Sounds like they are using LinuxBIOS plus some apps for the quick boot option.
Now, the question is, will Joe User start asking himself "Why can't EVERYTHING run this quickly?", and will the companies start realizing that everything CAN, IF they port their stuff to Linux?
(NOTE: Obviously there is one company that is unlikely to take this action, but perhaps others might.)
Of course, there is always the option of embedding Windows into the system ROM as well.
The biggest fault I can see with this test depends upon sizeof(int) -
I don't know about Sun, but in some other environments in which a 32 bit and a 64 bit model exist, the compiler will always treat an int as 32 bits, so as not to cause structures to change size. Hell, even on the Alpha, which was NEVER a 32 bit platform, gcc would normally have:
IF the compiler treats an int as 4 bytes, and IF the compiler has also been informed that the CPU is a 64 bit CPU, then the compiler may be doing dumb stuff like trying to force the size of "i" to be 4 bytes, by masking it or other foolish things.
So, the question I would have is, did the author run a test to insure that the compiler was really making int's and unsigned's be 64 bits or not?
Well, you could find a DC to DC converter and use that to power the radio - just make sure you get one that has enough power to run the radio, and has an isolated frame.
I think you are on the right track with Logo, since Logo is an interpreted and interactive language.
When the kid outgrows Logo (which he will do fairly quickly), then I'd suggest moving him on to other languages that are interpreted* and interactive - that is, that allow you to type commands at the command line to see "What happens if I do it this way".
TCL, Python, Perl, Forth, Ruby, (gack)Basic(gack again) are all good ways to go in this regard.
Of course, you want to teach the kid the value of looking at somebody else's code too - just make sure you explain the difference between "extending" and "plagarism".
* Yes, technically all the modern languages are bytecompiled at runtime, but for all intents and purposes they are interpreted in that you don't have a seperate "compile/assemble/link" phase.
No, Utah isn't so bad - the Mormons figure they've won there, so they aren't so bad.
I used to live in Idaho - now THAT'S bad. There's enough Mormons to make life miserable, but they don't feel they've won, so they are still REALLY agressive.
Think about what it would be like to be a bit slinger at SCO in Utah:
First of all, SCO is looking to hire people in India - in other words, you know your job is going to be outsourced soon.
Second of all, you likely are a Unix or Linux programmer - and your company name is reviled in the industry you are in.
Third of all, if you ARE looking to move, nobody wants to hire you for fear of SCO suing them for some imagined infringment.
Fourth of all, the only company that MIGHT hire you as a bit slinger is Microsoft.
Fifth of all, you know points 3 and 4 won't change until AFTER the company collapes - and then you are out of work.
Granted, unlike soldiers in Iraq nobody is shooting at SCO employees or trying to blow them up (AND NOBODY SHOULD, EITHER!). But still, for tech jobs, being a programmer at SCO has to blow.
And what happens when they block the/16 or/12 where your small ISP resides, what do you do?
Well, let's see. First of all, you are no WORSE off than if they block the/16 or/12 you are on under $BIG_ISP.
Secondly, since SPEWS blocks unresponsive ISPs, you can call $SMALL_ISP and raise hell, and likely be listened to far more than if you call $BIG_ISP and raise hell.
Third, since $SMALL_ISP is more likely to be SEVERELY effected by having a/16 blocked, they are FAR more likely to respond and correct the problem than $BIG_ISP for whom a/16 block is a flea bite.
By that logic virtually all the major ISP should be blacklisted and all real users should find little mom and pop operated providers.
Exactly! What I recommend to anybody is, whereever possible, do business with smaller entities rather than larger entities - you will be a larger percentage of their business and will therefor be more likely to command a degree of respect from them.
Read my Journal entry about my experiences with the small ISP I use - ask yourself if you see a ScrewSpewNet or EarthPink making that kind of a call.
