What is the difference between running something written with the Win32 API via the Wine implementation of it compared to running something written to the.NET API via Mono, Java API via a JRE, Python API/bytecode via Python, PERL via the Perl interpreter, shell script via shell, etc...
Because this chip's OpenGL is incomplete.
WTF? Even the Linux drivers for this chip support all of OpenGL 1.4 and loads of extensions which are useful besides. About the only thing I can guess you mean is that some parts are unaccelerated (e.g. the vertex shaders) but then unless you are running loads of games that isn't really an issue. I care about pixel shaders so I can make the GPU do real work doing per-pixel calculations. Getting the 4 vertices to render my full-screen quad fast is the least of my worries:).
Speaking as one of the guys who played a part in the original 'make DVDs work on Linux' effort I can definitely say we'd prefer it if we didn't have to sacrifice time, money and girlfriends to watching Chicken Run without rebooting all over again:).
> Which we did...created a new Debian based GNU/Solaris distribution with (the latest bits of) Solaris kernel & core userland inside.
So if it is a Solaris kernel replacing the Linux kernel and a Solaris userland replacing the GNU userland what is the justification for calling it GNU/Solaris again?
You don't seem to have quite grasped the concept of symlinks. What you describe are closer to hardlinks (leave the '-s' out of 'ln -s'). What you require either requires the links to only be between objects on the same filesystem or for there to be some other storage on link connectivity than the filesystem itself. Imagine I symlink/usbstick/bar to/home/foo. When I remove the stick and place it in another computer I don't expect (or in general want) that mv/home/foo/home/buzz will affect the USB stick. I can't then store 'reciprocal links' on the USB stick otherwise it could lead to filesystem instability when moving between machines. Similarly I don't want to scan through my entire file system each time I move a file to update any links.
We're left with storing the link metadata in the file-system layout (be it NTFS, Reiser, whatever) itself such that it can be efficiently searched to find any links that might require updating. This now no longer allows inter-fs links which reduces us to hard-links.
Follow the links in TFA. They you'll get to http://survey.netcraft.com/index-200007.html which says "The Netcraft Web Server Survey is a survey of Web Server software usage on Internet connected computers. We collect and collate as many hostnames providing an http service as we can find, and systematically poll each one with an HTTP request for the server name."
1: ratings bodies. This one is basically not optional for the producers, if industry led ratings schemes fail lots of countries would probablly replace them with government control and the industry really don't wan't that.
A government-appointed body like the BBFC for example? It seems to work OK this side of the pond.
The only way to protect against this is to either make it impossible for a plain camcorder to record the images (which means that your eyes can also not see them, rendering it impossible for them to make any form of business)
Not necessarily. Many big cinemas point a very powerful IR source at the screen which overwhelms the CCD in camcorders but is invisible to the human eye. When you look back at your recording the screen is just a huge glowing patch with not picture visible. A similar thing could in principle be done to TVs but of course a sufficiently motivated person could just disable the IR source --- this would be somewhat more involved than just pointing the camera at the screen tho'.
If I put my mind to it I think I could figure out who one person is who would actually get one of these DVDs and that's because my brother taught the guy golf lessons a few years back....
The odds of actually knowing who would have one of these and actually be able to get your hands on it is just about impossible.
Haven't you just about disproved your own existence?
Except that the layer is only generated on pure aluminium (as I did say). The 'it is going to be hard to oxidise' bit was a tongue-in-cheek reference to the fact it already is:).
It's not going to be terribly easy to oxidise. Aluminium in its pure state handles exposure quite well (by forming an oxide on the surface that protects the underlying metal).
Also, they have automatic right of entry to your home without a warrant, though only to search for a TV set.
Quoting from the back of my TV license:
Our officers may ask to inspect your license and television equipment at any time, but you do not have to let them into your home without a search warrant.
That isn't actually true. For a start many makes of car have model-unique key fobs that can only be cut by an appropriate dealer and then you'll need the matching chassis number (which can clearly be obtained but now you need physical access to the car and the key).
Secondly most mid-range cars here have active keys where the fob either contains a raido transponder or there is some electronic communication with the fob via the key itself. This cannot be copied and you must get a new set sent to you direct from the factory by post - in this country to the address matching your car's registration - if you want a duplicate set.
You see this a hell of a lot on old BBC sitcoms or dramas. Not only do you get this fun effect bright flashes or squibs also leave a tell-tale after image for a few frames.
Actually they already do. The cell in fact has one more processor on it than they claim and there is some logic to choose the n-1 best chips at any one point so that the entire thing is fault tolerant both for manufacturing and, if you happen to get a die with all of the processors working, for use.
Peering tends to be zero cost. The ISP gets to have their customers access BBC content and the BBC doesn't pay for bandwidth beyond the hardware. Peering is how most ISPs get their bandwidth.
The BBC peer directly with UK ISPs and, indeed, the broadband streaming is, as I understand it, coming from a box inside your ISP hence why ISPs in this country advertise their compatibility with the BBC broadband video player.
If you don't like streaming there is nothing to stop you dumping the stream with mplayer.
Slashdot Mirror
There are easier ways of noting an intentional mispeling (sic).
What is the difference between running something written with the Win32 API via the Wine implementation of it compared to running something written to the .NET API via Mono, Java API via a JRE, Python API/bytecode via Python, PERL via the Perl interpreter, shell script via shell, etc...
