So no, 45nm isn't just "65nm, only better". Every step at this point becomes harder and harder.
That depends on how you look at it. To an average user that is all 45nm gives them, a slightly faster processor than the previous generation. I would agree that the technology that goes into producing a 45nm chip is definitely innovative but the chip itself is just a smaller, better performing version of the previous generation of processors.
After looking around the site a little more I'm not sure this site is from the same person but just linking to that garbage is enough to make me disregard the author's opinion. The other external link is just as bad and was also covered on slashdot at one time.
You are right this is definitely a campaign against Firefox and has nothing to do with AdBlock. If you notice the links on the page this is from the same guy who wrote this garbage. I believe this was on slashdot a year ago or so.
Apache, Firefox, LyX, Ardour, VLC, Eclipse, Compiz/Beryl and so on. There are a ton of FOSS applications out there that are just as good or better than the competition. There are FOSS applications that are leading the pack. Just because you have limited knowledge of FOSS doesn't mean it isn't good software.
What about a large project like Firefox? That was ported to BeOS amongst other operating systems without much of an issue. Peronsally I think you're full of shit and have absolutely no experience with porting software. Mono would be relatively simple to port to BeOS if there was an interest in porting it. In fact Mono could be the default.NET package on pretty much all general purpose operating systems other than Microsoft's Windows.
I think this is the "let's make use of free labor" step. The Mono guys, assuming they're happy not getting paid, would be smart to ensure that Microsoft grants them full immunity from any legal claims as a result of their development. Otherwise, if they decide to pull out they can simply say "Silverlight on Mono violates a number of our patents, sorry we forgot to tell you".
Novell develops Mono and if you recall they signed a patent deal that so many people got pissed about that protects Mono and Moonlight from Microsoft's patents. So despite all the naysayers, Microsoft's participation in Moonlight development is a good thing. I am usually the first person to bash MS but in this case I can't see a negative. I guess time will tell.
It would be fairly painless to port mono to BeOS. Since mono is open source you could port it to all kinds of platforms and have all the features like moonlight to go with it. Isn't the GPL great?
Mac OS-X, (like all the Unixes), is closer to being a "real" OS than Linux or Windows
First I would love to see an explanation for that statement. Second OSX technically isn't a Unix although it is Unix-like. In fact Linux is much more similar to a "real" Unix than the Mach/BSD hybrid that is OSX.
A regular lock is basically useless if you are even dealing with a run-of-the-mill lock pick. I learned to pick locks a couple of years ago and then proceeded to pick all of the locks in my house for practice (just a piece of advice, DON'T try this at home, if you are inexperienced you may fuck up the lock beyond repair.) Anyway like the article says you only need a screwdriver and a strip of metal or analogous equipment. Circular locks are much better and much harder to pick unless you have specific lockpick equipment. If you are worried about security get a circular lock or some other non-standard lock that will require and expert to pick, there are a lot less professional lock picks out there than there are amateurs who could easily pick a standard lock in a few seconds. Even then you are not 100% secure. You need layers of security just like a computer system so get an alarm and practice any other anti-theft method that may be practical for your application.
f it works and sells, Sony is going to shit big square bricks, Steve Ballmer is single handedly going to cause a world chair shortage, and Nintendo is going to be most challenged. Anything you can do with the DS, you can do with the iPhone.
You do realize that buying the iPhone is equivalent to buying a PS3 in terms of price. We all saw how well that went. How do you expect the iPhone, which is only offered by one carrier to compete with the PSP and the DS in terms of price, platform, and developers? All of you apple people are fucking crazy.
Quite possibly the openMOSIX project would have better success and funding if they had better press.
They haven't had very much press in the past couple of years because not much has been done with openMosix. I was very interested in the project and had a small cluster set up a few years ago but they never got around to stabilizing the 2.6 branch, so I gave up as did a lot of people.
This is just lame. The researcher narrowed it down to a black person in Hartford, Connecticut between the ages of 16-19. Oh yeah, he likes the Boondock Saints and his name may be John. Do you know how many people that could be? There are 125,000 people in Hartford and nearly 40% are black. That's 50,000 people. Let's say roughly 25,000 are male. So now you have to narrow that down to ages 16-19 which is probably at least a couple thousand. Now you're looking for someone among thousands who's name may be John and who likes the Boondock Saints. Considering people are getting shot and robbed on the street in Hartford I think the police have a little more to worry about than someone who made a piece of software that makes you computer reboot continuously.
