It's not just bash, it's a full linux subsystem that runs native linux binaries. And the benchmarks I've seen make it look competitive to running them on native linux. For some operations that's tremendously faster than cygwin.
Zudem habe sich nach dem Unfall auch einer der vier Mitfahrer geäußert. Er hat wohl eine Geschwindigkeit von 150 bis 160 Stundenkilometern vom Tacho abgelesen.
which I'd translate as "In addition, after the accident one of the four passengers also weighed in. He read a speed of probably 150-160 kph from the speedometer."
Though your second question may be unpopular I don't think that's the problem with it.
Asking the "shouldn't we put our resources to better use" question certainly makes sense when talking about human spaceflight. The claim some others here are making that the reason this is important is future space colonization is not really credible. And maybe you could make a case for questioning the value of some NASA probe missions.
It simply doesn't make any sense when talking about satellite launches. We all, directly or indirectly, rely on satellites every day; we will need to have some number of launches every year for the forseeable future. To do this in a way that is less expensive, more rapid, and more environmentally friendly really is a big deal. This IS putting our resources - resources we're already using - to better use.
There really isn't a way to make your first question reasonable. Though will be some benefit to everyone from this, you may well not call it significant. But it's possible to live your life in a way such that practically nothing in the news impacts you very significantly. So if you're only interested in what directly and significantly impacts you, quit wasting your time reading news on the internet.
At its best, Slashdot has been a site where impressive feats of engineering have been publicized and celebrated. (e.g. the Top 10 Hacks long ago.) If "news for nerds" isn't the "stuff that matters" to you, don't spend your time here.
We've known since at least the 1700s that first-past-the-post plurality voting is a totally broken system. It's irresponsible to conduct any election with more than two alternatives in this fashion.
In many places, especially early in the election cycle, Trump would have lost any single head-to-head matchup. But his opponents were always split, and plurality voting is tremendously vulnerable to this kind of problem.
Process matters. If our elections were conducted using a Condorcet method like Ranked Pairs, Maximum Majority, or Schulze, we would have had less irrationality and extremism from both parties throughout the years, and the existing parties would not have become so entrenched.
A stat I like to tell people: in the 90s, in the same length of time - 4.5 years - that it took for today's 20% improvement, we went from P54C to Athlon and Coppermine - roughly an 800% improvement.
I've been on slashdot since quite close to the beginning. (I had another user name before this one, too bad I abandoned it before low UID was something worth bragging rights). I had never really considered subscribing before.
After the changes you've been making, and knowing a bit about your plans, I'd be happy to subscribe just to vote with my wallet in favor of what's going on, even if a subscription doesn't have any benefits whatsoever beyond knowing that I'm supporting a good thing.
My wallet is not very thick but I think there are thousands of others who feel similarly.
According to some physicists, one material commonly found not only in nuclear waste but also in the byproducts of many industrial chemical processes is radioactive and has a lifetime of 10^32 years!!! Just think what kind of lasting problems that creates!
Not only should we shut down those nuclear and chemical processes, we should obviously jettison all these troublesome 'protons' into space so future generations don't have to deal with them!!!!1111
For binary XML, as well as for the various fledgling binary json or binary yaml formats, the binary representation can be quickly converted to a plaintext one that has basically only minor formatting differences from the original. (I was about to say "to a human-readable one that..." but that's a stretch for a lot of XML.)
An AST / IR / bytecode is decompilable; e.g. from what I understand LLVM can do a good job of translating its IR back to C. Obviously a lot more information that could help with human comprehensibility is lost in that process than in the cases above. But decompiled IR can be as readable as minified JS source code is.
Of course, even without using any of these, what's sent over the wire is usually not human readable anyways, it's just that the tools to translate these other formats back to plaintext are higher-level than gzip is.
Residual is trying to do Myst III. The 2d+videos interface and engine of Myst and Riven is probably more of a natural fit for the main ScummVM than are the engines ResidualVM is trying to support.
I guess the browser-side performance isn't so much what they're talking about (rather, reducing network round-trips), but still, I have always wondered why we're still sending xml and js, plain or gzipped, rather than sending compact binary formats.
EXI is a W3C standard; it's more compact than gzipped xml and it's more than a dozen times faster to parse.