The bitmap serif fonts are non-evil then?
Because this chip's OpenGL is incomplete. WTF? Even the Linux drivers for this chip support all of OpenGL 1.4 and loads of extensions which are useful besides. About the only thing I can guess you mean is that some parts are unaccelerated (e.g. the vertex shaders) but then unless you are running loads of games that isn't really an issue. I care about pixel shaders so I can make the GPU do real work doing per-pixel calculations. Getting the 4 vertices to render my full-screen quad fast is the least of my worries :).
Xair can already run on bare hardware without another X server (based on 30 year old code) running underneath it.
Speaking as one of the guys who played a part in the original 'make DVDs work on Linux' effort I can definitely say we'd prefer it if we didn't have to sacrifice time, money and girlfriends to watching Chicken Run without rebooting all over again :).
> Which we did...created a new Debian based GNU/Solaris distribution with (the latest bits of) Solaris kernel & core userland inside.
So if it is a Solaris kernel replacing the Linux kernel and a Solaris userland replacing the GNU userland what is the justification for calling it GNU/Solaris again?
Elves and Hobbits don't run around either but I wouldn't call LotR fantasy. Fiction != Science Fiction.
You don't seem to have quite grasped the concept of symlinks. What you describe are closer to hardlinks (leave the '-s' out of 'ln -s'). What you require either requires the links to only be between objects on the same filesystem or for there to be some other storage on link connectivity than the filesystem itself. Imagine I symlink /usbstick/bar to /home/foo. When I remove the stick and place it in another computer I don't expect (or in general want) that mv /home/foo /home/buzz will affect the USB stick. I can't then store 'reciprocal links' on the USB stick otherwise it could lead to filesystem instability when moving between machines. Similarly I don't want to scan through my entire file system each time I move a file to update any links.
We're left with storing the link metadata in the file-system layout (be it NTFS, Reiser, whatever) itself such that it can be efficiently searched to find any links that might require updating. This now no longer allows inter-fs links which reduces us to hard-links.
Follow the links in TFA. They you'll get to http://survey.netcraft.com/index-200007.html which says
"The Netcraft Web Server Survey is a survey of Web Server software usage on Internet connected computers. We collect and collate as many hostnames providing an http service as we can find, and systematically poll each one with an HTTP request for the server name."
1: ratings bodies. This one is basically not optional for the producers, if industry led ratings schemes fail lots of countries would probablly replace them with government control and the industry really don't wan't that.
A government-appointed body like the BBFC for example? It seems to work OK this side of the pond.
The only way to protect against this is to either make it impossible for a plain camcorder to record the images (which means that your eyes can also not see them, rendering it impossible for them to make any form of business)
Not necessarily. Many big cinemas point a very powerful IR source at the screen which overwhelms the CCD in camcorders but is invisible to the human eye. When you look back at your recording the screen is just a huge glowing patch with not picture visible. A similar thing could in principle be done to TVs but of course a sufficiently motivated person could just disable the IR source --- this would be somewhat more involved than just pointing the camera at the screen tho'.
If I put my mind to it I think I could figure out who one person is who would actually get one of these DVDs and that's because my brother taught the guy golf lessons a few years back. ...
The odds of actually knowing who would have one of these and actually be able to get your hands on it is just about impossible.
Haven't you just about disproved your own existence?
Except that the layer is only generated on pure aluminium (as I did say). The 'it is going to be hard to oxidise' bit was a tongue-in-cheek reference to the fact it already is :).
It's not going to be terribly easy to oxidise. Aluminium in its pure state handles exposure quite well (by forming an oxide on the surface that protects the underlying metal).
Quoting from the back of my TV license:
Goodness - you mean that the BBC creative archive will contain clips from ITV programmes? How clever of them :).
... it wasn't Cat-5 when it hit New Orleans. Just FYI.
That isn't actually true. For a start many makes of car have model-unique key fobs that can only be cut by an appropriate dealer and then you'll need the matching chassis number (which can clearly be obtained but now you need physical access to the car and the key).
Secondly most mid-range cars here have active keys where the fob either contains a raido transponder or there is some electronic communication with the fob via the key itself. This cannot be copied and you must get a new set sent to you direct from the factory by post - in this country to the address matching your car's registration - if you want a duplicate set.
You see this a hell of a lot on old BBC sitcoms or dramas. Not only do you get this fun effect bright flashes or squibs also leave a tell-tale after image for a few frames.
Actually they already do. The cell in fact has one more processor on it than they claim and there is some logic to choose the n-1 best chips at any one point so that the entire thing is fault tolerant both for manufacturing and, if you happen to get a die with all of the processors working, for use.
Peering tends to be zero cost. The ISP gets to have their customers access BBC content and the BBC doesn't pay for bandwidth beyond the hardware. Peering is how most ISPs get their bandwidth.
Not in the UK they couldn't. It would go against the Charter.
And be burnt to CD...
The BBC peer directly with UK ISPs and, indeed, the broadband streaming is, as I understand it, coming from a box inside your ISP hence why ISPs in this country advertise their compatibility with the BBC broadband video player.
If you don't like streaming there is nothing to stop you dumping the stream with mplayer.