Fundimentally, all large ISPs are Bastard Backbone Baboons - they are big, you are small, take what we deign to give you and shut up.
The page linked is Linux World's page on SCO v. Novell - with an IBM Linux ad, featuring the face of "Linux" with the words I know you are but what am I?
over it.
EEEEVILLLL!
You KNOW that IBM had that ready and waiting for this move!
Moreover, most modern games don't get one aspect of scopes right - you can look AROUND the scope, to maintain situational awareness.
The way the old Outlaws game did it was pretty correct - you saw the zoomed view through the scope, but could see the rest of the scene around the scope. As such, if something moved out of the scope you could re-aquire it, and you could look around while waiting for that "prefect shot".
Modern games basicly "cheat" by altering the zoom ratio of the renderer and masking the display. I'd love to see a game do it right - render the zoomed view, render the scene, then put the scope view in the middle of the main view.
Also, take time-of-flight into account - the real issue with most games is the sniper rifle bullet is moving instantaniously from muzzle to target - there is no hang time of the round, no time of flight, no windage.
Add these, and watch the sniper rifle become much less useful.
So, disable Javascript by default, and enable it ONLY when necessary.
And BITCH at the websites that NEEDLESSLY require Javascript to do things that can be done with ordinary HTML.
Too damn many web content creation tools create ALL links as Javascript onclick events, with nothing but an href="#" for the HTML system. Mind you, all the javascript does is LOAD A NEW PAGE!
So, make a point of bitching at any website that does this. One of my friends is the webmaster at an internationally recognized company (no, I will not give out its name), and we go 'round and 'round on this, as he asserts that "the number of people who don't run Javascript is.001% of the total hits" (uhh, perhaps because without Javascript it is impossible to get INTO your site? Just a theory....)
Bitch (in a nice way) to the Webmasters that they don't NEED to do this - make them realize that they can use Javascript to ENHANCE a site while making the site USABLE without it.
When you received an e-mail that seems absolutely outrageous to you, its going to be hard to go spend hundreds of dollars on a lawyer. Very easy to say that you should have got a lawyer in retrospect.
And that, sir, is exactly the point behind my post.
The temptation, when faced with an outrageous claim like this is to blow it off and give some flip response.
DON'T!
That is where almost ALL of these sort of cases go south - the defendant gives some flip response and the plaintif's lawyers use that against him.
Hence why I made a point of Rule #1, and why I make that point again:
When faced with ANY threat or possiblility of legal action, SHUT UP AND GET A LAWYER.
If the claim truly is bogus, you will spend an hour of an attourney's time to be re-assured that there is no problem, and will be able to move on.
If there is a problem, then you are prepared to deal with it correctly.
(And, by the way, this is why most attourneys don't want to give out off-the-cuff advice. They want there to be a formal relationship so that privilege attaches.)
Actually, getting a lawyer in a case like this is easier if you are a college student - most colleges have legal services available for the students at reduced rates, often pro bono publica.
The first and most important rule in ANY case where somebody is threatening legal action:
SHUT UP AND GET A LAWYER!
The second most important rule:
UNTIL YOU HAVE A LAYWER, STAY SHUT UP.
Suppose somebody contacts you and says:
"You are in violation of our copyright [sic] on our site - give us the domain or we'll sue!"
The proper response is something like:
"Very interesting - OK, please give me the contact information for your law firm, and I'll have my attourney contact your attourney. I prefer to have all furthur contact through my attourney, so please route everything through your legal group."
If they persist in contacting you directly, inform them firmly that all furthur contact should go through their attourney to yours, and any direct contact is harrassment.
In a case like this one, where you ARE being contacted by the other side's legal department, then you should GET AN ATTOURNEY LICENSED TO PRACTICE IN YOUR AREA. First thing. Then route all contact through him.
Otherwise, shut up - say nothing to the other side. While it may be a civil matter rather than a criminal matter, remind yourself that "Everything I say will be used against me in court."
