Doing what you suggest would mean redesigning the network protocol from the ground up right? I mean you're talking about extending X11 so that is has some new features that GTK3 needs. So assume we did that. Now what about all of those Motif features that nobody is using. Do we still maintain them? How do we implement these new extensions and keep the old features in a way that improves the appearance of using the display?
I mean X11 doesn't have an easy way to ensure your application window appears cleanly on the first screen paint. And it's full of network round trips and has quite a few state bugs. How do you improve motif apps so that they don't look like motif apps?
There is so much in the X11 protocol that needs to be deprecated, that at this point you might as well throw it all away and build a better network protocol to replace it. Ok, so the Wayland devs aren't trying to design a new network protocol, but they're also not stopping the community from attempting to build one. Why not get all of the Qt, GTK, wxWidgets etc people into a room and hash out a new standard that they can all agree on.
All the Wayland devs are doing is following the traditional Unix philosophy. Take apart the features of the old monolithic XServer, define the pieces that we need to run a display. Shift features into the kernel that should be in the kernel. Shift the application remoting network protocol up a layer into a client of the compositor.
Oh, and in case you haven't noticed, there's nothing stopping you from remotely accessing the entire composited desktop via RDP or similar.
Using fingerprint scanners for logging into PC's has demonstrated their uselessness. So you want the operator of a firearm to stuff around getting their thumb to scan correctly in a situation where aiming a gun is literally a matter of life and death (not necessarily the holder of the weapon, but lets assume self defence for the sake of argument).
Printing money that then sits in a bank vault doesn't cause inflation. Bernanke massively increased base money, with practically no effect on any other measure of the money in circulation.
We've been trying to invent those essential AI algorithms for the last 50-ish years. What makes you think we'll magically succeed in the next 15?
Sure processing power and storage have been growing rapidly over that time scale, but we still can't make a computer do anything other than what we tell it to do.
Sure it's easy to model the spread of a virus. It's another thing entirely to write one that can run on every commodity access point, with sufficient CPU power to crack all nearby passwords / keys.
You can't assume that all 5500km of panels will output at full power. You could probably get a better approximation of power output based on the area of panels as seen from the sun, multiplied by the peak output of a panel in direct sunlight.
Banks make money primarily from interest on loans. They have a financial incentive to encourage the rest of society to borrow ever increasing amounts. That extra credit will flow around the economy and convince us that we're doing better than we were last year.
In an asset bubble, where the exact same asset is being exchanged for larger and larger amounts. Where each successive buyer has to borrow more and more money from a bank in order to win the auction. Who is the ultimately responsible for pushing up the price? The buyer? The seller? Or the bank manager greedily thinking of all the extra interest he will get?
Increasing credit so that people can speculate on asset prices is exactly what caused the financial crisis. We as a society had become dependant on that continuous increase in credit to keep our illusion of wealth alive. So when the inevitable finally happened and bank managers ran out or greater fools willing to borrow more, the economy collapsed.
There may be some need for banks to fund entrepreneurs, but they haven't been doing that at all. No, the current banking sector is a parasite, that has gradually convinced us to give them all of our disposable income. They don't make anything, they survive by sucking money from the productive sectors of society. They have taken the place of feudal Lords, gradually convincing the rest of us to pay them rent just so we can have a roof over our heads.
It's not impossible for them to be the same though. You could implement a gift card / store credit system using a crypto transaction model almost identical to bitcoin. Though you might want to eliminate the "mining" of new coins, and only allow your trusted server to produce blocks. You could still use the same publicly verifiable block chain validation process.
Sometimes what is being tested is revealed, at least in a vague sense, but how it's being tested is a secret. So they put you through some kind of fake test, but prime you with something else and measure if that changes your behaviour.
And there's the rub. In the US you are used to paying for an ISP connection based on it's peak speed. There's an incentive for an ISP to advertise a high link speed, without pricing in the cost of the back end capacity to deliver it.
Every time some set of US customers attempt to use their stated bandwidth, there has been this outcry from the ISP's that they can afford to provide the service they promised. While on the other hand, there's a massive revolt every time some ISP attempts to impose monthly bandwidth allowances so they know they can afford to provide that level of service.
You can't have it both ways.
