My question is this: Can an easter egg still be exciting if all the mystery is taken out of it. If i can download the source, i can look for the egg that way, and although i may not bother to read it all, i'm sure somebody has read any given portion, and the eggs will all be ferreted out fairly quickly.
There's an easter egg in Window Maker (a fairly obvious one). Go read the source and find it. It's not as easy as you think.
How "inexistent" is the Costa-Rican army actually?
Do they have a strong police?
Depends on your point of view really... there are the so called "civilian" (civilian as in "non military") and "rural" guards, there's a "judiciary" investigations bureau, a "Special Operations" bureau, and anti-drug squad ("squad", yeah, right) which is in someway or another supported by the DEA. There's also a "municipal" guard.
The police corps are, honestly, a joke: there's no formal police training and there's no formal police academy. Basically, you become a rural/civil guard because you can't/don't want to do anything else. Being a policeman (a guard really) is not a career, is something you just do. As a consequence, the policemen/guards/whatever are not incredibly motivated to do their jobs in the best possible way, and their wages are absolutely laughable at, too, which basically means it should be relative easy to bribe them, but alas, having worked with (not as) some rural guards, I must say the ones I know are the most honorable decent persons I have ever met, but the general perception is not like that.
Foreign guerrillas are the rural guard realm basically. The "rurals" do have some heavy weaponry, but it's the exception not the rule, it's semi-automatic weapons for the most part. You shouldn't be able to find anything like a goverment owned tank in Costa Rica, and I'd be surprised if you can find a heavy armored vehicle at all. And, IIRC, last time the goverment bought a chopper, it made it to the headlines...
So, instead of spending lots of money buying weapons noone needs, in Costa Rica that money is (hopefully) used to finance a public school system which is free and compulsory up to the 9th grade and free up to the 11th grade. After that, the stundents have three choices: keep on working on a higher education degree either on one of the goverment funded universities (which are in no way free, they are just funded), do the same on a private university, which are, by costarrican standards, prohibitively expensive (but there's a sector of the population that can afford it), work on some sort of "technical" degree, or just roll your own game in life...
All in all, internet conectivity in Costa Rica sucks big time. If you want to experience it first hand, just go to http://www.cr/, which is hosted on the same backbone as Costa Rica's largest public university (approx. 30 thousand students). No, it's not slashdotted.
This means we'll start seeing more standard 3D acceleration on cards-not just 3dfx anymore. With the present state, 3dfx is actually behind on DRI drivers, which is rather surprising.
Actually, it's the other drivers that are behind
The new GLX extension is OpenGL 1.2 compatible, meaning here comes 3D graphics, CAD and other such professional uses. This is starting to make Mesa look less and less desirable
And Mesa happens to be at the heart of the OpenGL implementation in XF4...
especially after seeing how OGL 1.2 performs on nVidia's.90 beta DRI drivers.
whose OpenGL 1.2 implementation is not complete/100% conformant
Taking Initiative It's clear who really wants this. nVidia clearly is fighting for victories on both Windows and Linux-what next, Macintosh? nVidia pushed the drivers out the door almost immediately, and in some cases it shows, but in others the drivers prove to be exceptional for performance-even if unoptimized. If nVidia gets on the ball and optimizes the drivers, they're looking to destroy Windows performance. I've never seen performance quite this fast on the first release candidate. Now only if nVidia would get off their lazy asses and release something new, maybe from the Detonator 500 series of drivers. We can all wish, right? Matrox also looks to be getting their hands in things, as they always do. They made the push on Windows, and proved to be one of the first mainstream cards to have OpenGL, and again they're a pioneer. The more the better, I say.
Which has very little to do with XF4, which is what is suppossed to being reviewed. Nvidia released a new server and a matching OpenGL implementation (without programmer's documentation or at least a dammed header, mind you). An own OpenGL implementation (or SGI's) is supposed to be behind it...