Patty Carey and Max Ary did a lot of dumpster-diving (junk yard diving really) for many long years, getting stuff NASA had thrown away and restoring it.
They got so good at it that when the Smithsonian was looking for folks to restore their stuff, they sent it to the Cosmosphere.
They set up a very fair comparison of the US vs. the Soviets - so fair that the Soviets started giving them artifacts.
After a while, they had a collection that was so good, when the Smithsonian started looking for museums to partner with, they started with the Cosmosphere - not just to display more of the Smithsonian's collection, but also so that the Smithsonian could gain access to and display some of the Cosmosphere's collection.
Of course, both "Apollo 13" and "From Earth To Moon" used the Cosmosphere to make the props.
Then there's the fact that when the ISS work started and astronauts needed to train on Russian gear, NASA had the Cosmosphere build the trainers, as they were the only ones who could do an authentic job.
NOTE: other than being a member of the Cosmosphere (which means I get a price break) I am not associated with the Cosmosphere in any way.
If you live near any space museum, ask them about the Cosmosphere.
And if you ever within 100 miles of Kansas, plan on making the trip - Hutch is pretty much in the middle of the state.
The problem with other "collectable" games is that after a period of time, you have collected everything that's been put out. So, as a game maker, you have to keep coming up with new things to be collected, as well as making the old things. That means your inventory keeps growing, and your costs keep going up.
With this idea, you keep making the same old things, and as the players keep playing, they USE UP their old things, and thus have to buy NEW things, but you don't have to come up with any new ideas!
BRILLIANT! ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT!
(/me removes tongue from cheek)
Unless, of course, the consumers you are targeting have a longer than 5 second attention span, or any ability to remember, communicate, or discern.
There is a simple reason you won't see a "None of the above" option in an election.
There are 2 ways you can implement a NOTA - non-binding and binding.
For the sake of discusson, assume an election is held with Larry, Moe, and Curly as candidates, and the results are:
Larry: 10% Moe: 10% Curly: 10% None of the above: 70%
The Non-Binding form works like this: Since NOTA won, run a new election with the same bunch. Remember the definition of insanity - doing the same thing, and expecting different results? The only way things change is if the people decide that Larry is better than elections ad infinitum.
The Binding form works like this: Since NOTA won, Larry, Moe, and Curly are out - here's your years supply of Rice-O-Roni and your copy of the home game, bu-bye, mind the door.
OK, now we have to pick a completely new slate of candidates, and have another round of campagning, and another election.
Now, Binding NOTA scares the hell out of the big parties, as it gives the smaller parties a real chance to win - during the first campaign, don't have your guy in the election, and run attack ads against the big boys. If you get the people to vote NOTA, THEN run your guy in the new election.
Since Binding NOTA would force the big 2 parties to be more responsive to the people, you can rest assured it will happen shortly after water freezes on a hot stove.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like they are using LinuxBIOS plus some apps for the quick boot option.
Now, the question is, will Joe User start asking himself "Why can't EVERYTHING run this quickly?", and will the companies start realizing that everything CAN, IF they port their stuff to Linux?
(NOTE: Obviously there is one company that is unlikely to take this action, but perhaps others might.)
Of course, there is always the option of embedding Windows into the system ROM as well.
(shudder)
The biggest fault I can see with this test depends upon sizeof(int) -
I don't know about Sun, but in some other environments in which a 32 bit and a 64 bit model exist, the compiler will always treat an int as 32 bits, so as not to cause structures to change size. Hell, even on the Alpha, which was NEVER a 32 bit platform, gcc would normally have:
sizeof(short) = 2
sizeof(int) = 4
sizeof(long) = 8
Now, consider the following code:
for (int i = 0; i 100; ++i)
{
frobnicate(i);
}
IF the compiler treats an int as 4 bytes, and IF the compiler has also been informed that the CPU is a 64 bit CPU, then the compiler may be doing dumb stuff like trying to force the size of "i" to be 4 bytes, by masking it or other foolish things.