Here in Australia we're used to paying for a connection based on monthly bandwidth allowances. Though ISP's have sold plans with no allowance limit, these plans are usually expensive, and only used by customers that will attempt to use it.
However, the creationists are not interested in being proved wrong as much as punching holes in the other side's arguments so they can say they "won" and gain legitimacy for their point of view. They are not interested in the scientific method, as far as they are concerned the Bible says it so it must be true.
If you're talking about Ken Ham, I agree with you. Just be careful not to paint everyone with that stereotype.
It's called "about:memory" and it shows you memory allocation in all kinds of fine or coarse grained ways. And it's been almost continually improved for the past couple of years, while the big issues this page has revealed have been fixed.
Before your deadline of 3 days, did you ever give an estimate of the outstanding effort?
Jumping into a project like that, I'd start by telling them how long it will take to get a feel for the current code base and pull a large number out of the air for the rest. Over time you should be refining that estimate as you learn more and start fleshing out the scope of unfinished / untested work.
If they haven't had a competent process for tracking requirements, deadlines, effort, testing,.... Then all of these jobs fall on your shoulders. Don't just do the work they tell you to do, always try to list the things that haven't been done with a rough guess for how much effort it will take.
$900 payout + first home owners boost + NBN + solar rebate + insulation rebate + school building program.....
Every stimulus program Labour started put money directly in tax payers pockets. All of them together had a huge impact on our economy.
Personally I'd say the first home owners boost had the biggest long term impact as it encouraged people to buy just as our housing bubble was starting to burst. Though prices started to fall / stagnate after the boost ended, the housing market is heading upwards again. Without that boost, housing prices could have plummeted and triggered all kinds of strife through banks and investment funds that were exposed.
The housing bubble will eventually burst though. It's just a matter of time.
Nope. US Fed did what is required from the start, so the recession in the US turned out to be far more shallow than in Europe (where the ECB blundered for several years). In Japan it's the contrast is even more stark - after a decade of slow stagnation and deflation (or near-deflation) they started growing almost immediately after the central bank and the government decided to be 'irresponsible'.
And yet Australia, which gave cash to tax payers instead of bank managers, did even better. But even though Australia completely avoided a technical recession, all they have done is delay the inevitable.
And how many times has malware started to take advantage of bugs that Microsoft just patched?
There are people who examine every change to find the backdoors that have been closed so they can attack them on unpatched machines. Do you think they'd ignore a backdoor that was just opened?
Most of that catalog listed firmware and bootloader hacks to patch an OS in memory. Most firmware is horribly buggy and rarely updated. Getting your payload into windows / android / iOS directly runs the very great risk of being noticed.
And all because their traffic capture only logged the start time of each torrent download. So obviously in future they will try to log the end time as well so they can charge everyone who was downloading at the same time.
That's great, but you can't. I mean, sure you can reallocate spending to more productive long term investments. But government spending is private sector income. If you unilaterally cut spending in the middle of this volatile financial crisis, it will be like 1937 all over again. In 1937, they believed that the depression was over and the "New Deal" spending initiatives should be rolled back. Almost immediately unemployment started to rise, and GDP fell plunging the economy back into recession.
What eventually helped the US out of the Great Depression? WWII spending. This finally reduced the level of private debt to serviceable levels. While increasing industrial capacity and output. We're not going to get out of this financial situation until we learn the lessons of history.
Input events are usually time-stamped by the operating system interrupts that captured them. On network games, these timestamps can be used by the server to work out after the fact who shot first. While pro-gamers like to say that frame rates higher than the monitor refresh rate help them win. I have yet to see a double blind study to confirm that it actually helps.
Usually network latency is a much bigger and more noticeable problem for this type of after the fact simulation. But the process can be applied equally well to local input events.
No, the frame rate doesn't matter. Sure you don't want to drop below 60fps. But that doesn't mean you need to render more than 60fps.
Above 60fps, without waiting for vsync, only a fragment of your rendered frame can possibly be displayed. I have wondered if graphics drivers can take advantage of this to only run the final fragment shader passes for the fragment of the screen that will be drawn.
Slashdot Mirror
Doing what you suggest would mean redesigning the network protocol from the ground up right? I mean you're talking about extending X11 so that is has some new features that GTK3 needs. So assume we did that. Now what about all of those Motif features that nobody is using. Do we still maintain them? How do we implement these new extensions and keep the old features in a way that improves the appearance of using the display?
