Since there seem to be a lot of people who like each UI, and the project is open source, is there any reason preventing either (1) old style vs. ribbons simply being a preference or (2) having one remain as a fork only different in the UI? There is no reason to have a battle between the pro-ribbon people and the can't-stand-the-ribbon people.
Except Pandora promises at best a third the battery life. Then again, Pandora is due out very soon, and reading about both it sounds like Pandora is the type of machine nVidia would expect Tegra to be used in.
Ignoring the fact that Office 2007's.docx (etc.) and OOXML are not the same format, even docx is rather rare. Most people I know are still using some older version which only has support for the old binary formats, and those that I know who have Office 2007 have to be reminded to save in the old formats because otherwise no one can read them. Microsoft Office is the de facto standard, but Office 2007 is a relatively new product, so it would be quite a stretch to say.docx is as well.
If speed if your concern, why would you switch from Java to C++ instead of just switching from JRE to gcj native? Is there really a significant difference between gcj and g++ in terms of speed? I guess Java has bounds checks which are probably not completely optimized out, but they could be disabled with --no-bounds-check.
Since Azureus uses SWT it seems like you should be able to compile it with gcj to native code without too much trouble. Google says it has been done.
Java is a perfectly fine language for native code. I wish more Java-based projects would release binaries for different platforms. Also note that the Sun JVM has been getting faster with every release, so although you may have found it unusable in the past, it may be fast enough for you now.
From the summary it sounds like the parts they are working on are the lower levels, which usually are only indirectly visible to users. (Note that I have not looked at the project, so the following may not represent its goals specifically.) For instance, their work init might eventually result in a faster booting system, or a better package system might mean the people putting together the packages can do so faster, but as a work in progress these are uninteresting to most users.
I think it is a bit early to say DNSSEC is being ignored. The most recent related RFC is dated Feburary 2008 (although Wikipedia says it was released in March). The Wikipedia article mentions work on setting up implementations. It sounds like it is getting slowly phased in, but as the parent implied, like many other internet standards, it may end up dying before anyone actually starts using it.
20% of America doesn't use e-mail because they don't have anything to say via e-mail. Consider the same logic with regard to first posts;) 20% of America doesn't use first posts because they don't have anything to say via first posts?
You can use virtualization to do this without too much trouble. qemu has a readonly option: the "-snapshot" option makes it only write to the image when you tell it to. I assume other virtualization software has similar options.
Which is exactly why we need more RAM: RAM is a cache for your hard drive. The more RAM you have, the less your hard drive gets accessed so the less its slowness matters. If your RAM is large enough to hold your entire working set (data, programs, shared libraries), then your computer hits the disk the first time it needs each file and then only touches it for writes afterwards.
Just as much, I assure you that memory speed is a very serious concern. Read up on the memory wall.
Installing indicatators on every road for automated cars would be a huge project. The US has enough trouble keeping some its roads driveable by humans. A reasonable self-driving car cannot rely on any more than a human driving a car does. Any more than a simple drop-in replacement like that would require decades of infrastructure improvement -- by which time we would probably have enough computing power to throw a the problem that self-driving cars would not need the signals anyway.
In the Urban Challenge, the teams were given the maps of the area in a computer-readable format shortly before the race started and were expected to use a combination of GPS and other sensors to keep track of their position (with an explicit requirement that they were not allowed to rely on GPS... reasonable because GPS signals do not always acquire quickly). From Wikipedia:
The event is being followed closely by auto manufacturers for the implications it holds for smarter cars and safer highways in the future.
The latest round was the DARPA Urban Challenge, which required vehicles to follow traffic regulations and interact with other vehicles on the course. This was considered more difficult than the off-road course.
Self-driving cars may be in the forseeable future, but if the technology already existed then there would be no DARPA Grand Challenge. On the other hand, self-flying airplanes are much easier because, as I understand it, there are a lot few obstacles around and a lot of the decision making can be done by only reading instruments, not using human senses.
I disagree on Google's openness. Google certainly is a big supporter of open source (SoC, etc.), but their core business is intrinsically closed: they want you on their site looking at their ads. Search is at least understandable as it requires a lot of work to spider, index, and cache any significant portion of the web, but GMail is not open. It ties you to Google and Google's ads instead of, say, Microsoft's OS, so it is more accessible, but it still holds the same problems: you do not really control your e-mail.
To use GMail's features, you have to let Google have all of your e-mail to scrape for information about you, and, because it is closed-source, certain features which are not in Google's interest like easy encryption support will likely never get implemented and minor interface tweaks/extra preferences are difficult or impossible to get added.
