Heh. We didn't get to conquer Europe, but we sure did take over your vocabulary of almost-never-needed obscure words.
I will not try to raise/.'s ratings by using words like "conundrum", "multiphased perspiration obfuscator" or (proof that we Germans indeed are insane) "Bahnsteigreinigungsassistentengehaltauszahlungsma schinenlieferungsgewerbesprecherkarriere".
But because the DRM lobby would have won until then the toy would refuse to give you the data because "The examined molecules did not have valid DRM information assigned with them. Aborting scan."
OTOH they now have Fedora as a cutting edge distribution/innovation testbed. People who want a Linux featuring the newest stuf might turn to Fedora and Fedora is there to test stuff that's later going to be used in RHEL.
With the exception of firewire support, however (which I don't know if it has been fixed in 2.6.7), the issues that concern me have been resolved. Also the publicity around some of the issues gives me hope that the Fedora folks will be a little more careful with the next release. This makes me think that Fedora 3 may finally live up to the expectations.
The thing is, it's not supposed to. People see Fedora as a differently namend RedHat Linux when indeed it's just the unstable branch of RHEL. There will probably never be a stable and quirkless Fedora.
I think that's too bad, since I kinda like Fedora - not the RedHat Way of Doing Things but little details like yum, which I prefer over graphical apps like YaST.
3 Test 1, 1 Test 3 - where's the difference? With just about a year between FC1 and FC3 I bet it's just a service pack. Everyone knows that it takes at least three years to release a new version of Wind^H^H^H^Han OS.
Yes, but there are various types of brokenness, various... flavors. Your typical fresh XP installation has the "Who is the deranged half-monkey responsible for this so-called UI?!" flavor, while older ones mature and develop unique flavors like "Where the hell did the clipboard functionality go?" or "No free space on target drive? I have twenty goddamn gigabytes of free space on that drive!"
Windows users appreciate the unique flavors their operating system offers them... No, actually they hate every single one, but they do prefer them over "Grub has been loading for half an hour and I doubt it's ever going to finish."
A model of everything... How is "everything" defined? As "everyhing sensible" or "everything possible"? In the latter case, I'll go build a cluster to simulate me some lint.
Actually, it's to turn bits into other bits as instructed by a human. Otherwise we could just expose the RAM to some nice interference, and all sorts of bits would change, and we could do without all that expensive programming nonsense.
Nice idea, I'll use that to implement my next BogoSearch algorithm. Patents pending.
I think that in order to "teach" someone being creative you have to interact with that person on a very, well, personal level. What we'd weed would be an artificial personality, which would probably make human/computer interaction much more interesting, but which will probably not make it into mainstream computing for a few decades or so.
First, we haven't done something like an AP before, only AIs. An AP is more complex than an AI and would require not only competent programmers, but also competent psychologists, sociologists etc. Developing an AP would be extremely expensive and the people who could afford high quality AP research - big business - are not interested in making computers friendly, as that will probably cost them more than it earns them. Especially since APs would have to be extremely adaptable, as everyone wants their PC to act differently.
Then there's the question of whether current or near-future commodity hardware is fast enough to actually run a full AP (and do something else, like running an art program, at the same time). Might be tricky.
I think that the PC will not be a tool to enhance creativity until we van make it interact with the user as someone, not something. And that is currently more fiction than sciense.
Ha! Once more disillusionment comes to my advantage. If they get it right I'll be pleasantly surprised. If they don't, well, I've lost my faith in the video game industry anyways. Just another great franchise put to death by the hands of an industry that mostly stopped producing quality entertainment.
In that regard Morrowind is one of the most Pen-and-Paperish CRPGs I have ever seen - you can decide what you want to do, where you want to do it and wneh you wanto to do it. You can be a shining hero or damn the plot to hell and just kill everything that moves.
Freedom.
The only thing a Bethesda Fallout might be lacking is the unique humour. OTOH they might get it right. I'll just wait and see.
Look at Japan: Everyone and their mother are reading manga. You see suits reading a story while they're waiting for the train etc.
Manga themselves are highly time-efficient - the proficient Japanese reader goes through a page in a matter of seconds, reading the story at a speed about equal to a movie.
Manga are the product of a culture where free time is being minimized and whete there is a need for fast, portable entertainment on the way to work.
