Indeed, Linux is fine as it is right now. Why should it spread? and more specifically, why should it surpass Windows? why the competition with Windows?
1) parallel search 2) accurate text translation 3) accurate human speech rendering 4) raytracing for 3d graphics 5) advanced physics in 3d applications 6) more dynamic programming languages 7) better video and audio decompression 8) much faster compression 9) ultra fast large WORD document repagination etc
The reason Vista cost so much but has nothing special to offer is because Microsoft does not know what 'separation of concerns' means. Windows is a big ball of mud.
Perhaps the problem of AI is approached in the wrong way. Perhaps the only mechanism that is required for AI is an efficient pattern matching algorithm.
I think the brain does not have a complex algorithm. All it does is match the input to responses and recall those responses. All of the brain's power goes into parallel searching, something that computers are not efficient in doing.
You are not alone, don't worry. Getting drunk to have fun is an Anglosaxonic trend. In the Mediterranean where I live, getting drunk is not a way to have fun.
I am not taking about 3d graphics on a flat screen, but live 3d graphics made out of 3d displays.
From 30 years to 15 years ago, the arcades was the place to experience the best graphics. Now arcade games are inferior to home stuff.
Arcades could bring in true 3d technologies, of the kind that it's not possible to have at home yet. Since these technologies are very expensive, the initial generation would be scaled down...like the first arcade machines could only display a few sprites with a few colors while the military played with multi-million dollar 3d graphics, the first 3d arcade machines would display primitive 3d while the military enjoys multi-million dollar 3d. But in a few years, true 3d could be affordable in arcade rooms.
Today it's Muslims that seem to be the most violent people, yesterday it was the Americans that revolted against the British (1776 ad) or the peasants against the aristocrats (1789 ad), or that it was the enslaved Greeks, Slavians and Albanians against the Ottomans (1821 ad), or before that the slaves vs the Roman Empire (120 bc) etc...and it all these cases, the revolted were called terrorists.
XML's big win is supposed to be its semantics: it tells you not only what data you have, but what sort of data it is.
Actually, it does not tell you what sort of data it is, it only tags the data with a name. If it happens that the receiver has the same concept of the transmitted data as the sender, then all is well. Otherwise, there is a big problem.
The only reason this debate is going on is because CPUs do not have the concept of modules. If they did, then each module would not be able to crash the rest of the modules.
If you wonder how to do modules without sacrificing the flat address space, it's quite easy: In most CPU designs, each page descriptor has a user/supervisor bit which defines if the contents of a page are accessible by the other pages. Instead of this bit, CPUs must use the target address to look up module information from another table. In other words, the CPU must maintain a map of addresses to modules, and use this map to provide security access.
This design is not as slow as it initially might seem. Modern CPUs are very fast, and they already contain many such maps: the Translation Lookaside Buffer, the Global Descriptor Table cache, the Local Descriptor Table cache, Victim Caches, Trace Caches, you name it.
...a game demo from 10 years ago, which I don't remember the title. It was most probably by Ion Storm, and it was the demo that caused mass media hysteria over Ion Storm. It featured a fight between a warrior and two or 3 skeletons. The soft shadows, supposedly real time, were projected onto the bodies of the actors, and where they combined, the shadow was harder.
This demo can be used as a reminder of how underused hardware is, and how programming languages, while allow us to do more in less time, also prohibit us from exploiting the current hardware.
The VHS situation is different than the internet situation. VHS video recorders could copy a movie, but they could not be used to search for a movie, whereas nowadays every digital item is two clicks away.
The real problem with MPAA is not that piracy is not theft, but its motives. The real motive behind MPAA is not that "piracy is bad", but that "we are not as filthy rich as we could be if you did not copy our data". So, since the rich don't play fair, it's only justified to copy a movie for personal use (not for profit).
If ever USA gets in a real war (because all it currently does is scare off mullahs), its enemies will attack from the shadows using knifes...and they will win. Didn't 9/11 teach you anything?
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, Linux is fine as it is right now. Why should it spread? and more specifically, why should it surpass Windows? why the competition with Windows?
How about:
1) parallel search
2) accurate text translation
3) accurate human speech rendering
4) raytracing for 3d graphics
5) advanced physics in 3d applications
6) more dynamic programming languages
7) better video and audio decompression
8) much faster compression
9) ultra fast large WORD document repagination
etc
You should have researched the Actor model Erlang and automatic parallelization of purely functional programs before you made that assertion.
Parallelism for ordinary software its already here, it's a matter of time before it is adopted by mainstream applications.
