I'm not really interested in working on the equivalents of shrinkwrapped software. I'm more interested in working with the inner guts of the system. There are different concerns when your software has a gui or interacts directly with a large number of regular users. I'm not as interested in that stuff.
So I can pretty well follow a spec, an algorithm description, or pseudo-code in C. But I'm no pro. Do I have the skills to start contributing to a top-tier open source project like the kernel, gcc, apache, etc? I'm looking at this link, what others would people recommend for how to get started?
That's not entirely true, Iceweasel has some important changes that integrate it with Debian shared libraries. Theoretically this makes it smaller and faster, though I'd like to see some numbers comparing it.
But it can't call itself firefox because it isn't firefox. That would break some sort of IP. You can change that however, and the Mozilla foundation probably aren't going to come after you.
Plentiful and common health potions that can heal the main character from near death to perfect health reliably and repeatably aren't the least bit realistic either.
This changes health management in two ways: 1 - health isn't tied to inventory 2 - the graphic for "health item" looks different
I hope nobody is complaining that this represents some grave cheapening of the game. It wasn't Fallout, where health items are rare, cost a fortune, and come with some of the side effects of actual drugs.
Oh any word on if Fallout 3 is still going to be scarce on the health power ups? The demos have looked combat-y (which is fine, it's certainly the most interesting bit of a game, at least visually) but is the game such a heavy shooter that they're going to need to throw downside-free stimpacks at the player all the time?
Review the Compaq case. Cloning hardware should be legit. The law shouldn't be executed just to protect the business models of companies we like. If Apple's walled garden is illegal, then it's illegal.
So they don't support it, but just telegraph software upgrades to clone makers ahead of time. It's the clone makers responsibility to keep compatible. Apple just avoids purposefully breaking other peoples compatibility.
Also: what are you talking about? OS X supports quite nearly as much hardware as Windows. It's a matter of getting good drivers written.
Let's say history had played out differently, IBM had purchased Microsoft toward the end of the 80s and Compaq was beaten in court. Do you really think the world would be better if 90% of the computers out there came from a single manufacturer and there was no competition anywhere in the supply chain?
Apple doesn't get special privileges because it "only" holds a smaller percentage of the hundreds of millions of computer sales out there. Their computers are overpriced and they need competition.
Apple aren't some magical company that gets to operate outside the rules of normal business. They make nice products, but that doesn't get them any legal favors.
IBM used to have a monopoly on the PC platform (correct me if I'm wrong: defined as Intel instruction set & PCI bus) but Compaq fought for and won the right to clone their specification.
The comparison to Slashdot is 100% off the mark. Slashdot owns written content, that is most definitely protected under copyright.
In most products, after a certain number are sold, competitors are allowed to create competing functional equivalents.
I love apple products and am typing this on my great big iMac right now, but I don't see how Psystar isn't totally within their rights here.
The reality is, scientists do work to prove and politic to make their case. Again, I'm not talking about science in the abstract, but what the actual job of being a scientist with an up-and-coming idea means.
It's very much a matter of convincing certain individuals that you are right.
that what might, in some argument be a sensible behavior for a professional athlete or a full time adult amateur athlete is in no way sensible for young athletes who are essentially practicing in a very publicized hobby.
Calling open season in the upper tiers of athletics would certainly have the effect of more young folks (and hell even that guy who cares too much about company soft ball) doing more drugs, and that isn't healthy and it isn't good.
I don't believe in the criminalization of drugs myself, but for something so explicitly about the body, athletics should really not be helping sell young people on the idea of dangerous chemical recreation.
I hate the drug war, but it is important to note that our world would be a lot better without certain drugs.
I'm not talking about the philosophical underpinnings of science, I'm talking about the way the academic world goes about accepting new ideas. It's a process and a bureaucracy. And that is what science really is. The nice upshot is, it works. It isn't a flat democracy because that wouldn't function.
Does anyone else out there take science fiction just a *little* bit seriously and think that some of the robotics innovations over the past 10 or 15 years might be a little bit dangerous?
AI is actually a little bit impressive, there just isn't a market for it yet.
Re:Shell as a general-purpose language...
on
Bash Cookbook
·
· Score: 1
Hey just throw more hardware at it right? His time on the hours he'd spend writing it in a faster language are worth more than the cost of a few new boxes, natch.
Re:Shell as a scripting language...
on
Bash Cookbook
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, old-school bash is about as fun as doing trivial tasks in C. And I love C. But still...
I use bash and a little folder in my $PATH as a more robust solution to alias-ing.
But for anything over 1 or 2 lines, calling shell utilities from Ruby is about a hundred million times easier.
I can't keep that archaic syntax in my head for more than a day at a time.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not really interested in working on the equivalents of shrinkwrapped software. I'm more interested in working with the inner guts of the system. There are different concerns when your software has a gui or interacts directly with a large number of regular users. I'm not as interested in that stuff.
So I can pretty well follow a spec, an algorithm description, or pseudo-code in C. But I'm no pro. Do I have the skills to start contributing to a top-tier open source project like the kernel, gcc, apache, etc? I'm looking at this link, what others would people recommend for how to get started?