Rather than coding in JS all the time, lots of people are using javascript as an intermediate representation or bytecode. This is tremendously inefficient.
Though the WebAssembly effort sounds like people are finally realizing they need to address the problem, it sure seems like they're approaching it from a rather odd angle. asm.js and pnacl don't necessarily seem like where one should start if one has the freedom to design a new IR.
I'm signed up for the Obduction kickstarter, though after the way Uru and Myst V went my expectations for it aren't all that high. I hope to be pleasantly surprised.
But though I have fond memories of it, I haven't played Riven in what, 18 years? (except for trying the steam version out to see whether it worked well. it didn't). And there are generations of gamers that have never played it.
And if you think playing old games is stupid, why are you bothering to comment on a scummvm article in the first place?
It's rather different from the kinds of adventures one usually thinks of for ScummVM, but some years ago a lot of work was done on the Mohawk engine, variations of which run Myst and Riven. Things stalled without it being promoted to testing, so it didn't get exposure and testing and attract new developers. But recently a lot of additional work has been done and it looks like this may finally see some light in the next release! See recent work here.
For Myst, one can choose between a number of rereleases, but not so for Riven, and the original and versions on Steam have some buggy behaviors on new operating systems. With a scummvm engine one could hope any issues would eventually be fixed, while Cyan doesn't have much incentive to fix their own old stuff.
(It really is too bad Cyan didn't do a 1440x1080 rerender / "HD remaster" of Riven. Yeah, it'd have to be 4/3 since they can't redo all their shots, but if they have the art assets it would be a big boon to have an edition with over 2x the vertical resolution.)
Fifteen years ago math and science students would have *killed* for the opportunity to get a PC with a Mathematica license and this kind of performance, especially when you can get the whole thing for under $50.
The Mathematica performance isn't impressive now - a normal PC will be more than 10x faster- but it's passable for simple work, and Mathematica licenses can be very expensive.
(Mathematica on the original RPi was just a gimmick, since it was really much too slow even to use the interface. But the RPi2 is a big step forward.)
Feels like the license should have been in the summary. Whatever your opinions on copyleft in other areas, a GPLv3'd RTOS would be at a huge disadvantage adoption-wise. It'll be good to have an Apache licensed RTOS with some serious momentum behind it.
On the contrary, I'm surprised they're only saving 20%. Look at the difference between VP9 or X265 and the VC-1 encoder they used exclusively for their first few years. And given the costs they incur using all this bandwidth they could definitely throw a good number of top quality engineers at figuring out a rate control algorithm that's more suited to their rather unusual use case.
Perhaps you're just poking fun at their sensibilities, but the question deserves a serious answer.
If you look at a map, you can see the access road forks at about 13300' - the left spur stays on the plateau and goes to the Caltech observatory and on towards the proposed TMT site, while the right spur, which services the summit observatories, climbs almost all the rest of the way to the summit in the next mile.
When the last of the telescopes on the summit is decommissioned (probably a couple decades away), that right fork could be reverted to a trail.
Yes, many visitors wouldn't want to hike to the top from sea level, but I think people who visit the mountain would be perfectly fine with walking one mile with a few hundred feet of elevation gain to reach one of the world's great summits.
Maunakea isn't like the Matterhorn. The area on the Maunakea plateau that's high enough etc to suit astronomers' needs is actually quite large, and the Thirty Meter Telescope's proposed location is at least a mile away from the summit and at least 500 feet lower.
But about 8 of the existing dozen or so scopes are practically right on the summit. Much more intrusive both to native sensibilities and to tourists. Built before cultural sensitivity was a thing, I guess, and before native Hawaiians had done much to organize politically. I think those opposed to the TMT may well largely be objecting to "one more straw" rather than to this telescope considered in isolation.
If all these scopes were planned for new construction now I think a reasonable compromise would be to disallow putting any of them above about the 13400' contour on the summit. And I imagine that by now many of the scopes on the summit are no longer all that scientifically useful anyways, having been eclipsed by bigger scopes and better technology.
Why not have a trade- go ahead and build the TMT, which will be a big scientific boon, but promise to gradually phase out and demolish the scopes on the summit and try to restore the summit area to a relatively pristine condition?