Unfortunately, with all new releases, some things just don't work quite as planned. Since it's Open-Source some of these problems can be expected, and it is also free. Here's a run-down of the problems faced in this release:
And you are comparing apples and oranges here... it doesn't say which Voodoo driver is being used, and I'd suppose it's compared against the nVidia recently released drivers. The point is nVidia says their drivers are beta, while the Voodoo ones are still in development.
I'm kinda surprised taco posted this, next thing he'll post is my (rather long) email that says "XFree86 sucks" or "XFree86 rulez"...:-(
What EXACTLY is the "secret recipe" used by NetPD to determine someone is a "MEtallica Pirate"? And, seeing definite vagueness regarding the TOS of the Napster agreement with regards to bannable activity, what's going to happen when a group amoung these 300,000 ex-fans decides, instead of simply recreating Napster accounts, decides to challenge Napster's assertion that they were actually in posession of Metallica tracks? This is just a sordid state of affairs
Kick back: find a free (i.e., freely distributable MP3) and call it 01_Metallica_Nothing_else_Matters.mp3 or whatever. NetPD is with 95% probability NOT checking content, just names. Let Napter kick you out. You get the idea...
BTW your viewpoint is very politically correct amongst open source zealots (and moderators, unsurprisingly), but also rather asinine. You obviously don't actually own a Nvidia card.
Technically, I don't own an NVidia card. I have to suffer one every day, but from your POV that seems irrelevant. It's funny how everytime I engage on this kind of discussion, and an NVidia zealot is arround the first question is "do you own an NVidia card?", and I begin my reply as "No, but..." but I can rarely get past the "No" part, because I'm interrupted with a "Ah! There! Shut up!".
With that in mind, the license is really interesting (emphasis mine):
2. GRANT OF LICENSE.
2.1 Rights and Limitations of Grant. NVIDIA hereby grants Customer the following non-exclusive, non-transferable right to use the SOFTWARE, with the following limitations:
2.1.1 Rights. Customer may install and use one copy of the SOFTWARE on a single computer, and except for making one back-up copy of the Software, may not otherwise copy the SOFTWARE. This LICENSE of SOFTWARE may not be shared or used concurrently on different computers.
2.1.2 Limitations.
No Reverse Engineering. Customer may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the SOFTWARE, nor attempt in any other manner to obtain the
source code. No Separation of Components. The SOFTWARE is licensed as a single product. Its component parts may not be separated for use on more than one computer, nor otherwise used separately from the other parts. No Rental. Customer may not rent or lease the SOFTWARE to someone else.
Given the nature of the SOFTWARE, the license is rather non sensical. I mean, I'll have to eventually install the SOFTWARE on more than one computer where it will be used by people who are NOT me. People who never read this crap and people who probably don't really know the SOFTWARE is installed (but is, nevertheless, running on the computer they are using)
For the most recent iteration of this discussion, see this message, and browse a little further into the thread. The topic of binary-i586 eventually came up. Several people have on several ocassions given good comments on why this is a bad idea. It's not only binary-586, but eventually binary-k7 or binary-p3. Several developers have also claimed that 586 optimizations hurt performance on P3 machines. In that thread, Joey asks for hard numbers supporting the 20% speed increase other people claim, but until now (11 days later) the only response has been silence.
If you are really interested in this, install the pentium builder package, read the docs and start recompiling libc6. After that you'll probably want to recompile libstdc++, the X packages, and stuff like that. If you can come up with hard cold data that supports the claimed speed gains, I'm sure someone will get interested rather quickly.
But then again, keep in mind the Intel world is not only Pentiums.
As for optimization flags, read the gcc documentation. Basically you are looking for stuff like unroll-loops, inline-fuctions, some of the forces and the like. Beware! This will bloat the generated code!
Sun/Linux however is a small niche, so it wouldn't have the HUGE support that Intel/Linux has. Solaris is heavily tested by Sun on their hardware platforms, and given that there hardware is sold in certain configurations with the OS, I trust that they have a great ability to debug and test their systems, and that bugs when reported are dealt with quickly. Does Sun/Linux have the same situation?