That's not entirely true, Iceweasel has some important changes that integrate it with Debian shared libraries. Theoretically this makes it smaller and faster, though I'd like to see some numbers comparing it.
But it can't call itself firefox because it isn't firefox. That would break some sort of IP. You can change that however, and the Mozilla foundation probably aren't going to come after you.
Damn Small Linux can apt-get itself into however much of a full Debian you want. This is my preferred path for a minimal desktop.
Plentiful and common health potions that can heal the main character from near death to perfect health reliably and repeatably aren't the least bit realistic either.
This changes health management in two ways:
1 - health isn't tied to inventory
2 - the graphic for "health item" looks different
I hope nobody is complaining that this represents some grave cheapening of the game. It wasn't Fallout, where health items are rare, cost a fortune, and come with some of the side effects of actual drugs.
Oh any word on if Fallout 3 is still going to be scarce on the health power ups? The demos have looked combat-y (which is fine, it's certainly the most interesting bit of a game, at least visually) but is the game such a heavy shooter that they're going to need to throw downside-free stimpacks at the player all the time?
No, they have to retry the Compaq case. And IBM lost that one.
Review the Compaq case. Cloning hardware should be legit. The law shouldn't be executed just to protect the business models of companies we like. If Apple's walled garden is illegal, then it's illegal.
Freedom trumps all.
Yeah, "better than Microsoft" does not directly imply "good."
So they don't support it, but just telegraph software upgrades to clone makers ahead of time. It's the clone makers responsibility to keep compatible. Apple just avoids purposefully breaking other peoples compatibility.
Also: what are you talking about? OS X supports quite nearly as much hardware as Windows. It's a matter of getting good drivers written.
Let's say history had played out differently, IBM had purchased Microsoft toward the end of the 80s and Compaq was beaten in court. Do you really think the world would be better if 90% of the computers out there came from a single manufacturer and there was no competition anywhere in the supply chain?
Apple doesn't get special privileges because it "only" holds a smaller percentage of the hundreds of millions of computer sales out there. Their computers are overpriced and they need competition.
Apple aren't some magical company that gets to operate outside the rules of normal business. They make nice products, but that doesn't get them any legal favors.
IBM used to have a monopoly on the PC platform (correct me if I'm wrong: defined as Intel instruction set & PCI bus) but Compaq fought for and won the right to clone their specification.
The comparison to Slashdot is 100% off the mark. Slashdot owns written content, that is most definitely protected under copyright.
In most products, after a certain number are sold, competitors are allowed to create competing functional equivalents.
I love apple products and am typing this on my great big iMac right now, but I don't see how Psystar isn't totally within their rights here.
The reality is, scientists do work to prove and politic to make their case. Again, I'm not talking about science in the abstract, but what the actual job of being a scientist with an up-and-coming idea means.
It's very much a matter of convincing certain individuals that you are right.
I see you didn't read that article...
Didn't you just describe a regular real woman? She's out there buddy, keep looking.
I was kidding folks.
I agree, I'd wipe out alcohol and tobacco with the heroin and crack as well if it were possible, but it isn't.
Now that doesn't mean they should be criminal, but they should be discouraged with social pressure and cultural choices.
Such as not letting athletes publicly use performance enhancing drugs.
that what might, in some argument be a sensible behavior for a professional athlete or a full time adult amateur athlete is in no way sensible for young athletes who are essentially practicing in a very publicized hobby.
Calling open season in the upper tiers of athletics would certainly have the effect of more young folks (and hell even that guy who cares too much about company soft ball) doing more drugs, and that isn't healthy and it isn't good.
I don't believe in the criminalization of drugs myself, but for something so explicitly about the body, athletics should really not be helping sell young people on the idea of dangerous chemical recreation.
I hate the drug war, but it is important to note that our world would be a lot better without certain drugs.
Proof like court, not like math. Beyond reasonable scientific doubt.
I guess this little sub-thread is about what constitutes reasonable scientific doubt.
I'm not talking about the philosophical underpinnings of science, I'm talking about the way the academic world goes about accepting new ideas. It's a process and a bureaucracy. And that is what science really is. The nice upshot is, it works. It isn't a flat democracy because that wouldn't function.
Just because White Man's Science has yet to be stricken down by the angered Old Gods doesn't mean it won't.
Anyone else read "We 3"
One of the best comics in the past few years.
Does anyone else out there take science fiction just a *little* bit seriously and think that some of the robotics innovations over the past 10 or 15 years might be a little bit dangerous?
AI is actually a little bit impressive, there just isn't a market for it yet.
Hey just throw more hardware at it right? His time on the hours he'd spend writing it in a faster language are worth more than the cost of a few new boxes, natch.
Yeah, old-school bash is about as fun as doing trivial tasks in C. And I love C. But still...
I use bash and a little folder in my $PATH as a more robust solution to alias-ing.
But for anything over 1 or 2 lines, calling shell utilities from Ruby is about a hundred million times easier.
I can't keep that archaic syntax in my head for more than a day at a time.
Jupiter is also on the small side for the biggest planet in a system, so it would seem.
There's also been speculation that Jupiter's stable orbit has helped out life by clearing out a lot of rocky debris from the inner solar system.
If we had major impacts once every million years or so, complicated life would have a much tougher time developing.
*drools*