As someone else pointed out, you get much better compression with high-resolution, as there is much more repetition in blocks. This is apparently very high resolution, so compression might go pretty well.
Also, as I noted somewhere else in this thread, Set-Top boxes will much precede this being common on computers. Like you said, decoder chips are much easier. In addition, the set-top boxes will probably support the media capable of holding such a thing before it becomes widly available on computers (it will, of course, be available, just not widely available).
However, you may be wrong about the display being so bad. One of the biggest changes is probably framerate, and most all screens already have refresh rates over double most video frame-rates. Although a good screen would be needed, I'm not sure it's entirely beyond what we have.
If you're wondering what I mean by better on current screens, check out the OpenEXR image format and see how much better a high-quality image can get. Because, damn.
Not saying anything against marketing, just saying that the date of product uptake and the date of marketing uptake are not only not the same date, they are not even related dates.
So, basically marketting is a many-colored super-tiger which can shred many things, but also protect the weak and lead young children out of the wilderness.
"So, given that I'm being optimistic with a date of January 1st, 2005, I really believe that the alternative OS's will have at least two full years before being in any danger from the MS Marketing Machine."
The issue is equally much how strongly Microsoft can get Longhorn onto newly-bought boxes. That's always been where they used their monopoly and marketing sway.
Also, the marketing machine goes into effect LONG before they have any products. Just look at the way Intel got everyone to benchmark the new Athlon64 against the P4 Extreme, even though that won't be out for over a month, then began leaking crap about some new God chip they'll have next year, even though it's total crap.
Well, I'm assuming they haven't worked on compression much yet. A little compression, and you can probably pull that down to about 500 gigs for 18 minutes. Of course, the processor to decompress and run it in realtime will need to be a couple dozen generations ahead.
More importantly, it'll be in set-top boxes designed for it before it's on our computers, and in theatres before that.
Has anybody considered applying this sort of stuff to computer algorithms? Not neccesarily this alone or specifically, but in general. This seems to say a lot about how the human mind works, and we still see the human mind in many ways far outpacing computers. In fact, in most things which are small-scale and not straight-computation, the human mind is incredibly superior.
Is there any research into applying these studies of the ways in which the mind works to making computer algorithms which emulate the human mind?
I suppose there are already perfectly good electronic readers out there, but this seems to be a general statement about human thought, not something specific to reading. Humans view things as encapsulated wholes, rather than ordered wholes.
Can computers be made to operate like this, accepting something with disorganized interiors as identical to something with organized interiors, if the interiors are the same?
On a similar note, which should a computer consider more similar, a scrambled interior, or an erroneous interior? For example, which of these two are most similar:
emxalpe
example
exame
If comparing straight difference between the ends, the first has the same contents, but is 100% different if you include organization. The other, however, is 60% the same and only 40% different. Which should an algorithm consider more correct?
Hmm...maybe Slashdot isn't the place to ask this question.
Well, I personally like to have the CD on hand. I have several random boxes around, and occasionally do an install for a friend. All things considered, I do an install about four times a year, although almost never on my home system. I KNOW I'll need the ISO sometime, so I might as well get it while it's hot.
50 million people signed a do-not-call list because it is possible to enforce and because the problem has been around for years. This is a really NEW problem, and it's getting plenty of attention. It is only a problem for regular internet users if these current measures fail.
You can't expect an issue to be a problem to people so quickly. If I did not read Slashdot, I wouldn't care about this. Why? The last time I mistyped an address was longer ago than I can remember. After all, I'm a decent typist and usually follow links. This is being dealt with by the organizations and individuals for whom it is a problem.
The interesting thing about deep-frying is that is DOESN'T destroy the surfacing. It just makes it malleable. Oil boils at a fairly low temp, so its not as destructive a boiling water. If you dip it in the deep frying, you'll get a bit of a pinch where you were holding it with tongs, then it was sag slightly from that point. You'll also have 5-10 seconds after it comes out where it will still be malleable.
I guess I'm the only person that doesn't really think that sounds nice. I usually find that I can get what I want easier as sources, and that is really nice. I know, most things have debian packages, but I've found I have a tendency to only need things which don't. Might just be me however (or they don't post their debian packages in their binary packages lists, which would be really weird). Also, I run CVS almost half the time, so...yeah.