That said, I am also a GMail user because it simply is far more convenient than the alternatives, but nothing made by Google is going to be truly open unless it is a side project they cannot make money on. As soon as a libre webmail client reaches GMail's usability (at least for the subset of its features that I use), I will switch.
No, in fact, all of his works can be found on Project Gutenberg, although you may notice a good number of minor differences from the versions you have seen before because any published edition has copyrighted touch-ups to the spelling and formatting.
Yes, paying a transaction fee to give money to your friends seems quite silly, especially if they are right next to you. You could use a system like RipplePay, but (1) it is incomplete, and (2) it would need a rather nice cell phone/mobile internet interface to make it at the same level of convenience as cash.
Unfortunately, flash has become the de facto standard for posting movies on the internet -- and rarely does one see a clear link to the video itself to simply load into mplayer. The grandparent talked about various hacks for downloading the video, which is what I often use when visiting YouTube, but they only work sometimes. So, there is no easy way to get out of using a flash player. And, no, "Don't watch videos on the internet." is not a sane workaround.
You are correct. Once someone that wants to release the photo can see it, they can manage to copy it and release to the world. The idea with FaceBook privacy settings is to be able to put up photos and then only allow certain people to view them, and those people are the people you trust to not share the photos. One problem is that FaceBook only allows you to base access on whether someone is your "friend" and whether they can only see your "limited profile" or your full profile, so it is pretty hard to put up photos without giving a lot of people access to them. Another problem is that you are giving FaceBook access to them, and they can do anything they want with them. A third problem is the one you mention: if you do not want anyone to see a photo, you should not put it on the internet.
Perhaps there is a definition confusion here. I do not care if companies maintain informative (and, if they want, flashy) websites and show up on a web search for their product type. That is marketing, but it is not intrusive. Also, consumers are free to look up review sites which will probably be less biased than the company's own website to discover products.
On the other hand, advertisements show up when I am not looking for information on the product/product type they are advertising, and are therefore just an annoyance. Admittedly, this does not affect me much because between ad blocking in web browsers and mostly watching TV shows/movies off DVDs, I do not encounter many ads.
Slashdot Mirror
Since there seem to be a lot of people who like each UI, and the project is open source, is there any reason preventing either (1) old style vs. ribbons simply being a preference or (2) having one remain as a fork only different in the UI? There is no reason to have a battle between the pro-ribbon people and the can't-stand-the-ribbon people.
Except Pandora promises at best a third the battery life. Then again, Pandora is due out very soon, and reading about both it sounds like Pandora is the type of machine nVidia would expect Tegra to be used in.
Then enable the number of connections capping that is in your p2p client's settings right next to the upload capping option.
Ignoring the fact that Office 2007's .docx (etc.) and OOXML are not the same format, even docx is rather rare. Most people I know are still using some older version which only has support for the old binary formats, and those that I know who have Office 2007 have to be reminded to save in the old formats because otherwise no one can read them. Microsoft Office is the de facto standard, but Office 2007 is a relatively new product, so it would be quite a stretch to say .docx is as well.
If speed if your concern, why would you switch from Java to C++ instead of just switching from JRE to gcj native? Is there really a significant difference between gcj and g++ in terms of speed? I guess Java has bounds checks which are probably not completely optimized out, but they could be disabled with --no-bounds-check.
Since Azureus uses SWT it seems like you should be able to compile it with gcj to native code without too much trouble. Google says it has been done.
Java is a perfectly fine language for native code. I wish more Java-based projects would release binaries for different platforms. Also note that the Sun JVM has been getting faster with every release, so although you may have found it unusable in the past, it may be fast enough for you now.
I cannot help you with the others, but for MatLab, look into GNU Octave, which is "mostly compatible with Matlab."
From the summary it sounds like the parts they are working on are the lower levels, which usually are only indirectly visible to users. (Note that I have not looked at the project, so the following may not represent its goals specifically.) For instance, their work init might eventually result in a faster booting system, or a better package system might mean the people putting together the packages can do so faster, but as a work in progress these are uninteresting to most users.
I think it is a bit early to say DNSSEC is being ignored. The most recent related RFC is dated Feburary 2008 (although Wikipedia says it was released in March). The Wikipedia article mentions work on setting up implementations. It sounds like it is getting slowly phased in, but as the parent implied, like many other internet standards, it may end up dying before anyone actually starts using it.
You can use virtualization to do this without too much trouble. qemu has a readonly option: the "-snapshot" option makes it only write to the image when you tell it to. I assume other virtualization software has similar options.