I see your point. Sun/Linux is IMO very well supported, and in the past I had really good experiences on that particular area. Granted, you are not likely to find a Sun/Linux guru in a 10 km radius (it is scary that you can find a pretty knowledgeable Linux user in that same area nowadays... or maybe I'm just lucky), but the number of people using Linux on Sun hardware is surprinsingly high. I wouldn't call debian-sparc a high traffic list, but it's not that low traffic either. This message regarding Debian GNU/Linux running on a e450 is amusing.
There are companies providing Linux preinstalled on Sun hardware (or at least Sun compatible hardware) like Kachina Technologies (no I don't work for them, but I admit I'm biased, I've got superb service from them in the past). I know there are more vendors offering Linux on Sun, but I don't have a list handy... sorry.
My question is this, would anyone buy Sun Hardware to run Linux? Sun machines are generally more reliable and robust, better tested, and better supported. However, what would be the point of running Linux on one.
From the top of my head (not so long ago someone asked me this very question):
Uniformity? There are some differences that matter. Think for example a situation where upper management is stupid enough to decide on Sun boxes but the people who are actually going to use them know zip about Solaris (administration wise) Impossible you say? I've seen it.
Not all the Sun hardware is super high end. There are some pretty low end Ultras, on which Solaris is a molasse. The nickname Slowaris is not just a pretty joke. Upper management (see previous point) got you stuck with a pile of expensive crap, you have to deal with it.
"On Sun hardware, Solaris is robust, Linux is not" is just FUD. You are not going to install Linux on that Enterprise 10k, but Linux on a Ultra 30 is a really good option.
But I have to admit, the Linux Sparc and UltraSparc installations I've done (Debian) have been real fun!
A closed source video driver. So what? As long as the driver works, I don't care. If it doesn't work, don't buy the damned card, buy another one from a different vendor that does work, or is open source, whatever your priorities are. No manufacturer has an obligation to live up to the ideological dictates of the open source movement.
Let me start with a simple statement: fsck Open Source!
Normally, I wouldn't care a bit about this, I have a G400 at home. But lucky me, at the university I've got a TNT2. One thing I can tell about the NVidia drivers: they are unstable as hell. The 2D driver is ok, but then again, I don't care about the 2D driver. The 3D driver is hell on earth. The only game I've run on this box is bzflag. Besides that, everything is pretty "normal" in house 3D applications. I was kind of waiting for the XFree86 4.0 drivers, which NVidia hinted were going to have source for them (mind you, real source, not the crap they spitted the last time), but it looks like it won't happen.
Why is it that I want to have source? Because if there's a problem with the dammed driver, I want to be able to take a look at it.
Why did NVidia release source? They did it as a publicity stunt (just like the one they have pulled with SGI and the one they pulled with the X-box). Nowadays you get some good press coverage if you put the words open and source close enough. Another reason they released source: "Quit bitching already! Here, have some source..." someone else already pointed that under normal circumstances, once "some" source is released someone will be able to improve on it, so releasing "some" source makes everybody happy... for a while. In this case it has not happened, because improving means "improving blindly", there's no specification to work with.
So there. fsck Open Source! That's what NVidia is saying. What would have happened if most of the people still refered to it as "Free Software" (assuming it was truly free) First of all, it would be pretty bold for a company to say fsck free software because that's easier to interpret as fsck freedom!, so they would just have to go with the alternative: ignore it, or play by the rules. There's no rules you say? It's their hardware, they get to do what they want? Ok, granted. But then stay out of the playground, will you NVidia? That way they won't show up as a possibility on the next batch of boxes we buy here, and I won't have to explain why I don't want cards that are faster on the paper but a PITA once you are actually using them.
NVidia has a constantly shifting target
What you mean, constantly shifting? The 3.3 series have been out there for quite a while, and the 3.3.6 in particular has been out for more than six months, IIRC. I wouldn't call that constantly shifting...
as you said Spielberg had to wait a long time for an Oscar and wasn't taken seriously by a lot of people until Schindler's List.
