um... you do realize it's a freaking pleasure ship, pleasure being the primary word here. The entire boat was designed for people to have fun on, you make it sound like a jail.
The pleasure does not derive from the ship itself, it derives from the crew that is there to care for you and to provide you with luxury. The pleasure also derives from the ship being something new and different.
If you want a ship that is a more appropriate comparison think the navy. You get food, quarters, laundry, exercise room, etc. Yet the chaplains have to keep an eye out for the kids on their first cruise getting suicidal. A shipboard workplace gets old very fast.
There are an increasing number of xserve clusters (http://www.macinchem.fsnet.co.uk/clusters.htm) why is this thought to be news worthy?
Perhaps because it replaces a Linux cluster? I haven't been following clusters but this is the first story where I recall Linux being replaced rather than Linux being adopted. Just a wild-ass guess.
Just to be clear I am not saying that the Catholic church did all the preservation, just some of it, more than governments and individuals of the time. I am aware of the vast amounts of knowledge that Islamic scholars preserved and added to.
When discussing whether or not the church should sell its art and other valuables you have to realize that the Catholic church has witnessed the fall of civilization and preserved art and knowledge until a new civilization arose. Why should they believe someone else would be a better custodian of the history and treasures they posses?
Personally I'd say that your "belief" that science will eventually be able to define "what we are" is is merely an article of faith. Science will only be able to deal with the detectable, to describe the mechanics of the universe. It will never be able to prove that there is no God, that the mechanics of the universe or our creation was random not somehow guided. Neither science nor religion have all the answer.
A lot of the history of Christianity revolves around bashing people who try to point out the actual reality of the universe. Those people (scientists) do get a little tired of the unrelenting "seek to tear down" (to use your phrase) attitude from the religious side of the spectrum.
"A graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Arizona, Consolmagno sees nothing incongruous about storing chunks of interplanetary debris next to the courtyard where Pope John Paul II presides over Mass on summer mornings.
Like the telescopes studding the roof of Castel Gandolfo, the 200-year-old meteorite collection is a tangible expression of the Vatican's long-standing commitment to scientific research, he said.
Analyzing the space rocks, or training the Vatican Observatory's $3 million Arizona telescope on a distant galaxy, are both ways of gaining "a closer appreciation of the personality of the creator," he said in an interview."This is our way of finding God," said Consolmagno, author of Brother Astronomer: Adventures of a Vatican Scientist, published in February by McGraw-Hill.
The Vatican Observatory is one of the oldest astronomical institutes in the world and the only research group directly supported by the Holy See. The church funds the observatory to the tune of about $1 million a year, leaving its operation to the Jesuits, a religious order whose "charism," or special gift to the church, is scholarship.
Ten Jesuit astronomers split their time between Italy and Tucson, Arizona, where the Vatican Observatory Research Group has offices at the University of Arizona's Steward Observatory. In collaboration with Steward, the Jesuits built the 70-inch (1.8-meter) Vatican Advanced Technology Telescope (VATT) on Mount Graham, 75 miles (120 kilometers) northeast of Tucson.
"
the catholic church does lots of things to milk the believers.
remember no meat but fish on friday?
Sounds like modern medical and nutritional advice. So when a doctor or nutritionist says eat fish once a week he/she is doing the right thing, but when coming from the clergy it is wrong?
Regarding past sins of the church, you confuse a church functioning as a political body not a religious body. The church got royally screwed up centuries ago when it got into the business of government. Power corrupts, even the church, even the agnostics, even the atheists. However today the church is back to its proper role.
More power just gives developers an excuse to use more resources. There is no reason a word processing program should lag on a 2+ ghz processor... but there is so much bloat in the program because software vendors feel the need to use up all that extra processing juice that it does...
Using up all resources can be good, for example games will eventually want all of both cores. The second will have extra eye candy. For example extra smoke and dust particles in a racing game. Yes, that example was stolen from a GDC lecture. Here's another GDC example, single core: static sky clouds, dual core: procedurally generated sky, clouds forming and breaking up.
I'm not sure cell is all hype, it may or may not be, and POWER and PowerPC are proven. The problem with say may simply be that its complicated and may take a while top figure out. The first round of games may be weaker than later rounds of simply because people will be inexperienced during the first round. POWER and PowerPC have an advantage that there is quite a bit of experience, compilers are a little more mature, etc. Just some random thoughts.
Yes the unions contribute to the problem at times but the overwhelming source of the problem is the US consumer. Non-union shops are getting hammerd too.
Unions completed original mission, new mission
on
Games Losing Their Voices
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Unions are there to protect the unions. They used to be there to protect the workers, and they attracted leaders who were concerned with protecting the workers. Then they grew large...
