I can understand when occasionally the/. eds accidentally post dupe stories, but when they explicitly point out that it's a dupe in the flipping article I begin to get a bit cross. There is nothing new here - aren't there any interesting stories today that aren't dupes?
the GCC project only accepts very conservative patches generally.
This is probably a good thing for such a crucial project by and large, but it does give rise to frustration among developers (and, historically, the whole egcs and pgcc malarkeys). Perhaps they should make a permanent gcc-unstable branch, to serve the same purpose that egcs did but not just on a temporary basis. That way "risky" patches such as any Apple might submit could go into the unstable tree and gradually find their way into gcc-stable.
Possibly the bleeding-edge 2.4pre gnomes weren't mega-stable, but you expect that from a pre-release (and if some wise guy tried to sell me a business solution based on pre-release software I'd tell him where to get off). In general gnome has been fine since 1.0 (ie years ago) and KDE is also fine (if a bit slow).
You will never convince me that debian-stable crashes every 10 minutes. And while it isn't the most up-to-date, eye-candified distro around it is the ideal basis for a business solution.
That's what you get for installing binaries from an untrusted/unknown source.
How long have the RIAA been making noises about hacking people's computers to delete illegal mp3s? And after this, people are still happy to trust that a binary program from a very mysterious organization isn't just a piece of RIAA spy/malware? Quick, break out the cluebats...
No. Just like there's no way to share the original binary for Windows semi-anonymously around the Internet. Given an engine[0], if you can share the data there's very little point in DRMing anything else...
[0] The engine is usually smaller to warez than the data - even at 100MB uncompressed.
I know I'm posting late so no-one will ever read this, but doesn't Microsoft fsck over all their DRM credentials WRT WinXP if they allow a virtualisable version of it to run like this? Surely it is possible to run a virtualised WinXP and a virtualised linux; use the WinXP to decode encrypted or one-time DVDs etc. and use a kernel module in the virtualised linux to read the memory (or swap file) and blat them to TVout, a different format, lineout etc.
Not a bad idea. By allowing other people to port the code to different OSes they could get some instant karma, save themselves some effort and get a bigger potential market all in one go. After all, people would still have to buy the game to get the datafiles.
The only problem is if the code contains third-party stuff like sound modules, physics engines etc.
Does this mean I can finally record that rock opera I've always dreamed about?
No more than it means you are suddenly Steve Vai. If you can record a rock opera now, you could have done so before - you just need to get off your butt and do it. Whether this will drastically alter the cost of recording is a moot point - I doubt it'll change very much due to the remaining need for a good physical studio.
But if you want to record your rock opera badly enough then you'll get the money from somewhere, whether it's from working shitty jobs 18 hours a day or just putting a little aside each month for a couple of years. I have friends who have gone out and made records and believe me, it's determination that gets things done, not cheapness. If it were free to climb Everest from tomorrow, would that mean you could finally go out and climb it? Perhaps, but for most people the answer would still be no - there's a lot more to it than cost, and you can always get round the cost problems if you want something badly enough.
Well, yes - but that's as in "good teaching of bright kids". If you're teaching thickies you have to go more slowly, if you're teaching clever 'uns you can speed up. I would have thought judging the pace of a lesson to be appropriate to the students you're teaching was rather self-evident.
Why would it be better to compare linux to solaris if you're trying to find out how linux performance is developing? How solaris performs is totally irrelevant, except as an idea of what other people can do - it has nothing to do with understanding the effect of changes made to the linux kernel.
That's fine for music, there's no way the studios can get round it. But I can't think of an easy equivalent for video - if the DRM software and OS itself is flawless you can still copy the audio using the line-in patch cable but the equivalent for video would be to put a camcorder up to your screen (sucky quality) or build a system to plug into the monitor socket, grab frames from it and encode them as video (sounds fiercely difficult and expensive).
