Remember, this is the republican party. If they get back in any time before he dies off, he will be there in the background, pulling the strings of whatever new puppet president they choose.
McCain would probably have stood up to him, but I suspect now the republicans blame him for their loss, it could well be back to the "Bush Box" to find their next candidate. Scary thought.
It's Christmas! Be sure to go to bed, get up, and spend the day with friends, family and food. Do you really need to update your kernel today? Why not let other people find out if there are some terrible early bugs in it?
It's things like this that convince me that while patents need some serious fixing, they shouldn't be abolished.
While we haven't seen all the details, it looks like genuinely interesting and original to me and a step beyond the currently available state-of-the-art.
Of course, only time will tell if this is really a good patent, and if the product is really any good in practice. It's easy to make things that look good in the lab but don't do so well in real usage.
'We simply cannot accept terms that fail to appropriately and fairly compensate recording artists, songwriters.... Having seen the most recent agreements, appropriate compensation for artists from these kind of things seems to be zero, so I think they are already getting a fair deal.
I don't find the multi-core so useful, it's rare that I want to hash one, very large file. More often I want to hash many things, which naturally parallelises.
In your SSL web traffic example, if you app isn't dealing with as many connections as it has cores, then you probably don't have to worry about performance, and if you do then you already have one compression per core.
Also, many people can't distinguish modern 128kps MP3 encoding in an ABX test.
an MP3 at 320kbps cannot sound better than a 256kbps MP3 encoded from the same source.
Total rubbish! Where are you getting these things from? Do you think the LAME people put in these options just for fun? Are the extra bits just hanging around not being used at all?
Certainly there is a case of diminishing returns, but 320 is still better.
How is that any different from me just physically mailing you a box of child pornography, along with a letter saying "Here is your order from kid's-r-us"?
To me this seems to be an area where the parallels with existing situations are compelling. You should have to give over your virtual keys and locations of data in the same situations you had to give over physical keys and locations of real things.
I really like javascript as a language, independant of webapps.
When I recently wanted to embed a scripting language in a C++ program I work on, I seriously considered javascript, as I thought more people would know it than lua and python.
There does not however seem to be an easy way to embed javascript in an arbitrary program. Is there some reason it isn't suitable for this kind of thing, or is it just the browser writers embed the javascript too deeply?
Having played a few Playstation 2 to Wii conversions where button presses were mapped directly to gestures, I can tell you they are no fun, and don't work. This mainly seems to be because the timing of gestures isn't quite as accurate as the button pressing. Of course gestures add more than just a button press, but you lose that with this kind of mapping.
This will be the same as when people used to play random games with DDR mats. It's great fun for about an hour or so, but if you actually want to finish anything, it's back to the keyboard.
It's a blatant advert! It's vapourware! It's just 'eyetoy', which has been out on the Playstation for ages! It won't work in real people's houses, because people will walk past and curtains will flutter in the wind! It will never get any decent games!
You wonder why Microsoft makes IE?
Well, the fact I personally know of at least 3 companies locked into Windows because they use an IE-only web app probably helps.
Also, would you want your OS's connection to the internet (arguably one of the most important things on a modern OS) dictated by another application beyond your control.
Also on the Mac, while Firefox is OK, it's certainly possibly to tell it isn't a "proper application", it does lots of things not-quite-right. Certainly not something Apple would want to promote to a top-level application.
Well, by reading the article and looking at the code, it actually all looks boringly sensible.
Looking up "Britney Spears", it is used in a few comments as an example of a name, included in a few filter lists. Nothing exciting at all really unfortunately.
I'm not sure which macs are 64-bit, but I can certainly tell you the Macbook Pro I'm typing this on has a 32-bit Core Duo, which is annoying as I would really like to be able to install this update.
They surely already are, it's called buying an SDK certificate for $99? From my understanding, once you buy one you can install any code on your own iPhone, for testing.