The article is wrong. It would take more like 10 - 15 seconds on a connection of that speed. That's still incredibly fast but also incredibly unlikely.
Might I also add that it is not against the law for them to break the encryption on their own copyrighted works.
I never said it was illegal for them to crack their own encryption. It is illegal for them to crack encrypted packets on P2P networks. It's hard to prove people are sharing their movies if the data on the P2P networks is encrypted and anonymous, especially if you have to break encryption to determine who a user is.
If they have probable cause to think that the encrypted stream contains their copyrighted works, they can decrypt it under the DMCA.
They are not the police. They cannot crack encrypted P2P packets without breaking the law.
so laugh it up. the independent tech sector is cutting it's own throat! you'll be the same bitches crying when they pass more laws with heavier fines, longer copyright protection and more corporate friendly language.
The media companies are screwed no matter what. They could stop releasing software players but they would die if they did so. They could try to pass more laws but people will still share movies and music. There are already anonymous, encrypted P2P services out there. Even if the media companies could break the encrypted networks they would have to break the law to do it. Their business model is outdated and it's going to die a slow death no matter how much encryption or how many politicians they throw at the problem.
Eh, PGP threw down the gauntlet a long time ago, and as far as I know it still remains uncracked. Just because CSS was cracked doesn't mean BD will necessarily be.
PGP and media encryption schemes are completely different animals. As long as they keep making software players for these discs their encryption will be broken.
Yes, Linus has the right to choose the development structure the kernel is now using, but that doesn't mean it is the best way to do it for everybody. dropping the distinction between "stable" and "development" versions was a sloppy, lazy move that simply pushed the responsibility for maintaining stable released off onto the distributors. That has essentially duplicated the work a hundred-fold, because each distribution must do the work themselves.
It sounds to me like you don't remember the 2.4 kernel. Distributions actually had to do more work on the 2.4 kernel than they do now. When 2.4 was current most distributions were backporting 2.6 features into the 2.4 series kernel. In fact, by the time the 2.6 kernel was released some distributions' 2.4 kernels were not all that unsimilar in functionality but were patched to high hell.
You can create a single installer that is compatible with Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003 and Windows Vista.
If you think all software made for the Windows platform is portable to all their different versions just because it is possible to create a simple application that will install on all of them you're nuts. The truth is even service packs are known to cause incompatibilities with some programs. Pretty much every AV and AS program had to be updated to work with Vista. A lot of games don't work on Vista. In fact most applications made today don't even support 98/ME.
Multi-distro linux installers? I'm pretty confident I can do that too (not with NSIS of course, but with complex shell scripts and gzipped tarballs) but no way would it ever include RedHat/Fedora. You can blame RedHat for setting the bar in lack of standards adherence across distributions.
Uh, no. It doesn't matter how whizbang your scripts are there isn't any easy way to account for different library versions used on different distros, especially when the library that ships with your distro isn't a supported version needed for an application.
Because I don't run gnome and it's annoying when I have to deal with that shit just to run a program that's written in gtk because the author is so fucking stupid as to use it?
Ok so your real issue is having to deal with GNOME's centralized management system when you don't use GNOME. Why didn't you say that in the first place? What does that have to do with Windows' registry? Why is an author stupid to use GConf if he intends his application to be a GNOME application? Because you don't like it? At this point you're just whining about your preferences.
BS artists don't get degrees from qualified institutions in their respective fields. That's why they are BS artists. Otherwise they are the real thing.
You're glad you had to learn about a "registry?" WTF!??! The registry is one of the stupidest things ever put into windows. Copying it for gnome very well might be the stupidest thing EVER put on Linux, but I won't say that for sure because miguel de icaza does a LOT of dumb stuff on Linux.
