the MS license prohibits X from licensing an implementation to Y stipulating that Y must release source code as a condition for releasing a product at all. That's obviously different from MS prohibiting X from releasing a product (say based on scripts) such that the laws of nature make the stipulation.
it's only because slashdot moderators are as dumb as you are that you have a +5.
to the extent that the space complexity of DNA computers can be improved by clever encodings, the time complexity of classical computers can be improved using the same encodings.
that's simply because DNA computers are just a bunch of little computers which can be simulated with equal overall complexity (space complexity X time complexity) by one big computer. i'm not saying that DNA computers (or some other form of super-parallel computers) won't ultimately be much faster than conventional computers (i work with parallel algorithms in my research). what i'm saying is that exponential complexity algorithms won't be implemented in polynomial space and time, even by DNA computers, which is what the previous poster was implying (SAT is NP hard.)
However, what DNA computing could be useful for in the future is solving problems that can take electronic computers far too long to figure out. Consider the SAT problem that was solved in this article. Suppose we are able to get DNA to solve SAT problems with hundreds of variables. Sure, it might take a week to do it, (maybe even a month), but it sure beats waiting for millions of years.
Except don't forget that the time-complexity of a serial computer is the space-complexity of a parallel computer, for example this one. note that the solution has to be present at the beginning of the algorithm, which for a SAT problem with a few hundred variables would quickly use up all the matter in the universe.
...let it equilibrate to the mean temperature of the environment before releasing it
but how the hell are you going to let something equilibrate to the ambient temperature without releasing heat to the surroundings, and once you have achieved equilibrium, how are you going to give off heat?
the right continuation was:
...make sure you release your heat via convection (via the atmosphere) and not by IR radiation.
no it's reverse psychology. i just wanted to get a first post without wasting precious karma. moderators, just like toddlers are extremely susceptible to this kind of manipulation.
witness the following:
karma whore: "i know i'm wasting my karma on this post, but i just have to say:"
moderator: "wow, what a guy, standing up for what you believe despite personal sacrifice. i think i'll mod you up to +5 insightful."
the point is, slashdot moderators are dumb. that's all i wanted to say.
That would be 8 typos in a post criticizing typos. I think there is a name for people like that, as in people who make some accusation of others before somebody can make it of them. not 'hypocrite' but like a psychological disorder. What the hell is it?
Surely your spate of links to sites that don't agree on a definition of terrorism isn't supposed to solidify your point...is it
the point is, pick any one of them and what you're saying is not in the same ballpark. obviously. if you could at least say that there was one definition of terrorism that agreed with you, then you'd have a point. not necessarily a good one, but a point. you have no point.
it's like creationists who say "look, that guy measures the age of the universe to be 12 billion years, and the other guy says it's 15 billion, which supports my claim that it's 6000". just because there is some uncertainty in what we're talking about, dosen't give you the right to say it's whatever the hell you want it to be.
Linux is very different but its advantages are clear (Not crashing all the dam time for a start)
hey, get with the ticket. it's "at least linux dosen't have all these security issues". the one about crashing all the time is obviously a throwback to the pre-NT 4.0 days. i haven't heard anyone say that on slashdot for almost a year.
but, glad to see that parent was worth a +1 to somebody.
terrorism def= peacetime equivalent of a war crime.
you think calling things like anti-competitive behaviour and government lobbying terrorism makes you broad-minded, but in fact, it merely makes you unable to stick to anyreasonabledefinitionofterrorism.
Re:Why did it take so many posts?
on
Abusing the GPL?
·
· Score: 1
Your grammer and spelling suck.
your argument would have been better if you had written 'grammar'.
you are saying nothing new. of course MS would prefer people to license things with say BSD so that they can use it in their products. the interesting thing is that there are also people who would chose the BSD license precisely because their code would be used by companies like MS. it's not necessarily a losing proposition for the coder.
it's just that people like that tend not to read slashdot.
you said that from the perspective of a software company, GPL software is no different from proprietary software. that's just a consequence of the fact that, ahem (make sure sigs are turned on)...