Actually, its neither elitist nor hipocrisy. The.museum domain is for museums. Their page points you to a list of museums and an information page about the museum pages. VeriSign points you at adds, while they are running.net and.com, which have almost anything on earth hosted on them.
The difference? The museum redirect is useful, the VeriSign redirect is useless and profiteering.
Actually, it doesn't seem like it is being tolerated. That's three major lawsuits in about two weeks, as well as a pretty strong message from ICANN about it, as well as a couple other people and organizations. Not doesn't seem like 'tolerance' to me
Actually, Slack is often great for Newbies (gimme a second to explain).
I started on SuSE, then Mandrake, then Redhat, then went to Slack. All in the span of two months. Why? I have a tendency to break systems. I like to do whatever the hell I want with them, and all those other ones seemed to expect some sort of default behavior. Mandrake's common menu system was so difficult to make work Exactly as I wanted that I pitched the Distro (no, that wasn't the only problem).
In general, if you are just starting with Linux and want to Really LEARN about Linux, not just use it, Slackware is great. The big advantage is that everything Does work in Slackware. With the others, I would try something and it wouldn't work, so I thought I had fucked up.
However, it was just as common that they had some custom setup shit which made normal changes not work properly. You HAD to use their tools, and their tools didn't do everything. Slackware doesn't do that.
I don't understand why people rave so much about Apt. Why is it so superior? Oh, I can type apt-get whatever and get it? Similarly, I can download it and install it myself. Odds are, I don't want to install something without going to its home-page anyway.
Why not? Well, groups that can't even explain why their system is good usually don't have a good product. And I don't want to install crap and find out its crap for myself. I'd rather read about it and avoid it.
And, how-the-hell is it competing with OpenBSD? OpenBSD offers security, Slackware offers more up-to-date packages that any other distro, and is stable. Where's the relationship?
Slackware gives you a lot of power, since it doesn't fuck with much.
Although there are occasionally packages that are patched, you can find out what the patches are and change them. If you order the source CD, you don't get the patches sources. You get the original sources and the patches. If you need to administer a system and ever need to customize something, that can be a life-saver.
Also, stuff is installed as it wants to be. That means you can compile anything from source and it will work right. (Okay, it might not, but it almost always has for me. The biggest change I've ever needed was to add something to my path variable).
In addition, you can usually get up-to-date programs with Slack. Although Slackware is usually fairly close to bleeding edge in Current, it isn't really buggy. The only bug I have encountered in all of Slackware 9.0 is that Qt Designer has errors when inserting widgets from KDElibs, and that can be fixed by rebuilding from source or redownloading just that package from Slackware Current (I don't know when they fixed it, but it didn't take long).
Furthermore, all of the configuration is essentially done by hand. I know, that sounds bad, but it's really kinda nice. For most important configurations, it has a configuration script. You can re-run it whenever you want, and it makes a fully readable config file. If you ever want to change how it configures things, you can just edit a script and its done. No fancy configuration tools which are broken half the time (the only tools I've found to work reliably are the proprietary Yast ones from SuSE).
Single CD. Makes for easier copying, sharing, storing, replacing, everythinging...yet still manages to have More packages I want than anything but Debian, which has almost everything I don't want.
Hmm...lets see. I tried using Mandrake, and SuSE, and Redhat.
Well, the Redhat 9.0 installer was broken out of the box, so that was a no-go. Can't say if the actual system was fine, since it crashed three times in a row and then I deep-fried the CD.
Mandrake looked kinda cool, had nice tools. Unfortunately, the configuration tools were broken. They worked MOST of the time. Didn't really cut it. I was better off doing it by hand, because then I never broke anything, and I could still make any changes I wanted. (I never did find a way to set up dual-head)
SuSE was the only one with real power. That was kinda nice. Good configuration and everything. But that proprietary tool-set threw me off, since I wasn't apparently allowed to give friends free copied of the CDs. That made it not acceptable.