Also, a higher price won't make AT&T happier. The real problem is that Apple negotiated an unlimited data package, under the assumption that it wouldn't really be reasonable to get that high data usage just from e-mail and web. When people start streaming music over their phones for 8+ hours a day, that goes out of the window, and probably so will unlimited data, if AT&T can work out how to get away with it.
I'm not saying I think these things are good for OSS, or reasonable. The question is are they sufficient to allow people to legally distribute GPL v2 and v3 software for the iPhone. I think they do follow the word, if not the spirit, of the GPL.
This sounds to me like it would be valid under the GPL v2, the v3 is tricky. There are two escape clauses:
1) Anyone can buy a certificate for $50, and then sign anything they like, including open-source programs they've downloaded. I think it's reasonable to require people to do this.
2) Apple will be providing a iPhone emulator, so people can still run your application, just not on their iPhone.
However, IANAL. I'm positive if there is a problem, the FSF can be expected to kick up a fuss before the final release of applications.
One thing which irritates me about official channels of getting things is that it is often much more trouble than getting a bittorrent. There are things I would pay for, because I want more to be made, but it's too much hassle. The obvious examples of this is DRM and "Use need the CD/DVD in the drive" for games, but it effects other levels too.
A recent extreme case of this is the BBC's new iPlayer. This is free (and I'm in the UK, so it works), and I use windows so it works fine, yet I'm STILL using a standard bittorrent site to get programs, because the interface is so goddamn slow and awful.
Let me sign up once, then make it easy for me to search for, and download what I want with the minimal of fuss.
although the discipline is no less rigourous than any other kind of engineering
Oh? Your wall has fallen down? That just seems to happens sometimes. Well, just push it up, go outside your house and come back in. Hopefully it won't happen again.
Slashdot Mirror
Remember, this is the republican party. If they get back in any time before he dies off, he will be there in the background, pulling the strings of whatever new puppet president they choose. McCain would probably have stood up to him, but I suspect now the republicans blame him for their loss, it could well be back to the "Bush Box" to find their next candidate. Scary thought.
It's Christmas! Be sure to go to bed, get up, and spend the day with friends, family and food. Do you really need to update your kernel today? Why not let other people find out if there are some terrible early bugs in it?
It's things like this that convince me that while patents need some serious fixing, they shouldn't be abolished. While we haven't seen all the details, it looks like genuinely interesting and original to me and a step beyond the currently available state-of-the-art. Of course, only time will tell if this is really a good patent, and if the product is really any good in practice. It's easy to make things that look good in the lab but don't do so well in real usage.
'We simply cannot accept terms that fail to appropriately and fairly compensate recording artists, songwriters.... Having seen the most recent agreements, appropriate compensation for artists from these kind of things seems to be zero, so I think they are already getting a fair deal.
I don't find the multi-core so useful, it's rare that I want to hash one, very large file. More often I want to hash many things, which naturally parallelises. In your SSL web traffic example, if you app isn't dealing with as many connections as it has cores, then you probably don't have to worry about performance, and if you do then you already have one compression per core.
Of course, it also violates the terms of use so is illegal, and will be prone to the BBC breaking it at any time.
Merge back? The Atari 2600 came out in 1977, 4 years before the first PC (If we define PC as 'IBM PC').
You claim. Where is here any evidence of this?
Also, many people can't distinguish modern 128kps MP3 encoding in an ABX test.
an MP3 at 320kbps cannot sound better than a 256kbps MP3 encoded from the same source.
Total rubbish! Where are you getting these things from? Do you think the LAME people put in these options just for fun? Are the extra bits just hanging around not being used at all?
Certainly there is a case of diminishing returns, but 320 is still better.
How is that any different from me just physically mailing you a box of child pornography, along with a letter saying "Here is your order from kid's-r-us"? To me this seems to be an area where the parallels with existing situations are compelling. You should have to give over your virtual keys and locations of data in the same situations you had to give over physical keys and locations of real things.