So, the question I would have is, did the author run a test to insure that the compiler was really making int's and unsigned's be 64 bits or not?
Well, you could find a DC to DC converter and use that to power the radio - just make sure you get one that has enough power to run the radio, and has an isolated frame.
Try www.digikey.com for starters.
Yes, i horta hope we aren't the only ones as well.
Last I'd heard, Spirit was going to sample a rock by grinding away part of the rock's surface, then imaging the patch.
So, I think what we'll find when we finally get there is a twisted mass of acid-etched metal, and burned into the ground next to it:
NO KILL I
Ensign Naraht's mother is gonna be PISSED.
I think you are on the right track with Logo, since Logo is an interpreted and interactive language.
When the kid outgrows Logo (which he will do fairly quickly), then I'd suggest moving him on to other languages that are interpreted* and interactive - that is, that allow you to type commands at the command line to see "What happens if I do it this way".
TCL, Python, Perl, Forth, Ruby, (gack)Basic(gack again) are all good ways to go in this regard.
Of course, you want to teach the kid the value of looking at somebody else's code too - just make sure you explain the difference between "extending" and "plagarism".
* Yes, technically all the modern languages are bytecompiled at runtime, but for all intents and purposes they are interpreted in that you don't have a seperate "compile/assemble/link" phase.
You could even pull the line from the Rocky Horror Picture Show audience parTIciPATION bit when Frankie is in Brad's seperate (but equal) room:
"Hey, has anybody seen my Tribble? Oh, HERE IT IS!"
[ad][ad]
[ad]Here's my review on[ad]
[page 2][page3][page4][page5][page6][page7]
[ad][ad]
[ad][ad]
[ad]this review. I really thought[ad]
[page 1][page3][page4][page5][page6][page7]
[ad][ad]
[ad][ad]
[ad]that they went just a bit[ad]
[page 1][page2][page4][page5][page6][page7]
[ad][ad]
[ad][ad]
[ad]overboard with splitting it up[ad]
[page 1][page2][page3][page5][page6][page7]
[ad][ad]
[ad][ad]
[ad]across multiple page views[ad]
[page 1][page2][page3][page4][page6][page7]
[ad][ad]
[ad][ad]
[ad]and sub-articles[ad]
[page 1][page2][page3][page4][page5][page7]
[ad][ad]
[ad][ad]
[ad]but that's just my opinion.[ad]
[page 1][page2][page3][page4][page5][page6]
[ad][ad]
whois 192.168.0.1
ifconfig you 192.168.0.6
whois 192.168.0.1
No, Utah isn't so bad - the Mormons figure they've won there, so they aren't so bad.
I used to live in Idaho - now THAT'S bad. There's enough Mormons to make life miserable, but they don't feel they've won, so they are still REALLY agressive.
(note: I have NOTHING to do with SCO)
Think about what it would be like to be a bit slinger at SCO in Utah:
First of all, SCO is looking to hire people in India - in other words, you know your job is going to be outsourced soon.
Second of all, you likely are a Unix or Linux programmer - and your company name is reviled in the industry you are in.
Third of all, if you ARE looking to move, nobody wants to hire you for fear of SCO suing them for some imagined infringment.
Fourth of all, the only company that MIGHT hire you as a bit slinger is Microsoft.
Fifth of all, you know points 3 and 4 won't change until AFTER the company collapes - and then you are out of work.
Granted, unlike soldiers in Iraq nobody is shooting at SCO employees or trying to blow them up (AND NOBODY SHOULD, EITHER!). But still, for tech jobs, being a programmer at SCO has to blow.
Well, let's see. First of all, you are no WORSE off than if they block the
Secondly, since SPEWS blocks unresponsive ISPs, you can call $SMALL_ISP and raise hell, and likely be listened to far more than if you call $BIG_ISP and raise hell.