The Schindler's List is a one sided manipulation of the espectator's feelings regarding a very sensitive subject. The performance and realization are magnificent, that can't be denied, but it's manipulation nevertheless. That's a pretty low thing to do as a director.
Don't get me wrong. That's what's it's all about, but in the case of TSL, Spielberg leaves the espectator no choice. He cages him and then makes him agree with his own opinions. That's what I have a problem with
I mean, take a look: Kubrick vs. Spielberg. I do like some of Spielberg's movies (Close Encounters, the Color Purple), but come on! This is Kubrick we are talking about! You can't match Close Encounters to 2001, can you? Jaws has nothing to do with The Shining. And what do you want to match Full Metal Jacket up to? Ryan? Are you nuts?!?
Spielberg makes movies that are to be swallowed, not to be enjoyed. You open your eyes and shut your brain.
The funky thing about having stock holders is that you owe them a load of explanations for your actions. AMD's 1 GHz costs US$1299 (1000 units) vs Intel's 1 GHz at US$990. I'm sorry, but the demand for such beasts is high and Intel has supply problems, their price must go up.
I really hope Intel won't be able to keep up with this.
I guess someone is trying to prevent an/.ting from happening, but it's interesting nonetheless, there are some really cool webpages there. And, in the middle of this page you'll find some familiar names...
Could someone please, please, PLEASE tell me how any of the Scream series relates to geeks? I didn't think geeks like "scary" movies.
Funky, I was going to stay out of this one until I read this comment... most geeks I know do dig horror flicks big time. In fact, I'm a horror film fan, and I've been having a hard time finding good horror movies lately... the "big" productions are dull (Scream, H2O,...) and the ones that aren't, are not horror films but psycho thrillers (Sixth Sense, 8mm, Blair Witch Project,...). And the little productions, which are usually good horror movies, are not so easy to find, and some of us despise VHS.
The leap-day this Tuesday, brought some surpriseful computer problems to the Hightech country of Japan. As the press agency Reuters informed, 1200 ATMs in Post Offices experimented problems as a result of Y2K related bugs. The Japan Weather Office had trouble gathering temperature and condensation data. As a result, this morning 43 stations distributed all over the country transmitted wrong data. As early as Monday some 24 hour forecasts had mistakes on them: instead of "29" they had "1" as the ending date for the validity of the forecast. In north Japan, in 20 regional offices, the seismic activity display units failed to work. In constrast with the turn of year, there were not reports of breakdowns in Japan's nuclear power plants.
Disclaimer: I'm not a native English speaker (it shows), and I'm not a native German speaker, but I do think my poor translation is easier to understand than the babelfish one.
Now I have to go back and tell all the people I've been telling no, Samba is NetBIOS over TCP/IP, not NetBEUI that now Samba is (or will be, shortly) also NetBEUI. *sigh*
This is good news in fact. Any user can set NetBEUI up, since there's nothing to setup. It doesn't help my old fight against former co-netadmins to stop them from polluting the network with NetBEUI, who will probably install it by default now, but so is life, you have to lick it one day at a time...
The terms were that I'd work at the company as a consultant for a fixed period of time. Any of "my" features they decided were worthwhile could be included as part of Word or Office, but anything they decided not to use would remain my intellectual property, so that in some theoretical other life I could start a company and sell my own little word processor in competition with theirs.
Well. Do it! I don't know what your wishlist contains, but I know what mine contains: a wordprocessor that's just that, a wordprocessor, not some hyperglorified desktop-publishing-tool-wannabe 100+ MB monster. You've got some spiffy ideas for a writer's wordprocessor? Share them! You want your own little wordprocessor to compete with with Word but don't have the skills to write it? Talk to these guys. IMO, they are the only players in this free-{beer,speech}-wordprocessor game that have a clue about what they are doing. Heck, what am I saying? They have a sackful of clues!
69 is a little bit overheated on some points, but interesting nonetheless. It addresses DVD and CSS directly. It's worth a read if you are thinking about submitting something. OTOH, I don't think this looks good...