I find graphic novels paint a mood in an instant without resorting to pages of descriptive text. In an fleeting moment, you can sum up the scene perfectly. Try doing that in a full page of text.
I remember reading Effi Briest in school. The first few pages were just a lengthy and utterly uninteresting description of a house and its surroundings that a graphic novel would do by simply showing the stuff in the first panel and maybe adding a narrator box saying: "The home of the Briest family, $place"
I think web comics actually reflect the popularity boost comics are experiencing - everyone wants to make one and the Internet allows them to do so, even if they don't have the talent/money/connection to get them syndicated. There are some comics of extremely high quality out there which would never have been possible if it weren't for the 'Net.
Many webcomics are nothing but fart jokes and pseudo-witty social culture references, but there are a few gems in between that really stand out. I won't give any links because it depends on the reader whether or not a webcomic is brilliant or just a pile of dirt among others.
There are also some webcomics that try to be more than just a comic strip. For example, The Makeshift Miracle (only accessible through some subscription service now) had a deep and interesting plot. If you'd call it a graphic novel, it would have been closer to the novel part.
As for me, webcomics are the only comics I read. I wouldn't touch most of the canonical graphic novels because they don't appeal to me. And I doubt that comics that appeal to my personal taste would ever get syndicated.
On the 'Net I can choose between comics in lots of genres (using lots of different ways of dealing with their genre), using lots of different formats and techniques to express themselves. I can read stories as dumb or as sophistocated as I want, comedy or drama, geared towards any audience. I have the choice.
I think that webcomics, like novels - the consumption of which I love -, are a valid form of literature and can be both highly sophisticated entertainment and creative excrement. Dismissing them all as junk would be like declaring all movies to be smut after watching Debbie does Dallas.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh. We didn't get to conquer Europe, but we sure did take over your vocabulary of almost-never-needed obscure words.
/.'s ratings by using words like "conundrum", "multiphased perspiration obfuscator" or (proof that we Germans indeed are insane) "Bahnsteigreinigungsassistentengehaltauszahlungsma schinenlieferungsgewerbesprecherkarriere".
I will not try to raise
I wouldn't trust a long Now that can't be cast into an int Now.
There's adifference between "can still be used in 200 years" and "can be used in 200 years at the earliest".
Because languages clearly were designed the wrong way. If we had some RFCs on how to design language, everything would be better.
Maybe we should make our programs LCARS-compatible. That might help.
But because the DRM lobby would have won until then the toy would refuse to give you the data because "The examined molecules did not have valid DRM information assigned with them. Aborting scan."
OTOH they now have Fedora as a cutting edge distribution/innovation testbed. People who want a Linux featuring the newest stuf might turn to Fedora and Fedora is there to test stuff that's later going to be used in RHEL.
It should be enough to enter a BSD installfest and offer everyone to install Mandrake on their boxen.
If FC2 would be released today, yes. That's a list of the stuff they want in the official release in October.
With the exception of firewire support, however (which I don't know if it has been fixed in 2.6.7), the issues that concern me have been resolved. Also the publicity around some of the issues gives me hope that the Fedora folks will be a little more careful with the next release. This makes me think that Fedora 3 may finally live up to the expectations.
The thing is, it's not supposed to. People see Fedora as a differently namend RedHat Linux when indeed it's just the unstable branch of RHEL. There will probably never be a stable and quirkless Fedora.
I think that's too bad, since I kinda like Fedora - not the RedHat Way of Doing Things but little details like yum, which I prefer over graphical apps like YaST.
3 Test 1, 1 Test 3 - where's the difference? With just about a year between FC1 and FC3 I bet it's just a service pack. Everyone knows that it takes at least three years to release a new version of Wind^H^H^H^Han OS.
Yes, but there are various types of brokenness, various... flavors. Your typical fresh XP installation has the "Who is the deranged half-monkey responsible for this so-called UI?!" flavor, while older ones mature and develop unique flavors like "Where the hell did the clipboard functionality go?" or "No free space on target drive? I have twenty goddamn gigabytes of free space on that drive!"
Windows users appreciate the unique flavors their operating system offers them... No, actually they hate every single one, but they do prefer them over "Grub has been loading for half an hour and I doubt it's ever going to finish."
A model of everything... How is "everything" defined? As "everyhing sensible" or "everything possible"? In the latter case, I'll go build a cluster to simulate me some lint.