I don't see why this gets +5, Funny. It should be +5, Insightful. Or possibly -1, Redundant, as RMS has been warning about exactly this danger [gnu.org] since the dawn of time. (Sorry, the link isn't precise but it's in there somewhere..)
It cuts both wawys - the bad thing about greater uniformity among ATMs is that exploits discovered on one machine can be run on many machines. They might be fixed/quicker/, but say it's a really awkward problem to fix and requires 2 days to fix (quicker than most Windows patches are released, but I'm assuming Bill is being personally kicked up the arse by bankers the world over during these 2 days): the banks can either take down all their ATMs for 2 days (mega loss of face) or be ripped off for 2 days (mega loss of cash). Not an envialbe choice.
C++ is a superset of C isn't it? So C is allowed too. I think maybe you have to bung some preprocessor macros in to keep the compiler happy but that's about it. Having said that, looking at the choice of languages they've made I suspect the task in question will probably be seriously easier in an OO language.
The problem that made me ditch koffice (the Mandrake 9.1 version) was that if you created a page with a background image and then tried to put frames on top there was no way of making the frame borders totally invisible in the final printout. This flaw may well have been fixed, I haven't tried kword since, but it's pretty sucky that no-one noticed it...
This gets announced so soon after the new nmap, which will make it easier for both white and black hats to find vulnerable hosts. I'm not saying it's good, I'm not saying it's bad - but now's the time to find those hosts, black hat or white hat!
Hoho, you think our public transport is good? You should come and use it some time...
Anyway: as a UK driver I have to say that the single most dangerous category of driver is the idiot who drives around everywhere at 40mph (when the speed limit is generally 60mph). This kind of behaviour, while sensible and laudable in appalling weather conditions, is dangerous at other times because the conditions allow people to drive perfectly safely at the speed limit. I've seen many, many otherwise perfectly good, safe drivers become raging psychopaths behind such people, and while you can make the argument that we should just sit there and take it and be calm, it's a fatuous argument; you could equally well say we should be calm about drivers who sit 3 feet from our tail, or who continually honk their horns and flash their lights. The truth remains that in all these cases - the tail-sitters, the horn-honkers and the 40mph brigade - it is totally antisocial driving behaviour. If they're too old or unconfident to drive safely at the speed limit they should have their driving licenses taken off them.
You don't get it. If Ford start using gnumeric it'll be Microsoft Office that "only" hits 99.99% compatibility with gnumeric - Ford is the 800lb gorilla that can make all its business partners use whatever software it likes - heck, Ford can probably make its suppliers' CEOs belly-dance naked in front of the board for a chance to remain a supplier...
Re:Application programming is a dying paradigm
on
Ford To Move To Linux
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, and they're all written in bloody shockwave bloody director, which means they're about as cross-platform as a non-derailed train. Sheesh, Macromedia have released a flash plugin for linux, why can't they do the same for director?
Yeah, I know 90% of the stuff written using it is tosh, but the same is true for any programming language. Oh yes it is....
Your argument seems to be that only those people using Open Source opersting systems should be able to use other Open Source software. Why should this be? Would you prevent people using the GNU tools under Windows, or cygwin, or GIMP on Windows? While I think it's great when I see someone switch to Linux, the reason I think it's great is just that that person will have a better computing experience.
In the end, everyone is free to use the tools that suit them best. If they happen to find a combination of Windows and OpenSource applications ideal for them, who are we to argue?
On the whole I think you're probably right. However, your very simple reason for not having 100% efficient cells is tosh. The fact that there are windows in the way of the cells doesn't affect the efficiency of the cells themselves, just the incident light available to them. It affects the efficiency of the window, but not the cells. The efficiency of the cells themselves is a constant whether they are in outer space, behind glass or encased in a block of lead at the bottom of a mineshaft.
Apart from that, your scepticism seems pretty much on the mark.