For example, playback devices that are authorized to decrypt and play DVD discs protected by CSS are generally prohibited from sending the decrypted digital content out of a digital output.
I really know zip about DVD, I just know I've seen it, and I like it! Now, is what Time-Warner says true? Won't a DVD player send a decrypted signal to a digital output? If that's the case, then I can see how the MPAA claims CSS is a copy protection schema, and not an access control one. Can someone please shed some light on this point?
Slashdot Mirror
One of the best ones lies in the kernel source (there are tons of those there). This particular one related to the meaning of Life.
There's an easter egg in Window Maker (a fairly obvious one). Go read the source and find it. It's not as easy as you think.
Depends on your point of view really... there are the so called "civilian" (civilian as in "non military") and "rural" guards, there's a "judiciary" investigations bureau, a "Special Operations" bureau, and anti-drug squad ("squad", yeah, right) which is in someway or another supported by the DEA. There's also a "municipal" guard.
The police corps are, honestly, a joke: there's no formal police training and there's no formal police academy. Basically, you become a rural/civil guard because you can't/don't want to do anything else. Being a policeman (a guard really) is not a career, is something you just do. As a consequence, the policemen/guards/whatever are not incredibly motivated to do their jobs in the best possible way, and their wages are absolutely laughable at, too, which basically means it should be relative easy to bribe them, but alas, having worked with (not as) some rural guards, I must say the ones I know are the most honorable decent persons I have ever met, but the general perception is not like that.
Foreign guerrillas are the rural guard realm basically. The "rurals" do have some heavy weaponry, but it's the exception not the rule, it's semi-automatic weapons for the most part. You shouldn't be able to find anything like a goverment owned tank in Costa Rica, and I'd be surprised if you can find a heavy armored vehicle at all. And, IIRC, last time the goverment bought a chopper, it made it to the headlines...
So, instead of spending lots of money buying weapons noone needs, in Costa Rica that money is (hopefully) used to finance a public school system which is free and compulsory up to the 9th grade and free up to the 11th grade. After that, the stundents have three choices: keep on working on a higher education degree either on one of the goverment funded universities (which are in no way free, they are just funded), do the same on a private university, which are, by costarrican standards, prohibitively expensive (but there's a sector of the population that can afford it), work on some sort of "technical" degree, or just roll your own game in life...
All in all, internet conectivity in Costa Rica sucks big time. If you want to experience it first hand, just go to http://www.cr/, which is hosted on the same backbone as Costa Rica's largest public university (approx. 30 thousand students). No, it's not slashdotted.
Actually, it's the other drivers that are behind
And Mesa happens to be at the heart of the OpenGL implementation in XF4...
whose OpenGL 1.2 implementation is not complete/100% conformant
Which has very little to do with XF4, which is what is suppossed to being reviewed. Nvidia released a new server and a matching OpenGL implementation (without programmer's documentation or at least a dammed header, mind you). An own OpenGL implementation (or SGI's) is supposed to be behind it...
And you are comparing apples and oranges here... it doesn't say which Voodoo driver is being used, and I'd suppose it's compared against the nVidia recently released drivers. The point is nVidia says their drivers are beta, while the Voodoo ones are still in development.
I'm kinda surprised taco posted this, next thing he'll post is my (rather long) email that says "XFree86 sucks" or "XFree86 rulez"... :-(
Kick back: find a free (i.e., freely distributable MP3) and call it 01_Metallica_Nothing_else_Matters.mp3 or whatever. NetPD is with 95% probability NOT checking content, just names. Let Napter kick you out. You get the idea...
#define NINE 8 + 1
int main(int argc, char ** argv) {
printf("6*9 = %d\n", SIX * NINE);
}
See?
Technically, I don't own an NVidia card. I have to suffer one every day, but from your POV that seems irrelevant. It's funny how everytime I engage on this kind of discussion, and an NVidia zealot is arround the first question is "do you own an NVidia card?", and I begin my reply as "No, but..." but I can rarely get past the "No" part, because I'm interrupted with a "Ah! There! Shut up!".