The problem with general public license advocates is that they don't understand that people need the opportunity to commercialize software
isn't aimed at end users, nor slashdot weenies. it's aimed at those developers who are thinking "should i license my program under GPL or the BSD license". it's also aimed at politicians who are thinking "should i support linux in high schools". it's aimed at school teachers who are thinking "should i take the trouble to base my programming class on gcc or just use visual studio".
it's a much bigger game than you seem to think, and geeks are a lot smaller players than they seem to think.
this is great news for me. fewer CS geeks wanting to work for MS means more money in it for me, since i'm strongly considering taking my CIT Ph.D and selling out to MS. for the money, but even more because i think the concentration of smart people is rivaled only by a few universities and even fewer research institutions in the world.
(moderators, it's "flaimbait" not "troll" since i am quite sincere, i assure you)
The goal of the GPL is to use copyright law to create a ``commons,'' a collection of shared resources to which anyone can add, and from which anyone can borrow freely, but from which nothing can be permanently removed.
that already exists. it's called the public domain.
Wow, this is really the most insightful comment I have seen lately on slashdot. Thank you.
I would add that by offering the solutions china wants, these companies are creating a middle ground. The chinese government retains some control of the new media, while the chinese people gain some access to it (and the savvy get access to almost all of it).
Americans, if you think the Chinese government should answer to you on the issue of censorship, then justify why you shouldn't answer to the Taliban on the issue of consumerism.
sh_
Re:Was that so complicated?
on
What is .NET?
·
· Score: 1
i'm not denying that.net is heavily influenced by java. that's perfectly clear. but the biggest innovation in java is machine independent bytecode. MS has taken it to the next level with source language and target machine independent CIL. your argument that C# is the "real target language" of CIL is as disingenuous as somebody writing off bytecode as targeting sun hardware because the best VM's ran on it.
if you want to stick with java because it was around first or because sun is that much cooler than MS, or just because that coffe mug looks great on the top of your applets, that's your prerogative. i'll take.net because it's language independent, third-party friendly, and governed by an standards comittee and not a corporation.
your argument that i am biased is, again, unmoving.
Re:Was that so complicated?
on
What is .NET?
·
· Score: 1
No matter managed or unmanaged code,.NET does require some specifics, it does not support general C/C++ or other languages in general, only a specific set.
to quote myself:
[MS does not say] that all features of any language under the sun can compile to IL.
[...]I see no real difference to the JVM. Java is the main language to be compiled into bytecode, but one could also develop other compilers for other languages..NET comes with two or three additional languages, but still C# is viewed as the main language for the future.
.NET is 1 day old, and has compilers for C#, C++, VB and Java. Third party products compile Perl and Python (both beta). Java is 6 years old, so your argument that people could (theoretically) write compilers for other languages to bytecode is unmoving.
Look, I know you read slashdot, but you can't be that thick-skulled that you can't see any difference between JVM and.Net. Go ahead, read something from Microsoft. It's not gonna hurt.
sh_
Re:Was that so complicated?
on
What is .NET?
·
· Score: 1
This is the first time I've heard the IL being criticized for not being language neutral enough. The fact is there are two types of code, managed (run-time type checked, bounds checked) and unmanaged, together with a managed (garbage-collected) heap and an unmanaged one. Unmanaged languages can, quite naturally, be compiled to unmanaged code, so your implication that it does not do well with them is misleading.
As for multiple inheritance, that is a headache even for writers of C++ compilers, so it seems reasonable that that feature is unsupported in the IL. Besides, what exactly do you want to do with multiple inheritance that you can't do with interfaces?
In any case, if you've read any of the white papers that MS has published, you know that it's not MS who's saying that all features of any language under the sun can compile to IL. Nor, IMHO, should they. Like all works of software engineering, the IL makes compromizes to balance power and simplicity. At least on paper, they seem to have done a pretty good job.