As the son and grandson of blue collar union members, and as a person who has materially benefited from the original ideals of unionization, I'll add that a large part of the problem is that union won their war but did not demobilize. Nearly all their legitimate issues are enshrined in law. Now they largely exist to preserve themselves and their power.
The occassional exception where they actually do something useful would be the "Save a job, buy American" type public relations campaigns. We bitch and moan about about jobs being exported and blame the government and corporations but the simple truth is that it is our own damn fault. We tend to buy whatever costs less. The union's modern battle is with the public not government and corporations. Well, that is if they were interested in protect their workers.
Pragmatic and technical considerations have driven this change, as Linux continues to gain a greater userbase and more third-party commercial software is made available on the platform. Are other universities eliminating Solaris in favor of a Linux distribution?
It happened after I graduated, over 5 years ago, but most Sun boxes were replaced with PCs running Linux. It was mostly a cost decision. Greater userbase and more 3rd party support are irrelevant since homework and projects for a computer science program don't usually need much beyond basic unix tools and apps. Ironically the idea of switching to Linux was introduced and championed by the local Linux advocates but with the switch from Sun hardware to generic PC hardware the university decided to make most of the machines dual boot Linux and Windows. Linux won, Microsoft won, Sun lost. Microsoft never even sent a thank you note to the Linux advocates.
Been there, done that. At least with AOL CDs. They launch just fine but they are much faster than a clay and present a very slim profile. Nearly impossible to hit. I don't expect platters would be much better.
As much as I enjoy hi tech it is not the answer for everything. C-clamp the platter to a bench, put a second c-clamp in the hole as a safety, apply the belt sander.
I find it hard to believe that you find a sledge more fun than a torch, a better workout yes, more fun no. But I may be biased, my grandfather is a retired master welder (or something like that, whatever you call the guys rated to assemble submarines). Time to spend some quality time with grandpa.;-)
However, if the first party simply provides an offer of the source to the second party, then the first party must provide the source to anyone who asks (ie. any third party.)
I don't think so. You only have an obligation to someone who has your binaries. It doesn't matter how they received the binaries, directly or indirectly. From the FAQ:
"The GPL does not require you to release your modified version. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization.
But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available to the program's users, under the GPL."
"If you commercially distribute binaries not accompanied with source code, the GPL says you must provide a written offer to distribute the source code later. When users non-commercially redistribute the binaries they received from you, they must pass along a copy of this written offer. This means that people who did not get the binaries directly from you can still receive copies of the source code, along with the written offer."
I disagree. Security through obscurity has been proved not to work time and time again. Granted it may perhaps buy you a little time, but in the long run it won't work.
Buying a little time is good. Public examination of source code can be viewed as giving the enemy a head start. Public examination is also highly overrated. What is really useful is that some third party has reviewed the software. In commercial over-the-counter software that is generally not an option so you could argue that FOSS has an advantage there. However the Pentagon doing an internal audit and review would probably be just as useful or more useful than a public review.
But the changes the contractor made would have to be made public under the GPL because they distributed it to the military. If the military decided that they didn't want the changes to be revealed, you're back to the same conflict.
No. The GPL only requires you to give source to your customers if they ask for it. Making it avaiable to anyone via the web is not required, it is just a convenient way to implement the preceeding for some. Subcontractor give source to Boeing and Boeing gives source to Pentagon, public never sees it, and no GPL violation has occurred.
Some applications don't need a GUI or all the other software that comes with a Mac. Look at the Navy's XServers running a sonar application. I might want to buy a mini and use it as a silent OpenBSD firewall. Sure Mac OS X could do this but for security reasons such a box is best run with only what it needs. In short think of "appliance" type application.
Contempt without investigation has a name: ignorance. Grandma's and graphic designers use Macs. Real nerds use Linux.
Pot. Kettle. Black. You just proved your ignorance.
"Ben Gutierrez writes "Paul Graham has posted a new essay on the Return of the Mac which begins with: 'All the best hackers I know are gradually switching to Macs.' Tim O'Reilly said some similar things in Watching Alpha Geeks. From the article: "My friend Robert said his whole research group at MIT recently bought themselves Powerbooks. These guys are not the graphic designers and grandmas who were buying Macs at Apple's low point in the mid 1990s. They're about as hardcore OS hackers as you can get.""
Slashdot Mirror
um... you do realize it's a freaking pleasure ship, pleasure being the primary word here. The entire boat was designed for people to have fun on, you make it sound like a jail.
The pleasure does not derive from the ship itself, it derives from the crew that is there to care for you and to provide you with luxury. The pleasure also derives from the ship being something new and different.