I mean X11 doesn't have an easy way to ensure your application window appears cleanly on the first screen paint. And it's full of network round trips and has quite a few state bugs. How do you improve motif apps so that they don't look like motif apps?
There is so much in the X11 protocol that needs to be deprecated, that at this point you might as well throw it all away and build a better network protocol to replace it. Ok, so the Wayland devs aren't trying to design a new network protocol, but they're also not stopping the community from attempting to build one. Why not get all of the Qt, GTK, wxWidgets etc people into a room and hash out a new standard that they can all agree on.
All the Wayland devs are doing is following the traditional Unix philosophy. Take apart the features of the old monolithic XServer, define the pieces that we need to run a display. Shift features into the kernel that should be in the kernel. Shift the application remoting network protocol up a layer into a client of the compositor.
Oh, and in case you haven't noticed, there's nothing stopping you from remotely accessing the entire composited desktop via RDP or similar.
Using fingerprint scanners for logging into PC's has demonstrated their uselessness. So you want the operator of a firearm to stuff around getting their thumb to scan correctly in a situation where aiming a gun is literally a matter of life and death (not necessarily the holder of the weapon, but lets assume self defence for the sake of argument).
Printing money that then sits in a bank vault doesn't cause inflation. Bernanke massively increased base money, with practically no effect on any other measure of the money in circulation.
We've been trying to invent those essential AI algorithms for the last 50-ish years. What makes you think we'll magically succeed in the next 15?
Sure processing power and storage have been growing rapidly over that time scale, but we still can't make a computer do anything other than what we tell it to do.
Sure it's easy to model the spread of a virus. It's another thing entirely to write one that can run on every commodity access point, with sufficient CPU power to crack all nearby passwords / keys.
You can't assume that all 5500km of panels will output at full power. You could probably get a better approximation of power output based on the area of panels as seen from the sun, multiplied by the peak output of a panel in direct sunlight.
Banks make money primarily from interest on loans. They have a financial incentive to encourage the rest of society to borrow ever increasing amounts. That extra credit will flow around the economy and convince us that we're doing better than we were last year.
In an asset bubble, where the exact same asset is being exchanged for larger and larger amounts. Where each successive buyer has to borrow more and more money from a bank in order to win the auction. Who is the ultimately responsible for pushing up the price? The buyer? The seller? Or the bank manager greedily thinking of all the extra interest he will get?
Increasing credit so that people can speculate on asset prices is exactly what caused the financial crisis. We as a society had become dependant on that continuous increase in credit to keep our illusion of wealth alive. So when the inevitable finally happened and bank managers ran out or greater fools willing to borrow more, the economy collapsed.
There may be some need for banks to fund entrepreneurs, but they haven't been doing that at all. No, the current banking sector is a parasite, that has gradually convinced us to give them all of our disposable income. They don't make anything, they survive by sucking money from the productive sectors of society. They have taken the place of feudal Lords, gradually convincing the rest of us to pay them rent just so we can have a roof over our heads.
It's not impossible for them to be the same though. You could implement a gift card / store credit system using a crypto transaction model almost identical to bitcoin. Though you might want to eliminate the "mining" of new coins, and only allow your trusted server to produce blocks. You could still use the same publicly verifiable block chain validation process.
Supposedly they are wiping ethanol onto the glass, so you can still smell it. But I'm not certain that would fool everyone.
Sometimes what is being tested is revealed, at least in a vague sense, but how it's being tested is a secret. So they put you through some kind of fake test, but prime you with something else and measure if that changes your behaviour.
And there's the rub. In the US you are used to paying for an ISP connection based on it's peak speed. There's an incentive for an ISP to advertise a high link speed, without pricing in the cost of the back end capacity to deliver it.
Every time some set of US customers attempt to use their stated bandwidth, there has been this outcry from the ISP's that they can afford to provide the service they promised. While on the other hand, there's a massive revolt every time some ISP attempts to impose monthly bandwidth allowances so they know they can afford to provide that level of service.
You can't have it both ways.
Here in Australia we're used to paying for a connection based on monthly bandwidth allowances. Though ISP's have sold plans with no allowance limit, these plans are usually expensive, and only used by customers that will attempt to use it.