And, please spare me the obligatory "but it's MS, so they'll definitely find a way to f*** it up" followup. Come back and we'll talk in 12 months.
If the GPL is completely invalid, then you have no legal right to distribute copies of GPL'd programs.
This is clearly not right. If I have a piece of software in my hot little hands, and it's not governed by any licence at all, that means I can do what I want with it. Don't trick yourself. If any part of a license is invalid, the rights reserved by the producer always decrease and the rights assigned to the user always increase.
On the flip side, both of these men were great scientists, I personally feel it is immaterial whos 'side' they were on in a war.
so you feel that a person's contribution to science is the only valid grounds to judge him. whether or not he happened to be, at one point in his life, trying to build a weapon to enslave the world is immaterial.
feynman is one of my heroes, and he also worked on the U.S. nuclear program. he discusses, in surely you're joking how moral it was to build such a thing. he dosen't say that he wishes he hadn't been part of the project--indeed he was ultimatly proud to be part of the american team. however, if he hadn't cared how his contribution to science and engineering was to be used, i would certainly think differently about him. certainly if he had been eager to use it as an offensive weapon to improve his nation's status in the world i would have thought less of him.
i am not saying i've made any certain conclusions regarding heisenberg's circumstances and motivation, but i can tell you that there's room to classify someone as a smart guy who made big contributions to physics and was rotten to the core. it seems possible that this tag is destined for heisenberg, at least in my mind.
Bill Gates "is really annoyed by the incredible pain we put everyone through in computing."
which he said just before conceding that:
"linux is a much more elegant, powerful, and in every respect better solution to all of the problems that we were trying to solve with windows. i feel so stupid."
then again, posting this article is par for the course for slashdot. way to go timothy.
i completely agree with you, alext. Arts-Fartsica, let's all try to keep focused on the larger picture, which is what microsoft is doing in the marketplace. save your thoughts on "technical merit" for someplace like developer.microsoft.com or wherever it is you spend the rest of your day. alext is right: you really are missing the whole fucking point.
just my two cents ($.02, i think it's called around here)
Slashdot Mirror
the MS license prohibits X from licensing an implementation to Y stipulating that Y must release source code as a condition for releasing a product at all. That's obviously different from MS prohibiting X from releasing a product (say based on scripts) such that the laws of nature make the stipulation.
it's only because slashdot moderators are as dumb as you are that you have a +5.
This is the reason that the price of GPL software tends to zero.
...and one of the reasons that this company dosen't want to have anything to do with the GPL ever again.
to the extent that the space complexity of DNA computers can be improved by clever encodings, the time complexity of classical computers can be improved using the same encodings.
that's simply because DNA computers are just a bunch of little computers which can be simulated with equal overall complexity (space complexity X time complexity) by one big computer. i'm not saying that DNA computers (or some other form of super-parallel computers) won't ultimately be much faster than conventional computers (i work with parallel algorithms in my research). what i'm saying is that exponential complexity algorithms won't be implemented in polynomial space and time, even by DNA computers, which is what the previous poster was implying (SAT is NP hard.)
cheers,
However, what DNA computing could be useful for in the future is solving problems that can take electronic computers far too long to figure out. Consider the SAT problem that was solved in this article. Suppose we are able to get DNA to solve SAT problems with hundreds of variables. Sure, it might take a week to do it, (maybe even a month), but it sure beats waiting for millions of years.