If you want a ship that is a more appropriate comparison think the navy. You get food, quarters, laundry, exercise room, etc. Yet the chaplains have to keep an eye out for the kids on their first cruise getting suicidal. A shipboard workplace gets old very fast.
There are an increasing number of xserve clusters (http://www.macinchem.fsnet.co.uk/clusters.htm) why is this thought to be news worthy?
Perhaps because it replaces a Linux cluster? I haven't been following clusters but this is the first story where I recall Linux being replaced rather than Linux being adopted. Just a wild-ass guess.
Since when was Tron a AAA title?
About 1982.
Just to be clear I am not saying that the Catholic church did all the preservation, just some of it, more than governments and individuals of the time. I am aware of the vast amounts of knowledge that Islamic scholars preserved and added to.
When discussing whether or not the church should sell its art and other valuables you have to realize that the Catholic church has witnessed the fall of civilization and preserved art and knowledge until a new civilization arose. Why should they believe someone else would be a better custodian of the history and treasures they posses?
Personally I'd say that your "belief" that science will eventually be able to define "what we are" is is merely an article of faith. Science will only be able to deal with the detectable, to describe the mechanics of the universe. It will never be able to prove that there is no God, that the mechanics of the universe or our creation was random not somehow guided. Neither science nor religion have all the answer.
A lot of the history of Christianity revolves around bashing people who try to point out the actual reality of the universe. Those people (scientists) do get a little tired of the unrelenting "seek to tear down" (to use your phrase) attitude from the religious side of the spectrum.
a tican_observe_000716.html
"A graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Arizona, Consolmagno sees nothing incongruous about storing chunks of interplanetary debris next to the courtyard where Pope John Paul II presides over Mass on summer mornings. Like the telescopes studding the roof of Castel Gandolfo, the 200-year-old meteorite collection is a tangible expression of the Vatican's long-standing commitment to scientific research, he said. Analyzing the space rocks, or training the Vatican Observatory's $3 million Arizona telescope on a distant galaxy, are both ways of gaining "a closer appreciation of the personality of the creator," he said in an interview."This is our way of finding God," said Consolmagno, author of Brother Astronomer: Adventures of a Vatican Scientist, published in February by McGraw-Hill. The Vatican Observatory is one of the oldest astronomical institutes in the world and the only research group directly supported by the Holy See. The church funds the observatory to the tune of about $1 million a year, leaving its operation to the Jesuits, a religious order whose "charism," or special gift to the church, is scholarship. Ten Jesuit astronomers split their time between Italy and Tucson, Arizona, where the Vatican Observatory Research Group has offices at the University of Arizona's Steward Observatory. In collaboration with Steward, the Jesuits built the 70-inch (1.8-meter) Vatican Advanced Technology Telescope (VATT) on Mount Graham, 75 miles (120 kilometers) northeast of Tucson. "
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/v
FWIW, the dean of my chemistry department (at a state university) was a Catholic priest.
the catholic church does lots of things to milk the believers.
remember no meat but fish on friday?
Sounds like modern medical and nutritional advice. So when a doctor or nutritionist says eat fish once a week he/she is doing the right thing, but when coming from the clergy it is wrong?
Regarding past sins of the church, you confuse a church functioning as a political body not a religious body. The church got royally screwed up centuries ago when it got into the business of government. Power corrupts, even the church, even the agnostics, even the atheists. However today the church is back to its proper role.
More power just gives developers an excuse to use more resources. There is no reason a word processing program should lag on a 2+ ghz processor... but there is so much bloat in the program because software vendors feel the need to use up all that extra processing juice that it does...
Using up all resources can be good, for example games will eventually want all of both cores. The second will have extra eye candy. For example extra smoke and dust particles in a racing game. Yes, that example was stolen from a GDC lecture. Here's another GDC example, single core: static sky clouds, dual core: procedurally generated sky, clouds forming and breaking up.
I'm not sure cell is all hype, it may or may not be, and POWER and PowerPC are proven. The problem with say may simply be that its complicated and may take a while top figure out. The first round of games may be weaker than later rounds of simply because people will be inexperienced during the first round. POWER and PowerPC have an advantage that there is quite a bit of experience, compilers are a little more mature, etc. Just some random thoughts.
Yes the unions contribute to the problem at times but the overwhelming source of the problem is the US consumer. Non-union shops are getting hammerd too.
Unions are there to protect the unions. They used to be there to protect the workers, and they attracted leaders who were concerned with protecting the workers. Then they grew large ...
As the son and grandson of blue collar union members, and as a person who has materially benefited from the original ideals of unionization, I'll add that a large part of the problem is that union won their war but did not demobilize. Nearly all their legitimate issues are enshrined in law. Now they largely exist to preserve themselves and their power.