Then there was Debian. Real good, I guess. Happens to have the worst installation ever. Gives you some base stuff, then a completely counter-intuitive package manager which is virtually impossible to use. Now, people tell me things like I should use the X version of the package installer...oh, wait. I'm setting up a server without X. But, just go to the websites of things, and then find the packages, and then...Wait a second, if I use Slackware, I've already got them installed in the easy to use incredibly light text-based installer.
Of yeah, and what happens when you happen to want to install a box just to share out storage, and you happen to want your install to be...oh...30 megs? Wait, RedHat says that's impossible, same with SuSE and Mandrake. Where does all their shit come into that package? Can't say Debian is that bloated, as I stopped dealing with its crap a while ago.
Oh, and if you're only referring to dependency checking, I've never really cared. I just install it, run it, and see what causes the seg-fault. Of course, some project managers also list what they depend on, in which case I just download what I need without some stupid app holding my hand through it. And, don't tell me its because I'm an old hand at Linux or something, because I've just been using it upwards of a year, and I had never touched a command-line before then. And the Slackware installer was still better in my opinion (it has never crashed, the others have).
I believe that the parent was not referring to how fucked up they are, but whether or not they have any value. Many people on Slashdot say to abolish IP entirely, which is totally separate from fixing it.
I did not say that they were evil in their entirety or avoidable, just that they are inherently evil, as are very many things.
The method of lobbying by money using corporate power exploits flaws in the political system which cannot be repaired by any political models proposed to date.
That does not mean that using those holes is not wrong, just a stealing from someone who cannot stop it (such as the RIAA) is wrong.
Its because using their methods is an inherent evil. To do so would be to lessen ourselves more than simply losing the fight will do. That is why many people fight so hard yet still have difficulty winning.
I just keep wishing they would put together a group for dealing with the stuff When It Hits.
I mean, odds are something will slip by sometimes, or something will come that we can't deflect. That doesn't mean we're all fucked, but we will need to have a plan to deal with it and contain the damage.
> Ditch the Foot/K-gear and replace it with a standard menu button, something like start but better.
Who gives a shit, if it's in the lower left corner.
> Unify font/color configuartion. So when I choose green with arial size 12 on KDE my gtk programs comply too.
That's more making one utility edit both GTK+ and Qt, not GNOME and KDE.
> Common shortcuts. For example, to open a tab on Konqueror you have to press ctrl+shift+n while mozilla and freinds use ctrl+t, Konqueror should switch to ctrl+t!
Yeah, Konqueror should switch its tab shortcut, but it really isn't that important. Now, if they had really easy to configure shortcuts in everything, that'd actually be useful, because then the DISTRO could make it work, which is fine by me.
> Standards for icons/emblems/backgrounds
WTF standard would this be? You mean format? They already both accept all the standard formats. Sizing? It's not like I want all my icons identical size anyway. I want the menu different from the desktop, and that different from the toolbar. And I don't really care if every toolbar is identical.
> Unified help/control system (man and/etc don't count), we need to be using gconf&scrollkeeper!
Why on earth would we use gconf & scrollkeeper? Is it in any way superior to anything else? Not that KDE beats it really. Their help system isn't even searchable from inside of it, because they haven't thought of such Obvious ideas yet. As far as GOOD help goes, I'd say OpenOffice has the best large help system of any OSS item. And that's not modular. Should they then just write a new help system? Yes. Yes, they should. And it shouldn't suck like their old attempts do. (On a personal rant-note, the help system should have a quick-loader deamon, so it isn't the slowest loading item in the system. When I want help, I want it now, and their current attempt loads slower than any portion of KOffice, and that is sad.)
> STANDRARD BUTTON ORDER! THIS THE MOST IMPORTANT! And make it easy to switch. People usually say yes or no! Not no or yes in real life.
Standard button order? HTF does that relate to the Desktop Environment? That's IN THE PROGRAMS. It's something that should be done according to Usability Guidelines, and would be fine if ANYBODY thought about it when making their programs. Also, most programs have different button sets.
Slashdot Mirror
As someone else pointed out, you get much better compression with high-resolution, as there is much more repetition in blocks. This is apparently very high resolution, so compression might go pretty well.