Except don't forget that the time-complexity of a serial computer is the space-complexity of a parallel computer, for example this one. note that the solution has to be present at the beginning of the algorithm, which for a SAT problem with a few hundred variables would quickly use up all the matter in the universe.
damn, you sounded so intelligent until you said:
but how the hell are you going to let something equilibrate to the ambient temperature without releasing heat to the surroundings, and once you have achieved equilibrium, how are you going to give off heat?
the right continuation was:
...make sure you release your heat via convection (via the atmosphere) and not by IR radiation.
no it's reverse psychology. i just wanted to get a first post without wasting precious karma. moderators, just like toddlers are extremely susceptible to this kind of manipulation.
witness the following:
karma whore: "i know i'm wasting my karma on this post, but i just have to say:"
moderator: "wow, what a guy, standing up for what you believe despite personal sacrifice. i think i'll mod you up to +5 insightful."
the point is, slashdot moderators are dumb. that's all i wanted to say.
and didn't get modded down to -1
Not to mention:
dependant -> dependent
typo's -> typos
principal -> principle
creator's -> creators
idlely -> idly
That would be 8 typos in a post criticizing typos. I think there is a name for people like that, as in people who make some accusation of others before somebody can make it of them. not 'hypocrite' but like a psychological disorder. What the hell is it?
Surely your spate of links to sites that don't agree on a definition of terrorism isn't supposed to solidify your point...is it
the point is, pick any one of them and what you're saying is not in the same ballpark. obviously. if you could at least say that there was one definition of terrorism that agreed with you, then you'd have a point. not necessarily a good one, but a point. you have no point.
it's like creationists who say "look, that guy measures the age of the universe to be 12 billion years, and the other guy says it's 15 billion, which supports my claim that it's 6000". just because there is some uncertainty in what we're talking about, dosen't give you the right to say it's whatever the hell you want it to be.
"try to keep up, k?"
Linux is very different but its advantages are clear (Not crashing all the dam time for a start)
hey, get with the ticket. it's "at least linux dosen't have all these security issues". the one about crashing all the time is obviously a throwback to the pre-NT 4.0 days. i haven't heard anyone say that on slashdot for almost a year.
but, glad to see that parent was worth a +1 to somebody.
slashdot sucks.
terrorism def= peacetime equivalent of a war crime.
you think calling things like anti-competitive behaviour and government lobbying terrorism makes you broad-minded, but in fact, it merely makes you unable to stick to any reasonable definition of terrorism.
Your grammer and spelling suck.
your argument would have been better if you had written 'grammar'.
you are saying nothing new. of course MS would prefer people to license things with say BSD so that they can use it in their products. the interesting thing is that there are also people who would chose the BSD license precisely because their code would be used by companies like MS. it's not necessarily a losing proposition for the coder.
it's just that people like that tend not to read slashdot.
you said that from the perspective of a software company, GPL software is no different from proprietary software. that's just a consequence of the fact that, ahem (make sure sigs are turned on)...
so, let's get it clear that
The problem with general public license advocates is that they don't understand that people need the opportunity to commercialize software
isn't aimed at end users, nor slashdot weenies. it's aimed at those developers who are thinking "should i license my program under GPL or the BSD license". it's also aimed at politicians who are thinking "should i support linux in high schools". it's aimed at school teachers who are thinking "should i take the trouble to base my programming class on gcc or just use visual studio".
it's a much bigger game than you seem to think, and geeks are a lot smaller players than they seem to think.
this is great news for me. fewer CS geeks wanting to work for MS means more money in it for me, since i'm strongly considering taking my CIT Ph.D and selling out to MS. for the money, but even more because i think the concentration of smart people is rivaled only by a few universities and even fewer research institutions in the world.
(moderators, it's "flaimbait" not "troll" since i am quite sincere, i assure you)
The goal of the GPL is to use copyright law to create a ``commons,'' a collection of shared resources to which anyone can add, and from which anyone can borrow freely, but from which nothing can be permanently removed.
that already exists. it's called the public domain.
Wow, this is really the most insightful comment I have seen lately on slashdot. Thank you.
I would add that by offering the solutions china wants, these companies are creating a middle ground. The chinese government retains some control of the new media, while the chinese people gain some access to it (and the savvy get access to almost all of it).
Americans, if you think the Chinese government should answer to you on the issue of censorship, then justify why you shouldn't answer to the Taliban on the issue of consumerism.
sh_
i'm not denying that
if you want to stick with java because it was around first or because sun is that much cooler than MS, or just because that coffe mug looks great on the top of your applets, that's your prerogative. i'll take
your argument that i am biased is, again, unmoving.