With that in mind, the license is really interesting (emphasis mine):
Given the nature of the SOFTWARE, the license is rather non sensical. I mean, I'll have to eventually install the SOFTWARE on more than one computer where it will be used by people who are NOT me. People who never read this crap and people who probably don't really know the SOFTWARE is installed (but is, nevertheless, running on the computer they are using)
Nice, uh?
For the most recent iteration of this discussion, see this message, and browse a little further into the thread. The topic of binary-i586 eventually came up. Several people have on several ocassions given good comments on why this is a bad idea. It's not only binary-586, but eventually binary-k7 or binary-p3. Several developers have also claimed that 586 optimizations hurt performance on P3 machines. In that thread, Joey asks for hard numbers supporting the 20% speed increase other people claim, but until now (11 days later) the only response has been silence.
If you are really interested in this, install the pentium builder package, read the docs and start recompiling libc6. After that you'll probably want to recompile libstdc++, the X packages, and stuff like that. If you can come up with hard cold data that supports the claimed speed gains, I'm sure someone will get interested rather quickly.
But then again, keep in mind the Intel world is not only Pentiums.
As for optimization flags, read the gcc documentation. Basically you are looking for stuff like unroll-loops, inline-fuctions, some of the forces and the like. Beware! This will bloat the generated code!
I see your point. Sun/Linux is IMO very well supported, and in the past I had really good experiences on that particular area. Granted, you are not likely to find a Sun/Linux guru in a 10 km radius (it is scary that you can find a pretty knowledgeable Linux user in that same area nowadays... or maybe I'm just lucky), but the number of people using Linux on Sun hardware is surprinsingly high. I wouldn't call debian-sparc a high traffic list, but it's not that low traffic either. This message regarding Debian GNU/Linux running on a e450 is amusing.
There are companies providing Linux preinstalled on Sun hardware (or at least Sun compatible hardware) like Kachina Technologies (no I don't work for them, but I admit I'm biased, I've got superb service from them in the past). I know there are more vendors offering Linux on Sun, but I don't have a list handy... sorry.
From the top of my head (not so long ago someone asked me this very question):
But I have to admit, the Linux Sparc and UltraSparc installations I've done (Debian) have been real fun!
Let me start with a simple statement: fsck Open Source!
Normally, I wouldn't care a bit about this, I have a G400 at home. But lucky me, at the university I've got a TNT2. One thing I can tell about the NVidia drivers: they are unstable as hell. The 2D driver is ok, but then again, I don't care about the 2D driver. The 3D driver is hell on earth. The only game I've run on this box is bzflag. Besides that, everything is pretty "normal" in house 3D applications. I was kind of waiting for the XFree86 4.0 drivers, which NVidia hinted were going to have source for them (mind you, real source, not the crap they spitted the last time), but it looks like it won't happen.
Why is it that I want to have source? Because if there's a problem with the dammed driver, I want to be able to take a look at it.
Why did NVidia release source? They did it as a publicity stunt (just like the one they have pulled with SGI and the one they pulled with the X-box). Nowadays you get some good press coverage if you put the words open and source close enough. Another reason they released source: "Quit bitching already! Here, have some source..." someone else already pointed that under normal circumstances, once "some" source is released someone will be able to improve on it, so releasing "some" source makes everybody happy... for a while. In this case it has not happened, because improving means "improving blindly", there's no specification to work with.
So there. fsck Open Source! That's what NVidia is saying. What would have happened if most of the people still refered to it as "Free Software" (assuming it was truly free) First of all, it would be pretty bold for a company to say fsck free software because that's easier to interpret as fsck freedom!, so they would just have to go with the alternative: ignore it, or play by the rules. There's no rules you say? It's their hardware, they get to do what they want? Ok, granted. But then stay out of the playground, will you NVidia? That way they won't show up as a possibility on the next batch of boxes we buy here, and I won't have to explain why I don't want cards that are faster on the paper but a PITA once you are actually using them.