Please be advised that if you put your current (finite) book collection on the shelf, or if you acquire an infinite collection and put it on the shelf in a way that leaves some space unoccupied, your books may topple. You need to acquire an infinite collection and fill all the space on the shelf. But don't worry - even if your shelf is full it can always accommodate an infinite number of additional books.
That's easy: book n leans against book n+1. If you had only a finite number m of books on a straight shelf, then that last book, having nothing to lean against, would topple, and then book m-1 would have nothing to lean on either and thus topple, and so on down the chain back to the first book. With an infinite shelf you don't have that problem.
Sure you can, by holding your phone at a viewing distance WAAAY closer than would be comfortable for a 17" monitor. The real question is not pixels per inch but pixels per degree (or per radian) at normal viewing distance. And there is no way on earth 500 ppi makes any sense at the >2ft viewing distances normal for a monitor.
If you view your phone, your monitor, and a movie screen from distances that allow them all to occupy similar viewing angles, then it makes sense for them all to have similar resolutions, not similar PPI.
Just as a matter of basic freshman physics (Rayleigh criterion) humans do not have the optical hardware to see sub-arcminute sized detail. 4K pixels are arcminute-sized at IMAX viewing angles. So there is little or point to display resolutions or content-delivery video formats beyond 4K.
It does sound too conveniently and obviously obtuse, doesn't it? I think that's why he got the funny mods, is that people thought he was trying to ironically mimic the hashtag activist mindset.
That's total bullcrap, motivated only by your partisan arrogance. The attitudes of the left towards e.g. food production and the entire field of economics are just as totally anti-science and devoid of consideration for facts as the attitudes of the right towards e.g. global warming. There is no party or movement that can claim the high ground here and there is not a single single member of congress who can be said to be on the side of data driven politics.
And your assumption "my party is always right and we just need to work to get it a stronger following" is exactly the bullcrap herd activist mentality he's talking about here.
Even using the term "progressivism" to some extent involves the same kind of problematic hasty and violent arrogance. As Chesterton said,
Every one of the popular modern phrases and ideals is a dodge in order to shirk the problem of what is good. We are fond of talking about "liberty"; that, as we talk of it, is a dodge to avoid discussing what is good. We are fond of talking about "progress"; that is a dodge to avoid discussing what is good. We are fond of talking about "education"; that is a dodge to avoid discussing what is good. The modern man says, "Let us leave all these arbitrary standards and embrace liberty." This is, logically rendered, "Let us not decide what is good, but let it be considered good not to decide it." He says, "Away with your old moral formulae; I am for progress." This, logically stated, means, "Let us not settle what is good; but let us settle whether we are getting more of it." He says, "Neither in religion nor morality, my friend, lie the hopes of the race, but in education." This, clearly expressed, means, "We cannot decide what is good, but let us give it to our children."
The case of the general talk of "progress" is, indeed, an extreme one. As enunciated today, "progress" is simply a comparative of which we have not settled the superlative. We meet every ideal of religion, patriotism, beauty, or brute pleasure with the alternative ideal of progress--that is to say, we meet every proposal of getting something that we know about, with an alternative proposal of getting a great deal more of nobody knows what. Progress, properly understood, has, indeed, a most dignified and legitimate meaning. But as used in opposition to precise moral ideals, it is ludicrous. So far from it being the truth that the ideal of progress is to be set against that of ethical or religious finality, the reverse is the truth. Nobody has any business to use the word "progress" unless he has a definite creed and a cast-iron code of morals. Nobody can be progressive without being doctrinal; I might almost say that nobody can be progressive without being infallible --at any rate, without believing in some infallibility. For progress by its very name indicates a direction; and the moment we are in the least doubtful about the direction, we become in the same degree doubtful about the progress. Never perhaps since the beginning of the world has there been an age that had less right to use the word "progress" than we.
Reaching solutions requires
a sincere realization of our own ignorance and the sincerity and rationality of our opponents
the willingness to engage in real and reasonable discourse with those we disagree with, working to find goals we can pursue with enough common cause that our pursuit will not require tyrannical coercion
consistent attention to the data and the best science in choosing means of pursuing those goals
(Science does not prescribe goals, but describes possible courses of action and their likely consequences; many problems, from failed social programs to environmental disasters, could have been avoided had people listened to scientists from economists to ecologists about the unintended consequences of policies.)
Unfortunately, I doubt any party in any Western nation is presently capable of any of these three things.