Third, since $SMALL_ISP is more likely to be SEVERELY effected by having a
Exactly! What I recommend to anybody is, whereever possible, do business with smaller entities rather than larger entities - you will be a larger percentage of their business and will therefor be more likely to command a degree of respect from them.
Read my Journal entry about my experiences with the small ISP I use - ask yourself if you see a ScrewSpewNet or EarthPink making that kind of a call.
Fundimentally, all large ISPs are Bastard Backbone Baboons - they are big, you are small, take what we deign to give you and shut up.
You may need to reload a couple of times to get that ad, rather than the dribbleclack ad.
I DO have a screen snap of it here
Folks, go toThe Linux World page and look at the ad from IBM.
The page linked is Linux World's page on SCO v. Novell - with an IBM Linux ad, featuring the face of "Linux" with the words
I know you are
but what am I?
over it.
EEEEVILLLL!
You KNOW that IBM had that ready and waiting for this move!
Moreover, most modern games don't get one aspect of scopes right - you can look AROUND the scope, to maintain situational awareness.
The way the old Outlaws game did it was pretty correct - you saw the zoomed view through the scope, but could see the rest of the scene around the scope. As such, if something moved out of the scope you could re-aquire it, and you could look around while waiting for that "prefect shot".
Modern games basicly "cheat" by altering the zoom ratio of the renderer and masking the display. I'd love to see a game do it right - render the zoomed view, render the scene, then put the scope view in the middle of the main view.
Also, take time-of-flight into account - the real issue with most games is the sniper rifle bullet is moving instantaniously from muzzle to target - there is no hang time of the round, no time of flight, no windage.
Add these, and watch the sniper rifle become much less useful.
So, disable Javascript by default, and enable it ONLY when necessary.
.001% of the total hits" (uhh, perhaps because without Javascript it is impossible to get INTO your site? Just a theory....)
And BITCH at the websites that NEEDLESSLY require Javascript to do things that can be done with ordinary HTML.
Too damn many web content creation tools create ALL links as Javascript onclick events, with nothing but an href="#" for the HTML system. Mind you, all the javascript does is LOAD A NEW PAGE!
So, make a point of bitching at any website that does this. One of my friends is the webmaster at an internationally recognized company (no, I will not give out its name), and we go 'round and 'round on this, as he asserts that "the number of people who don't run Javascript is
Bitch (in a nice way) to the Webmasters that they don't NEED to do this - make them realize that they can use Javascript to ENHANCE a site while making the site USABLE without it.
Don't use a firing squad - bullets cost money.
Don't use the chair - electricity costs money.
Don't use lethal injection - chemicals cost money.
Hang them - then you can reuse the noose.
And that, sir, is exactly the point behind my post.
The temptation, when faced with an outrageous claim like this is to blow it off and give some flip response.
DON'T!
That is where almost ALL of these sort of cases go south - the defendant gives some flip response and the plaintif's lawyers use that against him.
Hence why I made a point of Rule #1, and why I make that point again:
When faced with ANY threat or possiblility of legal action, SHUT UP AND GET A LAWYER.
If the claim truly is bogus, you will spend an hour of an attourney's time to be re-assured that there is no problem, and will be able to move on.
If there is a problem, then you are prepared to deal with it correctly.
(And, by the way, this is why most attourneys don't want to give out off-the-cuff advice. They want there to be a formal relationship so that privilege attaches.)
Actually, getting a lawyer in a case like this is easier if you are a college student - most colleges have legal services available for the students at reduced rates, often pro bono publica.
The first and most important rule in ANY case where somebody is threatening legal action:
SHUT UP AND GET A LAWYER!
The second most important rule:
UNTIL YOU HAVE A LAYWER, STAY SHUT UP.
Suppose somebody contacts you and says:
"You are in violation of our copyright [sic] on our site - give us the domain or we'll sue!"
