That's fine and dandy if you're an english major, but when you claim 'evolution' in a scientific study, you are talking about Evolution - plain and simple. There is no room to pander with words.
Yeah, that rather pisses me off. People are quick to say things 'evolved over time' without suggesting a mechanism. Evolution is not the mechanism of change! Thing's don't just 'change over time' in the sense of growing new limbs or changing skin colour. Specific mechanisms of evolution (ie. evolutionary forces) include:
1) Natural selection
2) Non-random mating
3) Mutations
4) Viruses (and some bacteria)
5) Geographic isolation should be included too since it more or less causes speciation
Unless you can pinpoint it to one of these things (or others which bring about changes in the population of alleles) claiming evolution is just silly!
Below the article there was a comment asking whether a EULA could be used to waive your right to the source under the GPL. I don't know whether you can do this or not, does anybody have any ideas about this?
Re:Some creativity, please.
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 1
It was a joke!
Some creativity, please.
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 1
I disagree. All he has to do is create two working prototypes, and use one prototype to send the other prototype through time, with a message attached telling whoever receives it to use it to send something to our time. Voila. Proof of time travel made easy.
he wants to go back in time and warn his father, who died of cancer when he was 10, of the danger of cigarettes.....
if his father lived, then he wouldn't create the time machine, and thus etc. etc
Yes yes and then after not inventing it, he doesn't save his father and creates a time machine, and becomes stuck in a time loop. Looks like somebody forgot their exit conditions!
Just a couple of points.
First I think you mean proprietary software, as commercial software can (and often is) Free too.
Also, your company could write a piece of Free code, and sell it to a client at whatever cost your company sees fit. Where's the big problem? Costs can be recovered this way.
What I don't understand is why everyone should be charged again and again for the same piece of code. The company has a one time expenditure in producing it, and then well after those costs have been recovered (and some profit generated), they are still siphoning off of us who use software. Hey, I don't like to burst your bubble, but an idea (and that's essentially what code is) is only worth the effort that has been put into it. Like all other ideas, once you have brought it to light, others will pat you on the back and build on it, not walk up to you and ask you $5 to hear your idea. Why? Because memes are easily communicated and replicated, same goes with code.
Whoops, looks like this degraded into a rant.
Later.
People don't liked to be preached too, they just want thier options.
OSS and Free Software are based on ideas. They are the product of an applied ideology. When it comes to you having an option between proprietary and free software, that option only exists because these ideas were put into practice.
Whether you like it or not, RMS is a champion of free software, and he will preach about, and defend it. I am glad that we have someone like RMS; he will never betray the idea of free software in order to conform to the popular opinion, or the Paradigm Of The Week. In order for free software to continue to be made, we need the underlying philosophy to be known to its developers and its users. Hence the preaching.
We also need people that are willing to sit around and think about free software, how it can be applied, what it means, and how it fits into the big picture of software. This is very important to the continued well being and direction of the movement, and it is in that capacity that RMS and his colleagues serve. The ideological well being of this 'religion' that you speak of so derisively is the only thing that will guarantee that you continue to have your 'options'.
Furthermore you talk about the PC, saying it succeeded due to its 'value', but really, the superior product is not that which always wins. For example, Microsoft Windows, the failure(s) of Esperanto and the Dvorak layout (to defeat inferiors). I'm sure you could think of plenty yourself. I think in fact what made the PC successful was in fact IBM itself, and their ability to market it.
To get back to my point, free software needs a spokeperson and 'defender' (if you'll excuse my dramatic terminology) so that when it does take off it is not perverted from its ideals, which isn't so bad in my book.
From what I gleaned from the article, it seems that Id's intention is to push the graphical envelope. In order to do that, Id needs to stay bleeding edge, and part of that is to be able to create a game quickly.
Id can produce an action game with a minimum of man hours. I think once you start to move into say, the RPG genre the man hours increase significantly.
Think of all the media that comes with a Square game. CGI movies, voice acting, the presence of a script with dialogue, a plot, the list is very long. In order to do something like this Id would have to expand, which they're very much against. In short, don't expect Id to change genres anytime soon!
if AMD switched to its new "MHz doesn't equal performance" naming scheme for its higher end Athlons (where one would assume that the users probably look at benchmarks) why is it sticking with GHz for "mainstream PC" chips (where you would imagine that users are less likely to look at benchmarks)?
Doesn't this answer itself? Obviously the computer 'savvy' individuals that follow benchmarks are able to properly judge for themselves which computer is the best, or the best for them, and understand that Hz is not necessarily the yardstick to measure all computers against.
However, any individual with rudimentary computer knowledge (say, one who watches ads on television, or has taken an 'intro to computing' course at highschool or college level)has been taught about Hz and that it does roughly determine how fast a computer operates, and gives them a basis for comparison (however weak).
A good friend next door came over and asked me about Hz or MHz which they were teaching her about in her intro to computing class. Of course I told her that it's the speed at which the computer operates. She doesn't know anything about computers, so how am I supposed to educate her about all the other factors that affect performance such as bottlenecks, pipelining, cache, bus, etc.
As soon as you get into a discussion such as that the computer jargon goes flying. AMD is left with the exact same problem to contend with. How are they supposed to claim that their computers are magically better than the competition's when the supposed benchmark for computers is their clock? Would the consumer even understand or care? They need a way to comparison shop, that's what consumers do, and MHz (now GHz) has become the basis for that comparison.
All sorts of ECC's, CRC's and so on are designed to stop a certain percentage of errors overall, and also to prevent certain types of errors the most. This system is analogous to the system we have in our bodies.
We have enzymes called nucleases whose job is to repair specific types of DNA damage. We have nucleases that repair uv damage (in the form of thymine dymers) to our DNA for example. Anyhow, before you complain about human biology, I suggest you RTFM and take a Bio course beyond highschool level.