Also, as I noted somewhere else in this thread, Set-Top boxes will much precede this being common on computers. Like you said, decoder chips are much easier. In addition, the set-top boxes will probably support the media capable of holding such a thing before it becomes widly available on computers (it will, of course, be available, just not widely available).
However, you may be wrong about the display being so bad. One of the biggest changes is probably framerate, and most all screens already have refresh rates over double most video frame-rates. Although a good screen would be needed, I'm not sure it's entirely beyond what we have.
If you're wondering what I mean by better on current screens, check out the OpenEXR image format and see how much better a high-quality image can get. Because, damn.
Not saying anything against marketing, just saying that the date of product uptake and the date of marketing uptake are not only not the same date, they are not even related dates.
So, basically marketting is a many-colored super-tiger which can shred many things, but also protect the weak and lead young children out of the wilderness.
It also tells people where MS is going so they can try to beat it. They don't need to imitate something to learn from it.
"So, given that I'm being optimistic with a date of January 1st, 2005, I really believe that the alternative OS's will have at least two full years before being in any danger from the MS Marketing Machine."
The issue is equally much how strongly Microsoft can get Longhorn onto newly-bought boxes. That's always been where they used their monopoly and marketing sway.
Also, the marketing machine goes into effect LONG before they have any products. Just look at the way Intel got everyone to benchmark the new Athlon64 against the P4 Extreme, even though that won't be out for over a month, then began leaking crap about some new God chip they'll have next year, even though it's total crap.
Marketing and production are unrelated creatures.
Well, I'm assuming they haven't worked on compression much yet. A little compression, and you can probably pull that down to about 500 gigs for 18 minutes. Of course, the processor to decompress and run it in realtime will need to be a couple dozen generations ahead.
More importantly, it'll be in set-top boxes designed for it before it's on our computers, and in theatres before that.
Has anybody considered applying this sort of stuff to computer algorithms? Not neccesarily this alone or specifically, but in general. This seems to say a lot about how the human mind works, and we still see the human mind in many ways far outpacing computers. In fact, in most things which are small-scale and not straight-computation, the human mind is incredibly superior.
Is there any research into applying these studies of the ways in which the mind works to making computer algorithms which emulate the human mind?
I suppose there are already perfectly good electronic readers out there, but this seems to be a general statement about human thought, not something specific to reading. Humans view things as encapsulated wholes, rather than ordered wholes.
Can computers be made to operate like this, accepting something with disorganized interiors as identical to something with organized interiors, if the interiors are the same?
On a similar note, which should a computer consider more similar, a scrambled interior, or an erroneous interior? For example, which of these two are most similar:
emxalpe
example
exame
If comparing straight difference between the ends, the first has the same contents, but is 100% different if you include organization. The other, however, is 60% the same and only 40% different. Which should an algorithm consider more correct?
Hmm...maybe Slashdot isn't the place to ask this question.
Well, I personally like to have the CD on hand. I have several random boxes around, and occasionally do an install for a friend. All things considered, I do an install about four times a year, although almost never on my home system. I KNOW I'll need the ISO sometime, so I might as well get it while it's hot.
Did you notice that the 'minimal' install size is 130 megs?
50 million people signed a do-not-call list because it is possible to enforce and because the problem has been around for years. This is a really NEW problem, and it's getting plenty of attention. It is only a problem for regular internet users if these current measures fail.
You can't expect an issue to be a problem to people so quickly. If I did not read Slashdot, I wouldn't care about this. Why? The last time I mistyped an address was longer ago than I can remember. After all, I'm a decent typist and usually follow links. This is being dealt with by the organizations and individuals for whom it is a problem.
The interesting thing about deep-frying is that is DOESN'T destroy the surfacing. It just makes it malleable. Oil boils at a fairly low temp, so its not as destructive a boiling water. If you dip it in the deep frying, you'll get a bit of a pinch where you were holding it with tongs, then it was sag slightly from that point. You'll also have 5-10 seconds after it comes out where it will still be malleable.
I guess I'm the only person that doesn't really think that sounds nice. I usually find that I can get what I want easier as sources, and that is really nice. I know, most things have debian packages, but I've found I have a tendency to only need things which don't. Might just be me however (or they don't post their debian packages in their binary packages lists, which would be really weird). Also, I run CVS almost half the time, so...yeah.
