Once upon a time, Scot Nicol of Ibis Cycles wrote "Metallurgy for Cyclists," an article about different frame materials for bicycles. Out of date by now, but still an informative.
(Google search result used because none of the servers it's on looks able to sustain much traffic.)
Actually, it was Graydon Carter, the editor-in-chief of Vanity Fair, who declared irony dead. Sheesh. See Google. He's often asked for media commentary, too. According to the Daily Herald in Illinois, Robert Thompson later/commented/ on Carter's comment, but that was it.
Although güd Mr Jobs didn't announce it, OS 9.2 has been (somewhat) released. You can't download it yet, but OS 9.2 is running on the fancy new G4s at the Apple booth at Macworld. (They're running OS X 10.0.4 as the current OS, but 9.2 starts up for Classic applications.) Classic launched about twice as fast on the dual 800 that I was using as compared to my Pismo 400 powerbook. Don't know how much of that is 9.2 being good and how much is the machine. I'm guessing more of the latter. Anyway, it should be available soon.
The cheapest available is.ca if you're Canadian,.cx if you're from the Christmas Islands, or.us if you're American. They're all as free as can be (I think.us is free; I could be wrong). They have stricter guidelines than the paid-for ones (.ca only allows one domain name per organization), but hey: it's free.
Re:patent-protection on support for .gifs
on
Gimp 1.2 Preview
·
· Score: 1
I thought it might simply involve ignoring patents. Good work, then. If I ever put together a Linux box with a HDD greater than 130Mb, I'll try out X and GIMP. But I'll be sticking with a GIMP that does.gifs, because I'm a web designer, and as much as I appreciate the added features of.pngs, customers tend not to when their horribly outdated browsers can't display them. Ah, the fun of the lowest common denominator.
patent-protection on support for .gifs
on
Gimp 1.2 Preview
·
· Score: 1
This likely falls under stupid questions, especially since I don't have GIMP (what with not having X), but how is GIMP allowed to support the.gif format? The GNU website says that it can't be done, since IBM and Unisys hold the patent for LZW compression.
That depends. You're assuming that the "dog" would operate with some sort of intelligence not only *on par* with organic minds, but also *compatibly* with organic minds. If I were going to build an AI pet (AI people would be different), then I would keep out a lot of the features. Sure, it would be neat if it was fully functional, but it would be much more convenient to make a dog where you didn't need to feel guilty about neglecting the thing, because it wouldn't mind. It's a very tricky topic, but I think that conventional ethics would only apply if its brain functioned like our does, or like those of dogs do.
I'm speaking more of general robot intelligence here, and ignoring your Turing test comment; that wouldn't apply if its brain functioned differently.
But see, now I feel guilty about contemplating neglecting a robot dog, even though it wouldn't care--very difficult subject matter indeed.
This is certainly true. However, the current definition of programmer is closer than the misunderstood definition of hacker, so at least it'd be a start. Perhaps there should be two standards (as there currently are): terms used amongst geeks, as hacker/cracker currently are, and those in common use, as programmer/hacker are.
As someone else mentioned in a different thread, it's like the gay/queer thing. Once it is used enough internally, it may make its way into common, correct usage.
"Repurposing cracker" would be an even worse situation. What we have right now is the media having turned a single word around. If we take that word's logical opposition (cracker) and start using it to denote the very thing which it was created to distinguish from (hacker) then no one will ever understand what anyone else is saying.
Corel has my support here: Photopaint and Wordperfect for Linux will probably be enough to get me to move my Win98 box fully over to Linux. My server is Linux, but I need access to these sort of apps to get my work done.
This is definitely a positive thing--the capitalist mindset doesn't allow this culture to accept that free software (GIMP and Emacs) could approach the quality of that which costs money. It may be, however, that this sways people over to Linux for the wrong reasons, and without caring about Open Source.
Hey--everyone complains about flamewars between *BSD and Linux users, but there are very few to defend us journalists on/. Journalists get a worse rap than lawyers here. *I*, for one, always get the physics on my stories correct.
(point of information: my father is a lawyer, so don't start being mean to them)
Slashdot Mirror
The same anecdote about the Canadian gold mine features in the opening chapter of Don Tapscott's new book, Wikinomics. Odd.
But, um, he didn't use it correctly (or at least not traditionally).
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
It's a good thing these guys aren't selling CPUs.
'Cause, uh, then they'd be chipmonks, see.
Once upon a time, Scot Nicol of Ibis Cycles wrote "Metallurgy for Cyclists," an article about different frame materials for bicycles. Out of date by now, but still an informative.