Slashdot Mirror
That's fine and dandy if you're an english major, but when you claim 'evolution' in a scientific study, you are talking about Evolution - plain and simple. There is no room to pander with words.
Yeah, that rather pisses me off. People are quick to say things 'evolved over time' without suggesting a mechanism. Evolution is not the mechanism of change! Thing's don't just 'change over time' in the sense of growing new limbs or changing skin colour. Specific mechanisms of evolution (ie. evolutionary forces) include:
1) Natural selection
2) Non-random mating
3) Mutations
4) Viruses (and some bacteria)
5) Geographic isolation should be included too since it more or less causes speciation
Unless you can pinpoint it to one of these things (or others which bring about changes in the population of alleles) claiming evolution is just silly!
There is a centripetal force however, and it is directed radially inward and is the one responsible for rotation. Centrifugal force is fiction.
Below the article there was a comment asking whether a EULA could be used to waive your right to the source under the GPL. I don't know whether you can do this or not, does anybody have any ideas about this?
It was a joke!
I disagree. All he has to do is create two working prototypes, and use one prototype to send the other prototype through time, with a message attached telling whoever receives it to use it to send something to our time. Voila. Proof of time travel made easy.
By not speaking out in opposition you are spoken for by the more vocal factions.
All we need next is for it to be able to program itself too, then we'll give those M$ bastards a run for their money! j/k
... without just appearing to be in another language, but actually being so. Take a look here . Genius or travesty?
Good point, besides, there are many experts that can be called upon.
Just a couple of points. First I think you mean proprietary software, as commercial software can (and often is) Free too. Also, your company could write a piece of Free code, and sell it to a client at whatever cost your company sees fit. Where's the big problem? Costs can be recovered this way. What I don't understand is why everyone should be charged again and again for the same piece of code. The company has a one time expenditure in producing it, and then well after those costs have been recovered (and some profit generated), they are still siphoning off of us who use software. Hey, I don't like to burst your bubble, but an idea (and that's essentially what code is) is only worth the effort that has been put into it. Like all other ideas, once you have brought it to light, others will pat you on the back and build on it, not walk up to you and ask you $5 to hear your idea. Why? Because memes are easily communicated and replicated, same goes with code. Whoops, looks like this degraded into a rant. Later.
My dad used to have a watch that worked on a similar principle, and to quote him : "One quick jerk-off and you were set for a week."
OSS and Free Software are based on ideas. They are the product of an applied ideology. When it comes to you having an option between proprietary and free software, that option only exists because these ideas were put into practice.
Whether you like it or not, RMS is a champion of free software, and he will preach about, and defend it. I am glad that we have someone like RMS; he will never betray the idea of free software in order to conform to the popular opinion, or the Paradigm Of The Week. In order for free software to continue to be made, we need the underlying philosophy to be known to its developers and its users. Hence the preaching.
We also need people that are willing to sit around and think about free software, how it can be applied, what it means, and how it fits into the big picture of software. This is very important to the continued well being and direction of the movement, and it is in that capacity that RMS and his colleagues serve. The ideological well being of this 'religion' that you speak of so derisively is the only thing that will guarantee that you continue to have your 'options'.
Furthermore you talk about the PC, saying it succeeded due to its 'value', but really, the superior product is not that which always wins. For example, Microsoft Windows, the failure(s) of Esperanto and the Dvorak layout (to defeat inferiors). I'm sure you could think of plenty yourself. I think in fact what made the PC successful was in fact IBM itself, and their ability to market it.
To get back to my point, free software needs a spokeperson and 'defender' (if you'll excuse my dramatic terminology) so that when it does take off it is not perverted from its ideals, which isn't so bad in my book.
What ever happened to the idea of conflict of interest?
That's not necessarily true, I think the average thug might have problems getting its hands on a death ray.
Perhaps you haven't read the news about the preemptible kernel patch as of late?
Frankly I find them boring, repetetive and somewhat trollish. Sadly I think that's the same argument people use against Katz himself. :)
Why is it that every Slashdotter who hates Jon Katz' opinion thinks that everyone else cares to hear his?
Id can produce an action game with a minimum of man hours. I think once you start to move into say, the RPG genre the man hours increase significantly.
Think of all the media that comes with a Square game. CGI movies, voice acting, the presence of a script with dialogue, a plot, the list is very long. In order to do something like this Id would have to expand, which they're very much against. In short, don't expect Id to change genres anytime soon!
Are those SI seconds or imperial seconds?
I guess it's time to create alt.judges.robert.bork.bork.bork ...
However, any individual with rudimentary computer knowledge (say, one who watches ads on television, or has taken an 'intro to computing' course at highschool or college level)has been taught about Hz and that it does roughly determine how fast a computer operates, and gives them a basis for comparison (however weak).
A good friend next door came over and asked me about Hz or MHz which they were teaching her about in her intro to computing class. Of course I told her that it's the speed at which the computer operates. She doesn't know anything about computers, so how am I supposed to educate her about all the other factors that affect performance such as bottlenecks, pipelining, cache, bus, etc.
As soon as you get into a discussion such as that the computer jargon goes flying. AMD is left with the exact same problem to contend with. How are they supposed to claim that their computers are magically better than the competition's when the supposed benchmark for computers is their clock? Would the consumer even understand or care? They need a way to comparison shop, that's what consumers do, and MHz (now GHz) has become the basis for that comparison.
We have enzymes called nucleases whose job is to repair specific types of DNA damage. We have nucleases that repair uv damage (in the form of thymine dymers) to our DNA for example. Anyhow, before you complain about human biology, I suggest you RTFM and take a Bio course beyond highschool level.