Actually, its neither elitist nor hipocrisy. The .museum domain is for museums. Their page points you to a list of museums and an information page about the museum pages. VeriSign points you at adds, while they are running .net and .com, which have almost anything on earth hosted on them.
The difference? The museum redirect is useful, the VeriSign redirect is useless and profiteering.
Actually, it doesn't seem like it is being tolerated. That's three major lawsuits in about two weeks, as well as a pretty strong message from ICANN about it, as well as a couple other people and organizations. Not doesn't seem like 'tolerance' to me
I suggest you save this joke for the next Mandrake of Redhat release. It doesn't fit so well with Slackware, Debian Stable, or SuSE.
Actually, Slack is often great for Newbies (gimme a second to explain).
I started on SuSE, then Mandrake, then Redhat, then went to Slack. All in the span of two months. Why? I have a tendency to break systems. I like to do whatever the hell I want with them, and all those other ones seemed to expect some sort of default behavior. Mandrake's common menu system was so difficult to make work Exactly as I wanted that I pitched the Distro (no, that wasn't the only problem).
In general, if you are just starting with Linux and want to Really LEARN about Linux, not just use it, Slackware is great. The big advantage is that everything Does work in Slackware. With the others, I would try something and it wouldn't work, so I thought I had fucked up.
However, it was just as common that they had some custom setup shit which made normal changes not work properly. You HAD to use their tools, and their tools didn't do everything. Slackware doesn't do that.
I don't understand why people rave so much about Apt. Why is it so superior? Oh, I can type apt-get whatever and get it? Similarly, I can download it and install it myself. Odds are, I don't want to install something without going to its home-page anyway.
Why not? Well, groups that can't even explain why their system is good usually don't have a good product. And I don't want to install crap and find out its crap for myself. I'd rather read about it and avoid it.
And, how-the-hell is it competing with OpenBSD? OpenBSD offers security, Slackware offers more up-to-date packages that any other distro, and is stable. Where's the relationship?
Slackware gives you a lot of power, since it doesn't fuck with much.
Although there are occasionally packages that are patched, you can find out what the patches are and change them. If you order the source CD, you don't get the patches sources. You get the original sources and the patches. If you need to administer a system and ever need to customize something, that can be a life-saver.
Also, stuff is installed as it wants to be. That means you can compile anything from source and it will work right. (Okay, it might not, but it almost always has for me. The biggest change I've ever needed was to add something to my path variable).
In addition, you can usually get up-to-date programs with Slack. Although Slackware is usually fairly close to bleeding edge in Current, it isn't really buggy. The only bug I have encountered in all of Slackware 9.0 is that Qt Designer has errors when inserting widgets from KDElibs, and that can be fixed by rebuilding from source or redownloading just that package from Slackware Current (I don't know when they fixed it, but it didn't take long).
Furthermore, all of the configuration is essentially done by hand. I know, that sounds bad, but it's really kinda nice. For most important configurations, it has a configuration script. You can re-run it whenever you want, and it makes a fully readable config file. If you ever want to change how it configures things, you can just edit a script and its done. No fancy configuration tools which are broken half the time (the only tools I've found to work reliably are the proprietary Yast ones from SuSE).
Single CD. Makes for easier copying, sharing, storing, replacing, everythinging...yet still manages to have More packages I want than anything but Debian, which has almost everything I don't want.
Hmm...lets see. I tried using Mandrake, and SuSE, and Redhat.
Well, the Redhat 9.0 installer was broken out of the box, so that was a no-go. Can't say if the actual system was fine, since it crashed three times in a row and then I deep-fried the CD.
Mandrake looked kinda cool, had nice tools. Unfortunately, the configuration tools were broken. They worked MOST of the time. Didn't really cut it. I was better off doing it by hand, because then I never broke anything, and I could still make any changes I wanted. (I never did find a way to set up dual-head)
SuSE was the only one with real power. That was kinda nice. Good configuration and everything. But that proprietary tool-set threw me off, since I wasn't apparently allowed to give friends free copied of the CDs. That made it not acceptable.