You have absolutely no experience with GConf other than glancing at gconf-editor if you think GConf is anything like Windows' registry. GConf is text based, not binary so corruption can be fixed. GConf isn't required to start the computer so a corrupt GConf won't cause your OS to fail to start like the famous C:\Windows\System32\Config errors. GConf also has different interfaces including a CLI tool. So the only remaining similarity is the fact that they both offer centralized configuration storage. So what you're saying is that centralized configuration is bad. I guess my question is why?
one thing i do NOT agree with is funds paying out to bullshit artists like naturopaths, it's a waste of money and gets nil result for a lot of money.
Oh fuck off. I have a family member that practices Chinese medicine, acupuncture, and acupressure. He didn't go to school for 8 years to be called a bullshit artist.
Slashdot Mirror
You're talking about Role Based Access Control. Linux has this too.
So no, 45nm isn't just "65nm, only better". Every step at this point becomes harder and harder.
That depends on how you look at it. To an average user that is all 45nm gives them, a slightly faster processor than the previous generation. I would agree that the technology that goes into producing a 45nm chip is definitely innovative but the chip itself is just a smaller, better performing version of the previous generation of processors.
I've had SBC (now ATT) for over three years now and SMTP has been blocked since day one for me.
After looking around the site a little more I'm not sure this site is from the same person but just linking to that garbage is enough to make me disregard the author's opinion. The other external link is just as bad and was also covered on slashdot at one time.
You are right this is definitely a campaign against Firefox and has nothing to do with AdBlock. If you notice the links on the page this is from the same guy who wrote this garbage. I believe this was on slashdot a year ago or so.
Apache, Firefox, LyX, Ardour, VLC, Eclipse, Compiz/Beryl and so on. There are a ton of FOSS applications out there that are just as good or better than the competition. There are FOSS applications that are leading the pack. Just because you have limited knowledge of FOSS doesn't mean it isn't good software.
What about a large project like Firefox? That was ported to BeOS amongst other operating systems without much of an issue. Peronsally I think you're full of shit and have absolutely no experience with porting software. Mono would be relatively simple to port to BeOS if there was an interest in porting it. In fact Mono could be the default .NET package on pretty much all general purpose operating systems other than Microsoft's Windows.
I think this is the "let's make use of free labor" step. The Mono guys, assuming they're happy not getting paid, would be smart to ensure that Microsoft grants them full immunity from any legal claims as a result of their development. Otherwise, if they decide to pull out they can simply say "Silverlight on Mono violates a number of our patents, sorry we forgot to tell you".
Novell develops Mono and if you recall they signed a patent deal that so many people got pissed about that protects Mono and Moonlight from Microsoft's patents. So despite all the naysayers, Microsoft's participation in Moonlight development is a good thing. I am usually the first person to bash MS but in this case I can't see a negative. I guess time will tell.
It would be fairly painless to port mono to BeOS. Since mono is open source you could port it to all kinds of platforms and have all the features like moonlight to go with it. Isn't the GPL great?
Mac OS-X, (like all the Unixes), is closer to being a "real" OS than Linux or Windows
First I would love to see an explanation for that statement. Second OSX technically isn't a Unix although it is Unix-like. In fact Linux is much more similar to a "real" Unix than the Mach/BSD hybrid that is OSX.
A regular lock is basically useless if you are even dealing with a run-of-the-mill lock pick. I learned to pick locks a couple of years ago and then proceeded to pick all of the locks in my house for practice (just a piece of advice, DON'T try this at home, if you are inexperienced you may fuck up the lock beyond repair.) Anyway like the article says you only need a screwdriver and a strip of metal or analogous equipment. Circular locks are much better and much harder to pick unless you have specific lockpick equipment. If you are worried about security get a circular lock or some other non-standard lock that will require and expert to pick, there are a lot less professional lock picks out there than there are amateurs who could easily pick a standard lock in a few seconds. Even then you are not 100% secure. You need layers of security just like a computer system so get an alarm and practice any other anti-theft method that may be practical for your application.
f it works and sells, Sony is going to shit big square bricks, Steve Ballmer is single handedly going to cause a world chair shortage, and Nintendo is going to be most challenged. Anything you can do with the DS, you can do with the iPhone.
You do realize that buying the iPhone is equivalent to buying a PS3 in terms of price. We all saw how well that went. How do you expect the iPhone, which is only offered by one carrier to compete with the PSP and the DS in terms of price, platform, and developers? All of you apple people are fucking crazy.