There have been two wildfires within 60 miles of me in the past week. In each fire there was a point when firefighters had to ground helicopter operations because of interfering private drones. The helicopters can't safely land with all the fire retardant they take off with, so they had to waste 500 gallons of fire retardant, just dumping it in the middle of nowhere. In one case the delay allowed the fire to make major progress and probably delayed containment by a couple days.
I'm all for declaring a permanent open season on unmanned aerial vehicles. Jamming, shotguns, surface-to-air missiles, whatever. I'm sick and tired of the crap that drone operators pull.
Hillary is 67. That's three years older than Romney was four years ago and only three years younger than McCain was in the election cycle before that.
The only candidates the Republicans have ever run (going back to 1856) who were older than Hillary were McCain, Bob Dole, and Reagan (for his re-election, not his first term).
The people who complained about Republican candidates being old white people are proclaiming Hillary is just the perfect age now. It was all just hypocritical grousing.
Slashdot Mirror
Forgot to say, it comes with ubuntu userland.
It's not just bash, it's a full linux subsystem that runs native linux binaries. And the benchmarks I've seen make it look competitive to running them on native linux. For some operations that's tremendously faster than cygwin.
No X11 at present though.
The followup article in the German paper says:
which I'd translate as "In addition, after the accident one of the four passengers also weighed in. He read a speed of probably 150-160 kph from the speedometer."
Though your second question may be unpopular I don't think that's the problem with it.
Asking the "shouldn't we put our resources to better use" question certainly makes sense when talking about human spaceflight. The claim some others here are making that the reason this is important is future space colonization is not really credible. And maybe you could make a case for questioning the value of some NASA probe missions.
It simply doesn't make any sense when talking about satellite launches. We all, directly or indirectly, rely on satellites every day; we will need to have some number of launches every year for the forseeable future. To do this in a way that is less expensive, more rapid, and more environmentally friendly really is a big deal. This IS putting our resources - resources we're already using - to better use.
There really isn't a way to make your first question reasonable. Though will be some benefit to everyone from this, you may well not call it significant. But it's possible to live your life in a way such that practically nothing in the news impacts you very significantly. So if you're only interested in what directly and significantly impacts you, quit wasting your time reading news on the internet.
At its best, Slashdot has been a site where impressive feats of engineering have been publicized and celebrated. (e.g. the Top 10 Hacks long ago.) If "news for nerds" isn't the "stuff that matters" to you, don't spend your time here.
We've known since at least the 1700s that first-past-the-post plurality voting is a totally broken system. It's irresponsible to conduct any election with more than two alternatives in this fashion.
In many places, especially early in the election cycle, Trump would have lost any single head-to-head matchup. But his opponents were always split, and plurality voting is tremendously vulnerable to this kind of problem.
Process matters. If our elections were conducted using a Condorcet method like Ranked Pairs, Maximum Majority, or Schulze, we would have had less irrationality and extremism from both parties throughout the years, and the existing parties would not have become so entrenched.
Here's a popular-audience explanation by a couple of Nobel winners.
A stat I like to tell people: in the 90s, in the same length of time - 4.5 years - that it took for today's 20% improvement, we went from P54C to Athlon and Coppermine - roughly an 800% improvement.
I've been on slashdot since quite close to the beginning. (I had another user name before this one, too bad I abandoned it before low UID was something worth bragging rights). I had never really considered subscribing before.
After the changes you've been making, and knowing a bit about your plans, I'd be happy to subscribe just to vote with my wallet in favor of what's going on, even if a subscription doesn't have any benefits whatsoever beyond knowing that I'm supporting a good thing.
My wallet is not very thick but I think there are thousands of others who feel similarly.
Keep up the good work!
According to some physicists, one material commonly found not only in nuclear waste but also in the byproducts of many industrial chemical processes is radioactive and has a lifetime of 10^32 years!!! Just think what kind of lasting problems that creates!
Not only should we shut down those nuclear and chemical processes, we should obviously jettison all these troublesome 'protons' into space so future generations don't have to deal with them!!!!1111
For binary XML, as well as for the various fledgling binary json or binary yaml formats, the binary representation can be quickly converted to a plaintext one that has basically only minor formatting differences from the original. (I was about to say "to a human-readable one that..." but that's a stretch for a lot of XML.)
