This page, a browser test page for png images, instantly crashes IE on Jaguar. Kind of funny considering that IE on OS X has far better png support than the windows version.
Overall, I've found OS X to be a wonderfully stable product, and have never seen a kernel panic.
Well, that lets everyone see the code, but that's not a problem anyway. It's perfectly legal , AFAIK, for him to let others see the code. It just can't be used in a GPL project.
Wildly publishing something doesn't put it into the public domain.
This is a load of FUD. 'things remain in a limbo of probability until an observer perceives them' is a stoners view of Heisenberg. (reporters words, not Kalamara's).
She may be far brighter than me, but I wonder what established scientists think. I also note the article makes no mention of a peer-reviewed paper.
This isn't totally convincing, but it's better that UFOs. The question about these drawings is 'why are they so damn big?', as many can only be viewed from above. Explaining them as directional indicators towards water doesn't explain why they look like birds. Or why they look like anything, for that matter. I think any desert culture would have water as a centeral them in their mythology, so finding some objects related to water isn't a huge suprise.
I think the easiest explanation is that they started out as a small scale art/devotional form that gained favour with the ruling class as a sign of prestige. That generated pressure to build 'em bigger, much like what might have happened on Easter Island.
That thereoy of Easter Is (can't remember a reference, sry) also maintained that increasing enviromental pressure on the island drove more energy towards trying to get the attention of the gods. Maybe desertifcation drove the same in Peru.
I think you might have missed my point. I am fully aware that MIPS and terrabytes are referencing different things.
In terms of scientific computing, the data set that is the linux kernel is tiny. One gig means you can probably compile it without swapping. But try to do the same amount of processing on a two terrabyte data set and your computer will slow to a crawl. In fact, there are computations that could be done better by an old Vaxen, simply because of its ability to move huge datasets quickly.
There are probably lots of fluid dynamic packages available that would run under Linux and do just what you ask. The problem is that for an acurate model, it needs to be very fine grained. This means lots ( and lots) of memory, lots of storage, and lots of IO.
These are actually the kinds of questions big iron is made for. In the end, it's not about how many MIPS, but how many terabytes.
Yeah, but imagine a be...no you're right, they are all stupid jokes.
2.5 kernel has initial support for USB2, bluetooth is no longer experimental., dunno 'bout FireWire2. This is all here
There's some kind of totally rewritten kernel managment coming, should make it easier. Linus loves his monolithic kernel. HURD is still in it's infancy. I'm not switching until you do.
Good point. All the supercomputers in the world today are being used by big money programes. I can't wait until this is on my desktop (or on a network I can use).
There are thousands of complex systems that could be modeled that might provide fasinating insights. What happens when you run the Game of Life for 10^100 generations? How about compiling the Linux kernel in a genetic algorithim? Who knows?
His solution was 45 bytes. I think the 2500 byte limit in the rules is going to encourage some solutions whose writers will be crushed by the winner.
It's a nice challenge, but I think they should have been a bit more specific in the rules ('Preferably no fastcall binaries') and stated a more challenging task than putting out a string.
Kazza Lite provides a nice hosts file (under the 'supertrick' link) that will block many anoying pop-ups and other nasties. It's for windows but I cut 'n pasted it on to my firewall. And that's what I think of the morality of plocking pop-ups.
Ummm. Come back and read the intelligent, well thought out responses to the question from pros, and then say that. 99% of/. is off somewhere else carping about MS vs. Linux vs. jar jar binks.
As I understand it, Intels compilers kisk ass. Faster compilations, faster code, smaller code, etc. Not to knok a great product in GCC, but Intels engineers are no slouches.
I don't think you would realize any real gains by recompiling your kernel. Recompiling your video/graphics/sound stuff, maybe. Recompiling might fix a bug or two, but if your system is stable thats no excuse for a recompile.
Of course, you don't need an excuse to make a new kernel. Go nuts. If you pull another 20fps out of UT2003, please tell us about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Overall, I've found OS X to be a wonderfully stable product, and have never seen a kernel panic.
Wildly publishing something doesn't put it into the public domain.
Hmmmm. How the hell did that happen? Yes that was the story I was reffering to. I've never been so offtopic. :-)
She may be far brighter than me, but I wonder what established scientists think. I also note the article makes no mention of a peer-reviewed paper.
I think we need to readjust our entire system towards human values, rather that monentary values.
I totally agree. Apt-get was worth a reinstall on 5 machines.
One thing that is clear is that Carmack made the most of acedemic research. His genius lies in the drive and ability to exploite what's out there.
We are slashdot. We are pros.
I think the easiest explanation is that they started out as a small scale art/devotional form that gained favour with the ruling class as a sign of prestige. That generated pressure to build 'em bigger, much like what might have happened on Easter Island.
That thereoy of Easter Is (can't remember a reference, sry) also maintained that increasing enviromental pressure on the island drove more energy towards trying to get the attention of the gods. Maybe desertifcation drove the same in Peru.
In terms of scientific computing, the data set that is the linux kernel is tiny. One gig means you can probably compile it without swapping. But try to do the same amount of processing on a two terrabyte data set and your computer will slow to a crawl. In fact, there are computations that could be done better by an old Vaxen, simply because of its ability to move huge datasets quickly.
These are actually the kinds of questions big iron is made for. In the end, it's not about how many MIPS, but how many terabytes.
Speilberg is going to produce some stupid action film that glosses over all the subelties and ruins Tintin for the next generation.
Man I sound old.
2.5 kernel has initial support for USB2, bluetooth is no longer experimental., dunno 'bout FireWire2. This is all here
There's some kind of totally rewritten kernel managment coming, should make it easier. Linus loves his monolithic kernel. HURD is still in it's infancy. I'm not switching until you do.
In the very long run, this gives some hope for an almost pristine Earth, with all the benifits of industry.
1.Read the sig. :-)
2.Think about the sig.
3.Think about what a troll is.
4.Repeat untill you slap yourself in the forehead.
There are thousands of complex systems that could be modeled that might provide fasinating insights. What happens when you run the Game of Life for 10^100 generations? How about compiling the Linux kernel in a genetic algorithim? Who knows?
It's a nice challenge, but I think they should have been a bit more specific in the rules ('Preferably no fastcall binaries') and stated a more challenging task than putting out a string.
I get the gist of the challenge, but 'preferably' is pretty vague. They might have an argument on their hands when they announce the winner.
Because it's a challenge, of course. Why are you reading the developers section?
Kazza Lite provides a nice hosts file (under the 'supertrick' link) that will block many anoying pop-ups and other nasties. It's for windows but I cut 'n pasted it on to my firewall. And that's what I think of the morality of plocking pop-ups.
They were fancy-ass cards though, and they needed the same kind of card on the other end. Not very usefull as a home solution, I guess.
You might consider going back to school and living in res....
Ummm. Come back and read the intelligent, well thought out responses to the question from pros, and then say that. 99% of /. is off somewhere else carping about MS vs. Linux vs. jar jar binks.
As I understand it, Intels compilers kisk ass. Faster compilations, faster code, smaller code, etc. Not to knok a great product in GCC, but Intels engineers are no slouches.
I click the second link, and after some digging, figure out that this is a legacy free port of the old Amiga OS.
My question is, what is this? An OS for microwaves? Graphics/Multimedia a la BeOS? Something to hack with? Or is it all about Amiga nostalgia?
Of course, you don't need an excuse to make a new kernel. Go nuts. If you pull another 20fps out of UT2003, please tell us about it.