually handle being on the Internet.
You seem to misunderstand what DRM, a.k.a. "copy protection", is advertised to do. It's about preventing copies of the content that is "protected" by DRM from becoming widely available to non-paying users.
The negative effects of implementing DRM systems, which is that users' devices remain out of their control (for most users), are alive and well. That doesn't mean that DRM is accomplishing its stated purpose.
What has been seen cannot be unseen.
The first Humble Bundle was advertised as DRM-free, and with a portion going to the EFF. So were several subsequent ones. It shouldn't be a surprise that people are pissed now.
The ad wasn't just big, it changed sizes as you resized the window, while the same ad on the US site did not.
I'm guessing that you're not a FOSS developer.
If I come up with a concept that it is utterly new, and difficult, but it can run on a PC... Why shouldn't I be able to patent it?
Because over the past decades, we've learned that allowing people like you to patent all of these thigs actually results in a "patent thicket" that punishes innovation. Today, if you try to build your utterly new and difficult invention in the US, you have a high risk of losing a patent infringement lawsuit (or spending a ton of money defending yourself against one), because doing so would infringe on dozens of other people's patents.
That's what he's proposing. If you RTFA, he's saying that rather than defining patents as "software" or "not software", just declare that distributing software on general-purpose computers can never infringe *any* patent.
Imagine a beowulf cluster of those!
Only if you look at it from the perspective of digital 1's and 0's. If you look at it from the perspective of analog signals, you'll see square waves or sine waves on a frequency.
Actually, if you're using something like direct-sequence spread spectrum modulation over a wide bandwidth, it's really going to just look like noise that's *quieter* than the noise floor at the receiver. Unless you know what you're looking for, you're not going to be able to distinguish the signal from the background noise.
Of course, if aliens are at least as concerned about battery life as we are, they aren't going to be transmitting signals with so much excess power and with so much redundancy that the signals will reach us AND that we'll be able to decode them.
How about... ...enabling users to upgrade the devices themselves?
No kidding. The fragmentation problem with Android comes from the fact that every hardware manufacturer effectively spins its own Linux distro for each device that they manufacture. There should be one or two Android distributions in the world, just like we have with desktop Linux distros.
It's probably related to this comment by Linus (in the same thread where he threatened to stop merging ARM patches altogether):