An AST / IR / bytecode is decompilable; e.g. from what I understand LLVM can do a good job of translating its IR back to C. Obviously a lot more information that could help with human comprehensibility is lost in that process than in the cases above. But decompiled IR can be as readable as minified JS source code is.
Of course, even without using any of these, what's sent over the wire is usually not human readable anyways, it's just that the tools to translate these other formats back to plaintext are higher-level than gzip is.
Residual is trying to do Myst III. The 2d+videos interface and engine of Myst and Riven is probably more of a natural fit for the main ScummVM than are the engines ResidualVM is trying to support.
I guess the browser-side performance isn't so much what they're talking about (rather, reducing network round-trips), but still, I have always wondered why we're still sending xml and js, plain or gzipped, rather than sending compact binary formats.
EXI is a W3C standard; it's more compact than gzipped xml and it's more than a dozen times faster to parse.
Rather than coding in JS all the time, lots of people are using javascript as an intermediate representation or bytecode. This is tremendously inefficient.
Though the WebAssembly effort sounds like people are finally realizing they need to address the problem, it sure seems like they're approaching it from a rather odd angle. asm.js and pnacl don't necessarily seem like where one should start if one has the freedom to design a new IR.
I'm signed up for the Obduction kickstarter, though after the way Uru and Myst V went my expectations for it aren't all that high. I hope to be pleasantly surprised.
But though I have fond memories of it, I haven't played Riven in what, 18 years? (except for trying the steam version out to see whether it worked well. it didn't). And there are generations of gamers that have never played it.
And if you think playing old games is stupid, why are you bothering to comment on a scummvm article in the first place?
It's rather different from the kinds of adventures one usually thinks of for ScummVM, but some years ago a lot of work was done on the Mohawk engine, variations of which run Myst and Riven. Things stalled without it being promoted to testing, so it didn't get exposure and testing and attract new developers. But recently a lot of additional work has been done and it looks like this may finally see some light in the next release! See recent work here.
For Myst, one can choose between a number of rereleases, but not so for Riven, and the original and versions on Steam have some buggy behaviors on new operating systems. With a scummvm engine one could hope any issues would eventually be fixed, while Cyan doesn't have much incentive to fix their own old stuff.
(It really is too bad Cyan didn't do a 1440x1080 rerender / "HD remaster" of Riven. Yeah, it'd have to be 4/3 since they can't redo all their shots, but if they have the art assets it would be a big boon to have an edition with over 2x the vertical resolution.)
Fifteen years ago math and science students would have *killed* for the opportunity to get a PC with a Mathematica license and this kind of performance, especially when you can get the whole thing for under $50.
The Mathematica performance isn't impressive now - a normal PC will be more than 10x faster- but it's passable for simple work, and Mathematica licenses can be very expensive.
(Mathematica on the original RPi was just a gimmick, since it was really much too slow even to use the interface. But the RPi2 is a big step forward.)
Feels like the license should have been in the summary. Whatever your opinions on copyleft in other areas, a GPLv3'd RTOS would be at a huge disadvantage adoption-wise. It'll be good to have an Apache licensed RTOS with some serious momentum behind it.
On the contrary, I'm surprised they're only saving 20%. Look at the difference between VP9 or X265 and the VC-1 encoder they used exclusively for their first few years. And given the costs they incur using all this bandwidth they could definitely throw a good number of top quality engineers at figuring out a rate control algorithm that's more suited to their rather unusual use case.
Perhaps you're just poking fun at their sensibilities, but the question deserves a serious answer.
If you look at a map, you can see the access road forks at about 13300' - the left spur stays on the plateau and goes to the Caltech observatory and on towards the proposed TMT site, while the right spur, which services the summit observatories, climbs almost all the rest of the way to the summit in the next mile.
When the last of the telescopes on the summit is decommissioned (probably a couple decades away), that right fork could be reverted to a trail.
Yes, many visitors wouldn't want to hike to the top from sea level, but I think people who visit the mountain would be perfectly fine with walking one mile with a few hundred feet of elevation gain to reach one of the world's great summits.
Maunakea isn't like the Matterhorn. The area on the Maunakea plateau that's high enough etc to suit astronomers' needs is actually quite large, and the Thirty Meter Telescope's proposed location is at least a mile away from the summit and at least 500 feet lower.