Actually, it's to turn bits into other bits as instructed by a human. Otherwise we could just expose the RAM to some nice interference, and all sorts of bits would change, and we could do without all that expensive programming nonsense.
Nice idea, I'll use that to implement my next BogoSearch algorithm. Patents pending.
I think that in order to "teach" someone being creative you have to interact with that person on a very, well, personal level. What we'd weed would be an artificial personality, which would probably make human/computer interaction much more interesting, but which will probably not make it into mainstream computing for a few decades or so.
First, we haven't done something like an AP before, only AIs. An AP is more complex than an AI and would require not only competent programmers, but also competent psychologists, sociologists etc. Developing an AP would be extremely expensive and the people who could afford high quality AP research - big business - are not interested in making computers friendly, as that will probably cost them more than it earns them. Especially since APs would have to be extremely adaptable, as everyone wants their PC to act differently.
Then there's the question of whether current or near-future commodity hardware is fast enough to actually run a full AP (and do something else, like running an art program, at the same time). Might be tricky.
I think that the PC will not be a tool to enhance creativity until we van make it interact with the user as someone, not something. And that is currently more fiction than sciense.
Ha! Once more disillusionment comes to my advantage. If they get it right I'll be pleasantly surprised. If they don't, well, I've lost my faith in the video game industry anyways. Just another great franchise put to death by the hands of an industry that mostly stopped producing quality entertainment.
In that regard Morrowind is one of the most Pen-and-Paperish CRPGs I have ever seen - you can decide what you want to do, where you want to do it and wneh you wanto to do it. You can be a shining hero or damn the plot to hell and just kill everything that moves.
Freedom.
The only thing a Bethesda Fallout might be lacking is the unique humour. OTOH they might get it right. I'll just wait and see.
They already did that with Morrowind, so I guess the chances are not too bad.
Discrimination! I demand more opposable thumbs! Why won't the government do anything about this?
If they went for the l33t market they'd call it: "OMG J4KCI70r i5 1337 U 5UcKZ LOL L0L L4MO!!!!!!!!111111"
Plus to make a good graphic novel you have to have a good writer and a good artist.
Or you are a good writer who knows a good artist or vice versa.
Look at Japan: Everyone and their mother are reading manga. You see suits reading a story while they're waiting for the train etc.
Manga themselves are highly time-efficient - the proficient Japanese reader goes through a page in a matter of seconds, reading the story at a speed about equal to a movie.
Manga are the product of a culture where free time is being minimized and whete there is a need for fast, portable entertainment on the way to work.
I find graphic novels paint a mood in an instant without resorting to pages of descriptive text. In an fleeting moment, you can sum up the scene perfectly. Try doing that in a full page of text.
I remember reading Effi Briest in school. The first few pages were just a lengthy and utterly uninteresting description of a house and its surroundings that a graphic novel would do by simply showing the stuff in the first panel and maybe adding a narrator box saying: "The home of the Briest family, $place"
Isn't ANSI working on a new standard for gunshots now? I think they want all guns to say "BLAM" when fired, in big, easy to read letters.
I think web comics actually reflect the popularity boost comics are experiencing - everyone wants to make one and the Internet allows them to do so, even if they don't have the talent/money/connection to get them syndicated. There are some comics of extremely high quality out there which would never have been possible if it weren't for the 'Net.
Many webcomics are nothing but fart jokes and pseudo-witty social culture references, but there are a few gems in between that really stand out. I won't give any links because it depends on the reader whether or not a webcomic is brilliant or just a pile of dirt among others.
There are also some webcomics that try to be more than just a comic strip. For example, The Makeshift Miracle (only accessible through some subscription service now) had a deep and interesting plot. If you'd call it a graphic novel, it would have been closer to the novel part.
As for me, webcomics are the only comics I read. I wouldn't touch most of the canonical graphic novels because they don't appeal to me. And I doubt that comics that appeal to my personal taste would ever get syndicated.
On the 'Net I can choose between comics in lots of genres (using lots of different ways of dealing with their genre), using lots of different formats and techniques to express themselves. I can read stories as dumb or as sophistocated as I want, comedy or drama, geared towards any audience. I have the choice.
I think that webcomics, like novels - the consumption of which I love -, are a valid form of literature and can be both highly sophisticated entertainment and creative excrement. Dismissing them all as junk would be like declaring all movies to be smut after watching Debbie does Dallas.