Re:A lot of /.ers will have zero power bills w/ th
on
Solar Window Panes
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
I can understand when occasionally the /. eds accidentally post dupe stories, but when they explicitly point out that it's a dupe in the flipping article I begin to get a bit cross. There is nothing new here - aren't there any interesting stories today that aren't dupes?
the GCC project only accepts very conservative patches generally.
This is probably a good thing for such a crucial project by and large, but it does give rise to frustration among developers (and, historically, the whole egcs and pgcc malarkeys). Perhaps they should make a permanent gcc-unstable branch, to serve the same purpose that egcs did but not just on a temporary basis. That way "risky" patches such as any Apple might submit could go into the unstable tree and gradually find their way into gcc-stable.
Possibly the bleeding-edge 2.4pre gnomes weren't mega-stable, but you expect that from a pre-release (and if some wise guy tried to sell me a business solution based on pre-release software I'd tell him where to get off). In general gnome has been fine since 1.0 (ie years ago) and KDE is also fine (if a bit slow).
You will never convince me that debian-stable crashes every 10 minutes. And while it isn't the most up-to-date, eye-candified distro around it is the ideal basis for a business solution.
That's what you get for installing binaries from an untrusted/unknown source.
How long have the RIAA been making noises about hacking people's computers to delete illegal mp3s? And after this, people are still happy to trust that a binary program from a very mysterious organization isn't just a piece of RIAA spy/malware? Quick, break out the cluebats...
No. Just like there's no way to share the original binary for Windows semi-anonymously around the Internet. Given an engine[0], if you can share the data there's very little point in DRMing anything else... [0] The engine is usually smaller to warez than the data - even at 100MB uncompressed.
I know I'm posting late so no-one will ever read this, but doesn't Microsoft fsck over all their DRM credentials WRT WinXP if they allow a virtualisable version of it to run like this? Surely it is possible to run a virtualised WinXP and a virtualised linux; use the WinXP to decode encrypted or one-time DVDs etc. and use a kernel module in the virtualised linux to read the memory (or swap file) and blat them to TVout, a different format, lineout etc.
Not a bad idea. By allowing other people to port the code to different OSes they could get some instant karma, save themselves some effort and get a bigger potential market all in one go. After all, people would still have to buy the game to get the datafiles.
The only problem is if the code contains third-party stuff like sound modules, physics engines etc.
Does this mean I can finally record that rock opera I've always dreamed about?
No more than it means you are suddenly Steve Vai. If you can record a rock opera now, you could have done so before - you just need to get off your butt and do it. Whether this will drastically alter the cost of recording is a moot point - I doubt it'll change very much due to the remaining need for a good physical studio.
But if you want to record your rock opera badly enough then you'll get the money from somewhere, whether it's from working shitty jobs 18 hours a day or just putting a little aside each month for a couple of years. I have friends who have gone out and made records and believe me, it's determination that gets things done, not cheapness. If it were free to climb Everest from tomorrow, would that mean you could finally go out and climb it? Perhaps, but for most people the answer would still be no - there's a lot more to it than cost, and you can always get round the cost problems if you want something badly enough.
Well, yes - but that's as in "good teaching of bright kids". If you're teaching thickies you have to go more slowly, if you're teaching clever 'uns you can speed up. I would have thought judging the pace of a lesson to be appropriate to the students you're teaching was rather self-evident.
Why would it be better to compare linux to solaris if you're trying to find out how linux performance is developing? How solaris performs is totally irrelevant, except as an idea of what other people can do - it has nothing to do with understanding the effect of changes made to the linux kernel.
That's fine for music, there's no way the studios can get round it. But I can't think of an easy equivalent for video - if the DRM software and OS itself is flawless you can still copy the audio using the line-in patch cable but the equivalent for video would be to put a camcorder up to your screen (sucky quality) or build a system to plug into the monitor socket, grab frames from it and encode them as video (sounds fiercely difficult and expensive).