Then there was Debian. Real good, I guess. Happens to have the worst installation ever. Gives you some base stuff, then a completely counter-intuitive package manager which is virtually impossible to use. Now, people tell me things like I should use the X version of the package installer...oh, wait. I'm setting up a server without X. But, just go to the websites of things, and then find the packages, and then...Wait a second, if I use Slackware, I've already got them installed in the easy to use incredibly light text-based installer.
Of yeah, and what happens when you happen to want to install a box just to share out storage, and you happen to want your install to be...oh...30 megs? Wait, RedHat says that's impossible, same with SuSE and Mandrake. Where does all their shit come into that package? Can't say Debian is that bloated, as I stopped dealing with its crap a while ago.
Oh, and if you're only referring to dependency checking, I've never really cared. I just install it, run it, and see what causes the seg-fault. Of course, some project managers also list what they depend on, in which case I just download what I need without some stupid app holding my hand through it. And, don't tell me its because I'm an old hand at Linux or something, because I've just been using it upwards of a year, and I had never touched a command-line before then. And the Slackware installer was still better in my opinion (it has never crashed, the others have).
I believe that the parent was not referring to how fucked up they are, but whether or not they have any value. Many people on Slashdot say to abolish IP entirely, which is totally separate from fixing it.
Actually, it's just the TLA's
I did not say that they were evil in their entirety or avoidable, just that they are inherently evil, as are very many things.
The method of lobbying by money using corporate power exploits flaws in the political system which cannot be repaired by any political models proposed to date.
That does not mean that using those holes is not wrong, just a stealing from someone who cannot stop it (such as the RIAA) is wrong.
Its because using their methods is an inherent evil. To do so would be to lessen ourselves more than simply losing the fight will do. That is why many people fight so hard yet still have difficulty winning.
I just keep wishing they would put together a group for dealing with the stuff When It Hits.
I mean, odds are something will slip by sometimes, or something will come that we can't deflect. That doesn't mean we're all fucked, but we will need to have a plan to deal with it and contain the damage.
What a bunch of useless points.
/etc don't count), we need to be using gconf&scrollkeeper!
> Ditch the Foot/K-gear and replace it with a standard menu button, something like start but better.
Who gives a shit, if it's in the lower left corner.
> Unify font/color configuartion. So when I choose green with arial size 12 on KDE my gtk programs comply too.
That's more making one utility edit both GTK+ and Qt, not GNOME and KDE.
> Common shortcuts. For example, to open a tab on Konqueror you have to press ctrl+shift+n while mozilla and freinds use ctrl+t, Konqueror should switch to ctrl+t!
Yeah, Konqueror should switch its tab shortcut, but it really isn't that important. Now, if they had really easy to configure shortcuts in everything, that'd actually be useful, because then the DISTRO could make it work, which is fine by me.
> Standards for icons/emblems/backgrounds
WTF standard would this be? You mean format? They already both accept all the standard formats. Sizing? It's not like I want all my icons identical size anyway. I want the menu different from the desktop, and that different from the toolbar. And I don't really care if every toolbar is identical.
> Unified help/control system (man and
Why on earth would we use gconf & scrollkeeper? Is it in any way superior to anything else? Not that KDE beats it really. Their help system isn't even searchable from inside of it, because they haven't thought of such Obvious ideas yet.
As far as GOOD help goes, I'd say OpenOffice has the best large help system of any OSS item. And that's not modular. Should they then just write a new help system? Yes. Yes, they should. And it shouldn't suck like their old attempts do.
(On a personal rant-note, the help system should have a quick-loader deamon, so it isn't the slowest loading item in the system. When I want help, I want it now, and their current attempt loads slower than any portion of KOffice, and that is sad.)
> STANDRARD BUTTON ORDER! THIS THE MOST IMPORTANT! And make it easy to switch. People usually say yes or no! Not no or yes in real life.
Standard button order? HTF does that relate to the Desktop Environment? That's IN THE PROGRAMS. It's something that should be done according to Usability Guidelines, and would be fine if ANYBODY thought about it when making their programs. Also, most programs have different button sets.