Which is exactly why we need more RAM: RAM is a cache for your hard drive. The more RAM you have, the less your hard drive gets accessed so the less its slowness matters. If your RAM is large enough to hold your entire working set (data, programs, shared libraries), then your computer hits the disk the first time it needs each file and then only touches it for writes afterwards.
Just as much, I assure you that memory speed is a very serious concern. Read up on the memory wall.
Installing indicatators on every road for automated cars would be a huge project. The US has enough trouble keeping some its roads driveable by humans. A reasonable self-driving car cannot rely on any more than a human driving a car does. Any more than a simple drop-in replacement like that would require decades of infrastructure improvement -- by which time we would probably have enough computing power to throw a the problem that self-driving cars would not need the signals anyway.
In the Urban Challenge, the teams were given the maps of the area in a computer-readable format shortly before the race started and were expected to use a combination of GPS and other sensors to keep track of their position (with an explicit requirement that they were not allowed to rely on GPS... reasonable because GPS signals do not always acquire quickly). From Wikipedia:
The event is being followed closely by auto manufacturers for the implications it holds for smarter cars and safer highways in the future.The latest round was the DARPA Urban Challenge, which required vehicles to follow traffic regulations and interact with other vehicles on the course. This was considered more difficult than the off-road course.
Self-driving cars may be in the forseeable future, but if the technology already existed then there would be no DARPA Grand Challenge. On the other hand, self-flying airplanes are much easier because, as I understand it, there are a lot few obstacles around and a lot of the decision making can be done by only reading instruments, not using human senses.
* is a traditional wildcard character; that is, it matches anything. In particular, **AA means RIAA and MPAA and any similar organizations.
Thank you, but I meant encrypted e-mails, which other replies addressed. I already do use the https version.
I disagree on Google's openness. Google certainly is a big supporter of open source (SoC, etc.), but their core business is intrinsically closed: they want you on their site looking at their ads. Search is at least understandable as it requires a lot of work to spider, index, and cache any significant portion of the web, but GMail is not open. It ties you to Google and Google's ads instead of, say, Microsoft's OS, so it is more accessible, but it still holds the same problems: you do not really control your e-mail.
To use GMail's features, you have to let Google have all of your e-mail to scrape for information about you, and, because it is closed-source, certain features which are not in Google's interest like easy encryption support will likely never get implemented and minor interface tweaks/extra preferences are difficult or impossible to get added.
That said, I am also a GMail user because it simply is far more convenient than the alternatives, but nothing made by Google is going to be truly open unless it is a side project they cannot make money on. As soon as a libre webmail client reaches GMail's usability (at least for the subset of its features that I use), I will switch.
Here you go.
No, in fact, all of his works can be found on Project Gutenberg, although you may notice a good number of minor differences from the versions you have seen before because any published edition has copyrighted touch-ups to the spelling and formatting.
Yes, paying a transaction fee to give money to your friends seems quite silly, especially if they are right next to you. You could use a system like RipplePay, but (1) it is incomplete, and (2) it would need a rather nice cell phone/mobile internet interface to make it at the same level of convenience as cash.
Unfortunately, flash has become the de facto standard for posting movies on the internet -- and rarely does one see a clear link to the video itself to simply load into mplayer. The grandparent talked about various hacks for downloading the video, which is what I often use when visiting YouTube, but they only work sometimes. So, there is no easy way to get out of using a flash player. And, no, "Don't watch videos on the internet." is not a sane workaround.
You are correct. Once someone that wants to release the photo can see it, they can manage to copy it and release to the world. The idea with FaceBook privacy settings is to be able to put up photos and then only allow certain people to view them, and those people are the people you trust to not share the photos. One problem is that FaceBook only allows you to base access on whether someone is your "friend" and whether they can only see your "limited profile" or your full profile, so it is pretty hard to put up photos without giving a lot of people access to them. Another problem is that you are giving FaceBook access to them, and they can do anything they want with them. A third problem is the one you mention: if you do not want anyone to see a photo, you should not put it on the internet.
Perhaps there is a definition confusion here. I do not care if companies maintain informative (and, if they want, flashy) websites and show up on a web search for their product type. That is marketing, but it is not intrusive. Also, consumers are free to look up review sites which will probably be less biased than the company's own website to discover products.
On the other hand, advertisements show up when I am not looking for information on the product/product type they are advertising, and are therefore just an annoyance. Admittedly, this does not affect me much because between ad blocking in web browsers and mostly watching TV shows/movies off DVDs, I do not encounter many ads.