But about 8 of the existing dozen or so scopes are practically right on the summit. Much more intrusive both to native sensibilities and to tourists. Built before cultural sensitivity was a thing, I guess, and before native Hawaiians had done much to organize politically. I think those opposed to the TMT may well largely be objecting to "one more straw" rather than to this telescope considered in isolation.
If all these scopes were planned for new construction now I think a reasonable compromise would be to disallow putting any of them above about the 13400' contour on the summit. And I imagine that by now many of the scopes on the summit are no longer all that scientifically useful anyways, having been eclipsed by bigger scopes and better technology.
Why not have a trade- go ahead and build the TMT, which will be a big scientific boon, but promise to gradually phase out and demolish the scopes on the summit and try to restore the summit area to a relatively pristine condition?
No, they don't sell one at Ikea, but you might be able to find one at Borges' Library Furniture and Supplies.
Please be advised that if you put your current (finite) book collection on the shelf, or if you acquire an infinite collection and put it on the shelf in a way that leaves some space unoccupied, your books may topple. You need to acquire an infinite collection and fill all the space on the shelf. But don't worry - even if your shelf is full it can always accommodate an infinite number of additional books.
That's easy: book n leans against book n+1. If you had only a finite number m of books on a straight shelf, then that last book, having nothing to lean against, would topple, and then book m-1 would have nothing to lean on either and thus topple, and so on down the chain back to the first book. With an infinite shelf you don't have that problem.
Sure you can, by holding your phone at a viewing distance WAAAY closer than would be comfortable for a 17" monitor. The real question is not pixels per inch but pixels per degree (or per radian) at normal viewing distance. And there is no way on earth 500 ppi makes any sense at the >2ft viewing distances normal for a monitor.
If you view your phone, your monitor, and a movie screen from distances that allow them all to occupy similar viewing angles, then it makes sense for them all to have similar resolutions, not similar PPI.
Just as a matter of basic freshman physics (Rayleigh criterion) humans do not have the optical hardware to see sub-arcminute sized detail. 4K pixels are arcminute-sized at IMAX viewing angles. So there is little or point to display resolutions or content-delivery video formats beyond 4K.
It does sound too conveniently and obviously obtuse, doesn't it? I think that's why he got the funny mods, is that people thought he was trying to ironically mimic the hashtag activist mindset.
Unfortunately if you look at it shows he wasn't being sarcastic at all. Just arrogant and shortsighted enough to be blind to the irony of it.
That's total bullcrap, motivated only by your partisan arrogance. The attitudes of the left towards e.g. food production and the entire field of economics are just as totally anti-science and devoid of consideration for facts as the attitudes of the right towards e.g. global warming. There is no party or movement that can claim the high ground here and there is not a single single member of congress who can be said to be on the side of data driven politics.
And your assumption "my party is always right and we just need to work to get it a stronger following" is exactly the bullcrap herd activist mentality he's talking about here.
Even using the term "progressivism" to some extent involves the same kind of problematic hasty and violent arrogance. As Chesterton said,
Reaching solutions requires
(Science does not prescribe goals, but describes possible courses of action and their likely consequences; many problems, from failed social programs to environmental disasters, could have been avoided had people listened to scientists from economists to ecologists about the unintended consequences of policies.)
Unfortunately, I doubt any party in any Western nation is presently capable of any of these three things.
There have been two wildfires within 60 miles of me in the past week. In each fire there was a point when firefighters had to ground helicopter operations because of interfering private drones. The helicopters can't safely land with all the fire retardant they take off with, so they had to waste 500 gallons of fire retardant, just dumping it in the middle of nowhere. In one case the delay allowed the fire to make major progress and probably delayed containment by a couple days.
I'm all for declaring a permanent open season on unmanned aerial vehicles. Jamming, shotguns, surface-to-air missiles, whatever. I'm sick and tired of the crap that drone operators pull.
Hillary is 67. That's three years older than Romney was four years ago and only three years younger than McCain was in the election cycle before that.
The only candidates the Republicans have ever run (going back to 1856) who were older than Hillary were McCain, Bob Dole, and Reagan (for his re-election, not his first term).
The people who complained about Republican candidates being old white people are proclaiming Hillary is just the perfect age now. It was all just hypocritical grousing.