(Google search result used because none of the servers it's on looks able to sustain much traffic.)
Actually, it was Graydon Carter, the editor-in-chief of Vanity Fair, who declared irony dead. Sheesh. See Google. He's often asked for media commentary, too. According to the Daily Herald in Illinois, Robert Thompson later /commented/ on Carter's comment, but that was it.
Will the NWN linux client function in linux ppc? With fancy new Yellowdog 3.0, can I finally make NWN go on my 12" powerbook?
Ha! You're brilliant. Go find someone wrongly calling something a conflict of interest and do the same thing. That was funny.
According to the New Scientist story referenced a couple posts below, this will make CRTs (or at least this kind of CRT) much lighter, yes.
See three comments up on the main story page. 9.2 is out.
Although güd Mr Jobs didn't announce it, OS 9.2 has been (somewhat) released. You can't download it yet, but OS 9.2 is running on the fancy new G4s at the Apple booth at Macworld. (They're running OS X 10.0.4 as the current OS, but 9.2 starts up for Classic applications.) Classic launched about twice as fast on the dual 800 that I was using as compared to my Pismo 400 powerbook. Don't know how much of that is 9.2 being good and how much is the machine. I'm guessing more of the latter. Anyway, it should be available soon.
75 pounds, fine. Stupid Imperial system.
Undoubtedly, they each sat down and ate a 75kg hunk of plutonium.
The cheapest available is .ca if you're Canadian, .cx if you're from the Christmas Islands, or .us if you're American. They're all as free as can be (I think .us is free; I could be wrong). They have stricter guidelines than the paid-for ones (.ca only allows one domain name per organization), but hey: it's free.
I thought it might simply involve ignoring patents. Good work, then. If I ever put together a Linux box with a HDD greater than 130Mb, I'll try out X and GIMP. But I'll be sticking with a GIMP that does .gifs, because I'm a web designer, and as much as I appreciate the added features of .pngs, customers tend not to when their horribly outdated browsers can't display them. Ah, the fun of the lowest common denominator.
This likely falls under stupid questions, especially since I don't have GIMP (what with not having X), but how is GIMP allowed to support the .gif format? The GNU website says that it can't be done, since IBM and Unisys hold the patent for LZW compression.
That depends. You're assuming that the "dog" would operate with some sort of intelligence not only *on par* with organic minds, but also *compatibly* with organic minds. If I were going to build an AI pet (AI people would be different), then I would keep out a lot of the features. Sure, it would be neat if it was fully functional, but it would be much more convenient to make a dog where you didn't need to feel guilty about neglecting the thing, because it wouldn't mind. It's a very tricky topic, but I think that conventional ethics would only apply if its brain functioned like our does, or like those of dogs do.
I'm speaking more of general robot intelligence here, and ignoring your Turing test comment; that wouldn't apply if its brain functioned differently.
But see, now I feel guilty about contemplating neglecting a robot dog, even though it wouldn't care--very difficult subject matter indeed.
I saw it in Edmonton's SEE Magazine, making reference to The Canadian Alliance Against Software Theft (CAAST). I'm too lazy to check out the site, but that's where it'd be.
This is certainly true. However, the current definition of programmer is closer than the misunderstood definition of hacker, so at least it'd be a start. Perhaps there should be two standards (as there currently are): terms used amongst geeks, as hacker/cracker currently are, and those in common use, as programmer/hacker are.
As someone else mentioned in a different thread, it's like the gay/queer thing. Once it is used enough internally, it may make its way into common, correct usage.
"Repurposing cracker" would be an even worse situation. What we have right now is the media having turned a single word around. If we take that word's logical opposition (cracker) and start using it to denote the very thing which it was created to distinguish from (hacker) then no one will ever understand what anyone else is saying.
I must agree that "programmer" is a good moniker.
Corel has my support here: Photopaint and Wordperfect for Linux will probably be enough to get me to move my Win98 box fully over to Linux. My server is Linux, but I need access to these sort of apps to get my work done.
This is definitely a positive thing--the capitalist mindset doesn't allow this culture to accept that free software (GIMP and Emacs) could approach the quality of that which costs money. It may be, however, that this sways people over to Linux for the wrong reasons, and without caring about Open Source.
Hey--everyone complains about flamewars between *BSD and Linux users, but there are very few to defend us journalists on /. Journalists get a worse rap than lawyers here. *I*, for one, always get the physics on my stories correct.
(point of information: my father is a lawyer, so don't start being mean to them)