Thanks, I shall look at QtScript. That looks list just what I want.
I really like javascript as a language, independant of webapps. When I recently wanted to embed a scripting language in a C++ program I work on, I seriously considered javascript, as I thought more people would know it than lua and python. There does not however seem to be an easy way to embed javascript in an arbitrary program. Is there some reason it isn't suitable for this kind of thing, or is it just the browser writers embed the javascript too deeply?
This will be the same as when people used to play random games with DDR mats. It's great fun for about an hour or so, but if you actually want to finish anything, it's back to the keyboard.
It's a blatant advert! It's vapourware! It's just 'eyetoy', which has been out on the Playstation for ages! It won't work in real people's houses, because people will walk past and curtains will flutter in the wind! It will never get any decent games!
Wow, I can power a chip for 200 years in sleep mode! Wait. I can power my computer for even longer if I just turn it off.
You wonder why Microsoft makes IE? Well, the fact I personally know of at least 3 companies locked into Windows because they use an IE-only web app probably helps. Also, would you want your OS's connection to the internet (arguably one of the most important things on a modern OS) dictated by another application beyond your control. Also on the Mac, while Firefox is OK, it's certainly possibly to tell it isn't a "proper application", it does lots of things not-quite-right. Certainly not something Apple would want to promote to a top-level application.
Yes, so debian developers can break even more packages with badly written patches!
Well, by reading the article and looking at the code, it actually all looks boringly sensible. Looking up "Britney Spears", it is used in a few comments as an example of a name, included in a few filter lists. Nothing exciting at all really unfortunately.
I'm not sure which macs are 64-bit, but I can certainly tell you the Macbook Pro I'm typing this on has a 32-bit Core Duo, which is annoying as I would really like to be able to install this update.
They surely already are, it's called buying an SDK certificate for $99? From my understanding, once you buy one you can install any code on your own iPhone, for testing.
Also, a higher price won't make AT&T happier. The real problem is that Apple negotiated an unlimited data package, under the assumption that it wouldn't really be reasonable to get that high data usage just from e-mail and web. When people start streaming music over their phones for 8+ hours a day, that goes out of the window, and probably so will unlimited data, if AT&T can work out how to get away with it.
I'm not saying I think these things are good for OSS, or reasonable. The question is are they sufficient to allow people to legally distribute GPL v2 and v3 software for the iPhone. I think they do follow the word, if not the spirit, of the GPL.
This sounds to me like it would be valid under the GPL v2, the v3 is tricky. There are two escape clauses:
1) Anyone can buy a certificate for $50, and then sign anything they like, including open-source programs they've downloaded. I think it's reasonable to require people to do this.
2) Apple will be providing a iPhone emulator, so people can still run your application, just not on their iPhone.
However, IANAL. I'm positive if there is a problem, the FSF can be expected to kick up a fuss before the final release of applications.
One thing which irritates me about official channels of getting things is that it is often much more trouble than getting a bittorrent. There are things I would pay for, because I want more to be made, but it's too much hassle. The obvious examples of this is DRM and "Use need the CD/DVD in the drive" for games, but it effects other levels too.
A recent extreme case of this is the BBC's new iPlayer. This is free (and I'm in the UK, so it works), and I use windows so it works fine, yet I'm STILL using a standard bittorrent site to get programs, because the interface is so goddamn slow and awful.
Let me sign up once, then make it easy for me to search for, and download what I want with the minimal of fuss.
You can't compare the two.
As you say, when a bridge falls down, that's major news. When a windows application, or windows crashes, that's life.
Sorry, you are right, there are programmers who really do work in safety critical software.
That is certainly not what 99.9% of the people who call themselves 'Software engineers' do however.
Oh? Your wall has fallen down? That just seems to happens sometimes. Well, just push it up, go outside your house and come back in. Hopefully it won't happen again.