The occassional exception where they actually do something useful would be the "Save a job, buy American" type public relations campaigns. We bitch and moan about about jobs being exported and blame the government and corporations but the simple truth is that it is our own damn fault. We tend to buy whatever costs less. The union's modern battle is with the public not government and corporations. Well, that is if they were interested in protect their workers.
Pragmatic and technical considerations have driven this change, as Linux continues to gain a greater userbase and more third-party commercial software is made available on the platform. Are other universities eliminating Solaris in favor of a Linux distribution?
It happened after I graduated, over 5 years ago, but most Sun boxes were replaced with PCs running Linux. It was mostly a cost decision. Greater userbase and more 3rd party support are irrelevant since homework and projects for a computer science program don't usually need much beyond basic unix tools and apps. Ironically the idea of switching to Linux was introduced and championed by the local Linux advocates but with the switch from Sun hardware to generic PC hardware the university decided to make most of the machines dual boot Linux and Windows. Linux won, Microsoft won, Sun lost. Microsoft never even sent a thank you note to the Linux advocates.
Been there, done that. At least with AOL CDs. They launch just fine but they are much faster than a clay and present a very slim profile. Nearly impossible to hit. I don't expect platters would be much better.
As much as I enjoy hi tech it is not the answer for everything. C-clamp the platter to a bench, put a second c-clamp in the hole as a safety, apply the belt sander.
Active volcano
;-)
Good idea, time to visit volcano national park on the big island of Hawaii. Honest Mr. IRS Auditor, it was a business trip.
I find it hard to believe that you find a sledge more fun than a torch, a better workout yes, more fun no. But I may be biased, my grandfather is a retired master welder (or something like that, whatever you call the guys rated to assemble submarines). Time to spend some quality time with grandpa. ;-)
Drilled? Couldn't we just paint them black and use them as targets on the 100yd range until enough data is removed?
However, if the first party simply provides an offer of the source to the second party, then the first party must provide the source to anyone who asks (ie. any third party.)
r eSourcePostedPublic
I don't think so. You only have an obligation to someone who has your binaries. It doesn't matter how they received the binaries, directly or indirectly. From the FAQ:
"The GPL does not require you to release your modified version. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization. But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available to the program's users, under the GPL."
"If you commercially distribute binaries not accompanied with source code, the GPL says you must provide a written offer to distribute the source code later. When users non-commercially redistribute the binaries they received from you, they must pass along a copy of this written offer. This means that people who did not get the binaries directly from you can still receive copies of the source code, along with the written offer."
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequi
I disagree. Security through obscurity has been proved not to work time and time again. Granted it may perhaps buy you a little time, but in the long run it won't work.
Buying a little time is good. Public examination of source code can be viewed as giving the enemy a head start. Public examination is also highly overrated. What is really useful is that some third party has reviewed the software. In commercial over-the-counter software that is generally not an option so you could argue that FOSS has an advantage there. However the Pentagon doing an internal audit and review would probably be just as useful or more useful than a public review.
But the changes the contractor made would have to be made public under the GPL because they distributed it to the military. If the military decided that they didn't want the changes to be revealed, you're back to the same conflict.
No. The GPL only requires you to give source to your customers if they ask for it. Making it avaiable to anyone via the web is not required, it is just a convenient way to implement the preceeding for some. Subcontractor give source to Boeing and Boeing gives source to Pentagon, public never sees it, and no GPL violation has occurred.
Some applications don't need a GUI or all the other software that comes with a Mac. Look at the Navy's XServers running a sonar application. I might want to buy a mini and use it as a silent OpenBSD firewall. Sure Mac OS X could do this but for security reasons such a box is best run with only what it needs. In short think of "appliance" type application.
You can boot from cd-rom, read up on IEEE 1275 Open Firmware.
Contempt without investigation has a name: ignorance. Grandma's and graphic designers use Macs. Real nerds use Linux.
/ 1818256&tid=156&tid=3&tid=218
Pot. Kettle. Black. You just proved your ignorance.
"Ben Gutierrez writes "Paul Graham has posted a new essay on the Return of the Mac which begins with: 'All the best hackers I know are gradually switching to Macs.' Tim O'Reilly said some similar things in Watching Alpha Geeks. From the article: "My friend Robert said his whole research group at MIT recently bought themselves Powerbooks. These guys are not the graphic designers and grandmas who were buying Macs at Apple's low point in the mid 1990s. They're about as hardcore OS hackers as you can get.""
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/29
"I don't want to pick up a sword and have it read Nike on the side..."
The Nike logo would be on the boots. The blade would probably be brought to you by Gillette or Remington.