I don't see why this gets +5, Funny. It should be +5, Insightful. Or possibly -1, Redundant, as RMS has been warning about exactly this danger [gnu.org] since the dawn of time. (Sorry, the link isn't precise but it's in there somewhere..)
I wonder if they mean nuclear power facilities... What about bomber subs?
It cuts both wawys - the bad thing about greater uniformity among ATMs is that exploits discovered on one machine can be run on many machines. They might be fixed /quicker/, but say it's a really awkward problem to fix and requires 2 days to fix (quicker than most Windows patches are released, but I'm assuming Bill is being personally kicked up the arse by bankers the world over during these 2 days): the banks can either take down all their ATMs for 2 days (mega loss of face) or be ripped off for 2 days (mega loss of cash). Not an envialbe choice.
C++ is a superset of C isn't it? So C is allowed too. I think maybe you have to bung some preprocessor macros in to keep the compiler happy but that's about it. Having said that, looking at the choice of languages they've made I suspect the task in question will probably be seriously easier in an OO language.
The problem that made me ditch koffice (the Mandrake 9.1 version) was that if you created a page with a background image and then tried to put frames on top there was no way of making the frame borders totally invisible in the final printout. This flaw may well have been fixed, I haven't tried kword since, but it's pretty sucky that no-one noticed it...
This gets announced so soon after the new nmap, which will make it easier for both white and black hats to find vulnerable hosts. I'm not saying it's good, I'm not saying it's bad - but now's the time to find those hosts, black hat or white hat!
where Bill wants to go today!
That's because you've spent all your money on Microsoft software, you dolt :-)
Hoho, you think our public transport is good? You should come and use it some time...
Anyway: as a UK driver I have to say that the single most dangerous category of driver is the idiot who drives around everywhere at 40mph (when the speed limit is generally 60mph). This kind of behaviour, while sensible and laudable in appalling weather conditions, is dangerous at other times because the conditions allow people to drive perfectly safely at the speed limit. I've seen many, many otherwise perfectly good, safe drivers become raging psychopaths behind such people, and while you can make the argument that we should just sit there and take it and be calm, it's a fatuous argument; you could equally well say we should be calm about drivers who sit 3 feet from our tail, or who continually honk their horns and flash their lights. The truth remains that in all these cases - the tail-sitters, the horn-honkers and the 40mph brigade - it is totally antisocial driving behaviour. If they're too old or unconfident to drive safely at the speed limit they should have their driving licenses taken off them.
You don't get it. If Ford start using gnumeric it'll be Microsoft Office that "only" hits 99.99% compatibility with gnumeric - Ford is the 800lb gorilla that can make all its business partners use whatever software it likes - heck, Ford can probably make its suppliers' CEOs belly-dance naked in front of the board for a chance to remain a supplier...
Yeah, and they're all written in bloody shockwave bloody director, which means they're about as cross-platform as a non-derailed train. Sheesh, Macromedia have released a flash plugin for linux, why can't they do the same for director?
Yeah, I know 90% of the stuff written using it is tosh, but the same is true for any programming language. Oh yes it is....
Your argument seems to be that only those people using Open Source opersting systems should be able to use other Open Source software. Why should this be? Would you prevent people using the GNU tools under Windows, or cygwin, or GIMP on Windows? While I think it's great when I see someone switch to Linux, the reason I think it's great is just that that person will have a better computing experience.
In the end, everyone is free to use the tools that suit them best. If they happen to find a combination of Windows and OpenSource applications ideal for them, who are we to argue?
On the whole I think you're probably right. However, your very simple reason for not having 100% efficient cells is tosh. The fact that there are windows in the way of the cells doesn't affect the efficiency of the cells themselves, just the incident light available to them. It affects the efficiency of the window, but not the cells. The efficiency of the cells themselves is a constant whether they are in outer space, behind glass or encased in a block of lead at the bottom of a mineshaft.
Apart from that, your scepticism seems pretty much on the mark.
They still like to throw stones though ;-)