Woops. Slip of the tongue. I happen to love that movie.
They haven't had very much press in the past couple of years because not much has been done with openMosix. I was very interested in the project and had a small cluster set up a few years ago but they never got around to stabilizing the 2.6 branch, so I gave up as did a lot of people.
This is just lame. The researcher narrowed it down to a black person in Hartford, Connecticut between the ages of 16-19. Oh yeah, he likes the Boondock Saints and his name may be John. Do you know how many people that could be? There are 125,000 people in Hartford and nearly 40% are black. That's 50,000 people. Let's say roughly 25,000 are male. So now you have to narrow that down to ages 16-19 which is probably at least a couple thousand. Now you're looking for someone among thousands who's name may be John and who likes the Boondock Saints. Considering people are getting shot and robbed on the street in Hartford I think the police have a little more to worry about than someone who made a piece of software that makes you computer reboot continuously.
The article is wrong. It would take more like 10 - 15 seconds on a connection of that speed. That's still incredibly fast but also incredibly unlikely.
I never said it was illegal for them to crack their own encryption. It is illegal for them to crack encrypted packets on P2P networks. It's hard to prove people are sharing their movies if the data on the P2P networks is encrypted and anonymous, especially if you have to break encryption to determine who a user is.
They are not the police. They cannot crack encrypted P2P packets without breaking the law.
PGP and media encryption schemes are completely different animals. As long as they keep making software players for these discs their encryption will be broken.
It sounds to me like you don't remember the 2.4 kernel. Distributions actually had to do more work on the 2.4 kernel than they do now. When 2.4 was current most distributions were backporting 2.6 features into the 2.4 series kernel. In fact, by the time the 2.6 kernel was released some distributions' 2.4 kernels were not all that unsimilar in functionality but were patched to high hell.
Explain this to me then smartypants:
If you think all software made for the Windows platform is portable to all their different versions just because it is possible to create a simple application that will install on all of them you're nuts. The truth is even service packs are known to cause incompatibilities with some programs. Pretty much every AV and AS program had to be updated to work with Vista. A lot of games don't work on Vista. In fact most applications made today don't even support 98/ME.
Multi-distro linux installers? I'm pretty confident I can do that too (not with NSIS of course, but with complex shell scripts and gzipped tarballs) but no way would it ever include RedHat/Fedora. You can blame RedHat for setting the bar in lack of standards adherence across distributions.
Uh, no. It doesn't matter how whizbang your scripts are there isn't any easy way to account for different library versions used on different distros, especially when the library that ships with your distro isn't a supported version needed for an application.
Because I don't run gnome and it's annoying when I have to deal with that shit just to run a program that's written in gtk because the author is so fucking stupid as to use it?
Ok so your real issue is having to deal with GNOME's centralized management system when you don't use GNOME. Why didn't you say that in the first place? What does that have to do with Windows' registry? Why is an author stupid to use GConf if he intends his application to be a GNOME application? Because you don't like it? At this point you're just whining about your preferences.
BS artists don't get degrees from qualified institutions in their respective fields. That's why they are BS artists. Otherwise they are the real thing.
You're glad you had to learn about a "registry?" WTF!??! The registry is one of the stupidest things ever put into windows. Copying it for gnome very well might be the stupidest thing EVER put on Linux, but I won't say that for sure because miguel de icaza does a LOT of dumb stuff on Linux.
You have absolutely no experience with GConf other than glancing at gconf-editor if you think GConf is anything like Windows' registry. GConf is text based, not binary so corruption can be fixed. GConf isn't required to start the computer so a corrupt GConf won't cause your OS to fail to start like the famous C:\Windows\System32\Config errors. GConf also has different interfaces including a CLI tool. So the only remaining similarity is the fact that they both offer centralized configuration storage. So what you're saying is that centralized configuration is bad. I guess my question is why?
one thing i do NOT agree with is funds paying out to bullshit artists like naturopaths, it's a waste of money and gets nil result for a lot of money.
Oh fuck off. I have a family member that practices Chinese medicine, acupuncture, and acupressure. He didn't go to school for 8 years to be called a bullshit artist.