No matter managed or unmanaged code, .NET does require some specifics, it does not support general C/C++ or other languages in general, only a specific set.
.NET comes with two or three additional languages, but still C# is viewed as the main language for the future.
.Net. Go ahead, read something from Microsoft. It's not gonna hurt.
to quote myself:
[MS does not say] that all features of any language under the sun can compile to IL.
[...]I see no real difference to the JVM. Java is the main language to be compiled into bytecode, but one could also develop other compilers for other languages.
.NET is 1 day old, and has compilers for C#, C++, VB and Java. Third party products compile Perl and Python (both beta). Java is 6 years old, so your argument that people could (theoretically) write compilers for other languages to bytecode is unmoving.
Look, I know you read slashdot, but you can't be that thick-skulled that you can't see any difference between JVM and
sh_
This is the first time I've heard the IL being criticized for not being language neutral enough. The fact is there are two types of code, managed (run-time type checked, bounds checked) and unmanaged, together with a managed (garbage-collected) heap and an unmanaged one. Unmanaged languages can, quite naturally, be compiled to unmanaged code, so your implication that it does not do well with them is misleading.
As for multiple inheritance, that is a headache even for writers of C++ compilers, so it seems reasonable that that feature is unsupported in the IL. Besides, what exactly do you want to do with multiple inheritance that you can't do with interfaces?
In any case, if you've read any of the white papers that MS has published, you know that it's not MS who's saying that all features of any language under the sun can compile to IL. Nor, IMHO, should they. Like all works of software engineering, the IL makes compromizes to balance power and simplicity. At least on paper, they seem to have done a pretty good job.
And, please spare me the obligatory "but it's MS, so they'll definitely find a way to f*** it up" followup. Come back and we'll talk in 12 months.
sh_
If the GPL is completely invalid, then you have no legal right to distribute copies of GPL'd programs.
This is clearly not right. If I have a piece of software in my hot little hands, and it's not governed by any licence at all, that means I can do what I want with it. Don't trick yourself. If any part of a license is invalid, the rights reserved by the producer always decrease and the rights assigned to the user always increase.
sh_
On the flip side, both of these men were great scientists, I personally feel it is immaterial whos 'side' they were on in a war.
so you feel that a person's contribution to science is the only valid grounds to judge him. whether or not he happened to be, at one point in his life, trying to build a weapon to enslave the world is immaterial.
feynman is one of my heroes, and he also worked on the U.S. nuclear program. he discusses, in surely you're joking how moral it was to build such a thing. he dosen't say that he wishes he hadn't been part of the project--indeed he was ultimatly proud to be part of the american team. however, if he hadn't cared how his contribution to science and engineering was to be used, i would certainly think differently about him. certainly if he had been eager to use it as an offensive weapon to improve his nation's status in the world i would have thought less of him.
i am not saying i've made any certain conclusions regarding heisenberg's circumstances and motivation, but i can tell you that there's room to classify someone as a smart guy who made big contributions to physics and was rotten to the core. it seems possible that this tag is destined for heisenberg, at least in my mind.
sh_
come on:
Bill Gates "is really annoyed by the incredible pain we put everyone through in computing."
which he said just before conceding that:
"linux is a much more elegant, powerful, and in every respect better solution to all of the problems that we were trying to solve with windows. i feel so stupid."
then again, posting this article is par for the course for slashdot. way to go timothy.
i completely agree with you, alext. Arts-Fartsica, let's all try to keep focused on the larger picture, which is what microsoft is doing in the marketplace. save your thoughts on "technical merit" for someplace like developer.microsoft.com or wherever it is you spend the rest of your day. alext is right: you really are missing the whole fucking point.
just my two cents ($.02, i think it's called around here)
that's it. that's all i wanted to say, but i have to write something to get around the LF.