IBM has created a mouse cortical simulation:
http://domino.research.ibm.com/comm/pr.nsf/pages/rsc.bluegene_cognitive.html
They simulation is quire accurate, but it takes a Blue Gene computer to run it...the human brain has millions of such columns...
The reason Vista cost so much but has nothing special to offer is because Microsoft does not know what 'separation of concerns' means. Windows is a big ball of mud.
Perhaps the problem of AI is approached in the wrong way. Perhaps the only mechanism that is required for AI is an efficient pattern matching algorithm.
I think the brain does not have a complex algorithm. All it does is match the input to responses and recall those responses. All of the brain's power goes into parallel searching, something that computers are not efficient in doing.
Why your post makes me think of basements and virgins?
You are not alone, don't worry. Getting drunk to have fun is an Anglosaxonic trend. In the Mediterranean where I live, getting drunk is not a way to have fun.
What if the URI points to a link which redirects the user to the company's page but also adds spam in the page?
I am not taking about 3d graphics on a flat screen, but live 3d graphics made out of 3d displays.
From 30 years to 15 years ago, the arcades was the place to experience the best graphics. Now arcade games are inferior to home stuff.
Arcades could bring in true 3d technologies, of the kind that it's not possible to have at home yet. Since these technologies are very expensive, the initial generation would be scaled down...like the first arcade machines could only display a few sprites with a few colors while the military played with multi-million dollar 3d graphics, the first 3d arcade machines would display primitive 3d while the military enjoys multi-million dollar 3d. But in a few years, true 3d could be affordable in arcade rooms.
So each time I have spaghetti, I insult these people?
As stated by another poster, in Tailand Muslims are 5% of the population, yet they cause great terrorism.
And I live in a 1st world country, with the highest anti-americanism in whole of Europe, yet there were native terrorists that killed Americans in the past.
Today it's Muslims that seem to be the most violent people, yesterday it was the Americans that revolted against the British (1776 ad) or the peasants against the aristocrats (1789 ad), or that it was the enslaved Greeks, Slavians and Albanians against the Ottomans (1821 ad), or before that the slaves vs the Roman Empire (120 bc) etc...and it all these cases, the revolted were called terrorists.
There are "terrorists" in all colors and religions, from Christian to Jewish to, of course, Islamists.
Actually, it does not tell you what sort of data it is, it only tags the data with a name. If it happens that the receiver has the same concept of the transmitted data as the sender, then all is well. Otherwise, there is a big problem.
slashdot?
You did: modules != pages.
32-bit 80x86 segmentation requires 48-bit addressing...the flat address space is 32-bits.
The only reason this debate is going on is because CPUs do not have the concept of modules. If they did, then each module would not be able to crash the rest of the modules.
If you wonder how to do modules without sacrificing the flat address space, it's quite easy: In most CPU designs, each page descriptor has a user/supervisor bit which defines if the contents of a page are accessible by the other pages. Instead of this bit, CPUs must use the target address to look up module information from another table. In other words, the CPU must maintain a map of addresses to modules, and use this map to provide security access.
This design is not as slow as it initially might seem. Modern CPUs are very fast, and they already contain many such maps: the Translation Lookaside Buffer, the Global Descriptor Table cache, the Local Descriptor Table cache, Victim Caches, Trace Caches, you name it.
Dear Bill,
The 'I' in 'IT' means 'information'.
What does your software manage ? does it manage information or bits?
All that is needed for an explosive growth of information technology is for software to stop managing bits and start managing information...
Yeah, that one. Thanks. Was it realtime?
...a game demo from 10 years ago, which I don't remember the title. It was most probably by Ion Storm, and it was the demo that caused mass media hysteria over Ion Storm. It featured a fight between a warrior and two or 3 skeletons. The soft shadows, supposedly real time, were projected onto the bodies of the actors, and where they combined, the shadow was harder.
This demo can be used as a reminder of how underused hardware is, and how programming languages, while allow us to do more in less time, also prohibit us from exploiting the current hardware.
The VHS situation is different than the internet situation. VHS video recorders could copy a movie, but they could not be used to search for a movie, whereas nowadays every digital item is two clicks away.
The real problem with MPAA is not that piracy is not theft, but its motives. The real motive behind MPAA is not that "piracy is bad", but that "we are not as filthy rich as we could be if you did not copy our data". So, since the rich don't play fair, it's only justified to copy a movie for personal use (not for profit).
They can use Tritanium, which is 21.4 times stronger than diamond.
If ever USA gets in a real war (because all it currently does is scare off mullahs), its enemies will attack from the shadows using knifes...and they will win. Didn't 9/11 teach you anything?