However, the creationists are not interested in being proved wrong as much as punching holes in the other side's arguments so they can say they "won" and gain legitimacy for their point of view. They are not interested in the scientific method, as far as they are concerned the Bible says it so it must be true.
If you're talking about Ken Ham, I agree with you. Just be careful not to paint everyone with that stereotype.
It's called "about:memory" and it shows you memory allocation in all kinds of fine or coarse grained ways. And it's been almost continually improved for the past couple of years, while the big issues this page has revealed have been fixed.
Before your deadline of 3 days, did you ever give an estimate of the outstanding effort?
Jumping into a project like that, I'd start by telling them how long it will take to get a feel for the current code base and pull a large number out of the air for the rest. Over time you should be refining that estimate as you learn more and start fleshing out the scope of unfinished / untested work.
If they haven't had a competent process for tracking requirements, deadlines, effort, testing, .... Then all of these jobs fall on your shoulders. Don't just do the work they tell you to do, always try to list the things that haven't been done with a rough guess for how much effort it will take.
1. Start writing new automated tests for the existing features of the application.
2. Run them against the original, unmodified code.
3. When your changes break the tests, work out what *you* did wrong, before you commit your changes.
How can you get anything done if you don't find out quickly that you broke something?
$900 payout + first home owners boost + NBN + solar rebate + insulation rebate + school building program.....
Every stimulus program Labour started put money directly in tax payers pockets. All of them together had a huge impact on our economy.
Personally I'd say the first home owners boost had the biggest long term impact as it encouraged people to buy just as our housing bubble was starting to burst. Though prices started to fall / stagnate after the boost ended, the housing market is heading upwards again. Without that boost, housing prices could have plummeted and triggered all kinds of strife through banks and investment funds that were exposed.
The housing bubble will eventually burst though. It's just a matter of time.
Nope. US Fed did what is required from the start, so the recession in the US turned out to be far more shallow than in Europe (where the ECB blundered for several years). In Japan it's the contrast is even more stark - after a decade of slow stagnation and deflation (or near-deflation) they started growing almost immediately after the central bank and the government decided to be 'irresponsible'.
And yet Australia, which gave cash to tax payers instead of bank managers, did even better. But even though Australia completely avoided a technical recession, all they have done is delay the inevitable.
When you start modelling money and debt, global economies still look very sick indeed.
Having software that searches your own database of contacts might be acceptable. Searching a database containing everyone? No thanks.
And how many times has malware started to take advantage of bugs that Microsoft just patched?
There are people who examine every change to find the backdoors that have been closed so they can attack them on unpatched machines. Do you think they'd ignore a backdoor that was just opened?
Most of that catalog listed firmware and bootloader hacks to patch an OS in memory. Most firmware is horribly buggy and rarely updated. Getting your payload into windows / android / iOS directly runs the very great risk of being noticed.
If their vote gets a bill passed, they can.
And all because their traffic capture only logged the start time of each torrent download. So obviously in future they will try to log the end time as well so they can charge everyone who was downloading at the same time.
cut spending
That's great, but you can't. I mean, sure you can reallocate spending to more productive long term investments. But government spending is private sector income. If you unilaterally cut spending in the middle of this volatile financial crisis, it will be like 1937 all over again. In 1937, they believed that the depression was over and the "New Deal" spending initiatives should be rolled back. Almost immediately unemployment started to rise, and GDP fell plunging the economy back into recession.
What eventually helped the US out of the Great Depression? WWII spending. This finally reduced the level of private debt to serviceable levels. While increasing industrial capacity and output. We're not going to get out of this financial situation until we learn the lessons of history.
Input events are usually time-stamped by the operating system interrupts that captured them. On network games, these timestamps can be used by the server to work out after the fact who shot first. While pro-gamers like to say that frame rates higher than the monitor refresh rate help them win. I have yet to see a double blind study to confirm that it actually helps.
Usually network latency is a much bigger and more noticeable problem for this type of after the fact simulation. But the process can be applied equally well to local input events.
No, the frame rate doesn't matter. Sure you don't want to drop below 60fps. But that doesn't mean you need to render more than 60fps.
Above 60fps, without waiting for vsync, only a fragment of your rendered frame can possibly be displayed. I have wondered if graphics drivers can take advantage of this to only run the final fragment shader passes for the fragment of the screen that will be drawn.