What you mean, constantly shifting? The 3.3 series have been out there for quite a while, and the 3.3.6 in particular has been out for more than six months, IIRC. I wouldn't call that constantly shifting...
The Schindler's List is a one sided manipulation of the espectator's feelings regarding a very sensitive subject. The performance and realization are magnificent, that can't be denied, but it's manipulation nevertheless. That's a pretty low thing to do as a director.
Don't get me wrong. That's what's it's all about, but in the case of TSL, Spielberg leaves the espectator no choice. He cages him and then makes him agree with his own opinions. That's what I have a problem with
Zemeckis directed BttF, not Spielberg. Spielberg produced it.
I mean, take a look: Kubrick vs. Spielberg. I do like some of Spielberg's movies (Close Encounters, the Color Purple), but come on! This is Kubrick we are talking about! You can't match Close Encounters to 2001, can you? Jaws has nothing to do with The Shining. And what do you want to match Full Metal Jacket up to? Ryan? Are you nuts?!?
Spielberg makes movies that are to be swallowed, not to be enjoyed. You open your eyes and shut your brain.
$ ls /sbin/yast
/sbin/yast /usr/lib/libjpeg.so*
/usr/lib/libjpeg.so
/usr/lib/libjpeg.so.6
/usr/lib/libjpeg.so.6.0.1
$ ls
Need I say more?
Up yours!
The funky thing about having stock holders is that you owe them a load of explanations for your actions. AMD's 1 GHz costs US$1299 (1000 units) vs Intel's 1 GHz at US$990. I'm sorry, but the demand for such beasts is high and Intel has supply problems, their price must go up.
I really hope Intel won't be able to keep up with this.
I guess someone is trying to prevent an /.ting from happening, but it's interesting nonetheless, there are some really cool webpages there. And, in the middle of this page you'll find some familiar names...
There must be a gazillion martins in Germany, and a similar number of schmids, schmit, schmith and whatnot...
Funky, I was going to stay out of this one until I read this comment... most geeks I know do dig horror flicks big time. In fact, I'm a horror film fan, and I've been having a hard time finding good horror movies lately... the "big" productions are dull (Scream, H2O, ...) and the ones that aren't, are not horror films but psycho thrillers (Sixth Sense, 8mm, Blair Witch Project, ...). And the little productions, which are usually good horror movies, are not so easy to find, and some of us despise VHS.
Why make things harder on yourself? isleap = (!(year % 4) && (year % 100)) || !(year % 400);
If you call that a translation...
Disclaimer: I'm not a native English speaker (it shows), and I'm not a native German speaker, but I do think my poor translation is easier to understand than the babelfish one.
Now I have to go back and tell all the people I've been telling no, Samba is NetBIOS over TCP/IP, not NetBEUI that now Samba is (or will be, shortly) also NetBEUI. *sigh*
This is good news in fact. Any user can set NetBEUI up, since there's nothing to setup. It doesn't help my old fight against former co-netadmins to stop them from polluting the network with NetBEUI, who will probably install it by default now, but so is life, you have to lick it one day at a time...
Well. Do it! I don't know what your wishlist contains, but I know what mine contains: a wordprocessor that's just that, a wordprocessor, not some hyperglorified desktop-publishing-tool-wannabe 100+ MB monster. You've got some spiffy ideas for a writer's wordprocessor? Share them! You want your own little wordprocessor to compete with with Word but don't have the skills to write it? Talk to these guys. IMO, they are the only players in this free-{beer,speech}-wordprocessor game that have a clue about what they are doing. Heck, what am I saying? They have a sackful of clues!
69 is a little bit overheated on some points, but interesting nonetheless. It addresses DVD and CSS directly. It's worth a read if you are thinking about submitting something. OTOH, I don't think this looks good...
From the Time-Warner submission:
I really know zip about DVD, I just know I've seen it, and I like it! Now, is what Time-Warner says true? Won't a DVD player send a decrypted signal to a digital output? If that's the case, then I can see how the MPAA claims CSS is a copy protection schema, and not an access control one. Can someone please shed some light on this point?