The proper response is something like:
"Very interesting - OK, please give me the contact information for your law firm, and I'll have my attourney contact your attourney. I prefer to have all furthur contact through my attourney, so please route everything through your legal group."
If they persist in contacting you directly, inform them firmly that all furthur contact should go through their attourney to yours, and any direct contact is harrassment.
In a case like this one, where you ARE being contacted by the other side's legal department, then you should GET AN ATTOURNEY LICENSED TO PRACTICE IN YOUR AREA. First thing. Then route all contact through him.
Otherwise, shut up - say nothing to the other side. While it may be a civil matter rather than a criminal matter, remind yourself that "Everything I say will be used against me in court."
Patty Carey and Max Ary did a lot of dumpster-diving (junk yard diving really) for many long years, getting stuff NASA had thrown away and restoring it.
They got so good at it that when the Smithsonian was looking for folks to restore their stuff, they sent it to the Cosmosphere.
They set up a very fair comparison of the US vs. the Soviets - so fair that the Soviets started giving them artifacts.
After a while, they had a collection that was so good, when the Smithsonian started looking for museums to partner with, they started with the Cosmosphere - not just to display more of the Smithsonian's collection, but also so that the Smithsonian could gain access to and display some of the Cosmosphere's collection.
Of course, both "Apollo 13" and "From Earth To Moon" used the Cosmosphere to make the props.
Then there's the fact that when the ISS work started and astronauts needed to train on Russian gear, NASA had the Cosmosphere build the trainers, as they were the only ones who could do an authentic job.
NOTE: other than being a member of the Cosmosphere (which means I get a price break) I am not associated with the Cosmosphere in any way.
If you live near any space museum, ask them about the Cosmosphere.
And if you ever within 100 miles of Kansas, plan on making the trip - Hutch is pretty much in the middle of the state.
I guess I am spoiled rotten, since the space museum near where I live does restoration for a living.
I wonder if they are going to have the Cosmosphere do the restoration work on the Saturn 5?
Heck, I'd bet they'd do the work for the US$1.5 they have now, if the would let the Cosmosphere display it....
Don't you see, this is BRILLIANT!
The problem with other "collectable" games is that after a period of time, you have collected everything that's been put out. So, as a game maker, you have to keep coming up with new things to be collected, as well as making the old things. That means your inventory keeps growing, and your costs keep going up.
With this idea, you keep making the same old things, and as the players keep playing, they USE UP their old things, and thus have to buy NEW things, but you don't have to come up with any new ideas!
BRILLIANT! ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT!
(/me removes tongue from cheek)
Unless, of course, the consumers you are targeting have a longer than 5 second attention span, or any ability to remember, communicate, or discern.
Pesky consumers.
There is a simple reason you won't see a "None of the above" option in an election.
There are 2 ways you can implement a NOTA - non-binding and binding.
For the sake of discusson, assume an election is held with Larry, Moe, and Curly as candidates, and the results are:
Larry: 10%
Moe: 10%
Curly: 10%
None of the above: 70%
The Non-Binding form works like this:
Since NOTA won, run a new election with the same bunch. Remember the definition of insanity - doing the same thing, and expecting different results? The only way things change is if the people decide that Larry is better than elections ad infinitum.
The Binding form works like this:
Since NOTA won, Larry, Moe, and Curly are out - here's your years supply of Rice-O-Roni and your copy of the home game, bu-bye, mind the door.
OK, now we have to pick a completely new slate of candidates, and have another round of campagning, and another election.
Now, Binding NOTA scares the hell out of the big parties, as it gives the smaller parties a real chance to win - during the first campaign, don't have your guy in the election, and run attack ads against the big boys. If you get the people to vote NOTA, THEN run your guy in the new election.
Since Binding NOTA would force the big 2 parties to be more responsive to the people, you can rest assured it will happen shortly after water freezes on a hot stove.