Quite often hardware overheating issues will cause the kernel to crash in the nVidia driver. This will probably be the first thing nVidia claims and it's pretty true.
You are not a lawyer, patent abstracts are *abstract* they are not actual claims. These articles and your lack of willingness to understand the patent system is tiresome.
Yes software patents are bad, but blatantly lying about how they work will not achieve the goal of getting them removed.
Major corporations are always in the pockets of Congress and it'll always be that way. People are blind, they call congress corrupt and then expect them to eliminate corruption in another government organization. The American people are getting played from both sides down the middle; half don't know it, 1/3 don't care, and the rest don't know what to do about it.
Saying congress is turning up the heat on the FCC is like saying Chaney is turning up the heat on Bush to get out of Iraq. They serve the same agenda and they're not looking out for the people.
Nothing short of removing power from both congress and the FCC will keep these jokers from leeching from the public.
Monopolies are created by regulation. Cell phone monopolies were created by a 2 provider per area limit back in the day which was facilitated by the government regulating all EM spectrum. "Municipalities" "Regulate" cable layers and create all these other broad-sweeping ancillary problems.
You're right though, remove the regulation, remove the monopoly.
I'm thinking remove their incumbent advantage instead of adding another layer. Open them up to free market forces. Land, mineral right, and time, all pseudo tangible ownership objects are traded on the free market and do just fine. EM spectrum and cabling can be done the same.
I don't know why you're trying to get the government to protect you. In democracy 51% tells 49% they're wrong. The vast majority of people don't need fast internet connections. You should be scared of what the majority will do to you because if you're a high bandwidth user, you're the minority and your opinion means squat.
We need to remove the tools of power that regulate to protect ourselves from the stupid majority.
Both sides of this story are lying about their intentions. Extra regulation will not make the net more neutral. Only removing the tools of power used by governments to regulate the internet at all, will make it neutral.
Explain again why 95% of people need fiber to their home.
5% of internet users use 50% of the bandwidth.
Even if that's not correct, why are we talking about wiring fiber to people's homes when there are thousands of starving children in the US?
Get out of your ivory towers.
Remember when all those "crazy libertarians" with theirs "heartless ideals" said public funding of schools was a bad idea and that politicians corrupt the best of intentions?
I'd like to point out that you are now being taxed by the government to enforce RIAA policies for our children. Not exactly the income redistribution paradise people envisioned I think.
It just doesn't make any sense. They're trying to put fiber in to homes, something that is not very profitable and companies have failed many times in the past. This is something all nerds would love, unlimited bandwidth to the home but the only article I see are about how they're cutting copper off and replacing it with fiber? Who cares?
This constant trumpeting of how terrible Verizon is makes me wonder what Slashdot editors have to gain through constantly posting these articles. Every other story posted here has some sort of editorial ulterior motive but I haven't been able to figure out the motive for hating Verizon yet. Any thoughts?
The original post was mostly tongue in cheek but it's interesting what comments it draws.
I'd like to see how you ensure the (int) member of a structure always has a value between 1 and 10 in the face of a new programmer modifying the source code and doesn't know that it in fact needs to be between those values. You could make all other code have precondition contracts but that doesn't specify who set the member wrong in the first place. If the bug isn't found for a long time, you'll be hunting forever trying to catch something real DbC would have found in milliseconds. You could say "comment the code" but empirically as code changes, the comment don't get updated, even if there were comments in the first place.
Checking correct mutex usage is simple, enforce a total ordering on all mutex lock acquires. Eiffel could do that very easily, I don't know where you get the idea it can't. Knowing the system is deadlocked is different than being able to do something about it. Mutex deadlock would mean a kernel panic or killing of the offending processes in order to 'solve' the problem.
Explain again how a for loop is different than a from loop? for(i = 10; i >= 0; i--) from i:= 0 until i=10 loop i:=i+1 end But back to DbC, with Eiffel you could put in a loop invariant to make sure your loop is always one step closer to completing, something you can't implement in C without a lot of hackery, but then again, C programmers love hacking.
True, C is probably still the best language for kernel development.
Slashdot Mirror
I would support this and would allow it in my back yard.
Quite often hardware overheating issues will cause the kernel to crash in the nVidia driver. This will probably be the first thing nVidia claims and it's pretty true.
You are not a lawyer, patent abstracts are *abstract* they are not actual claims. These articles and your lack of willingness to understand the patent system is tiresome.
Yes software patents are bad, but blatantly lying about how they work will not achieve the goal of getting them removed.
Eiffel: Native code OO language, design by contract, well implemented multiple inheritance, high order functions, closure, interfaces with C, C++.
Major corporations are always in the pockets of Congress and it'll always be that way. People are blind, they call congress corrupt and then expect them to eliminate corruption in another government organization. The American people are getting played from both sides down the middle; half don't know it, 1/3 don't care, and the rest don't know what to do about it.
Saying congress is turning up the heat on the FCC is like saying Chaney is turning up the heat on Bush to get out of Iraq. They serve the same agenda and they're not looking out for the people.
Nothing short of removing power from both congress and the FCC will keep these jokers from leeching from the public.
Monopolies are created by regulation. Cell phone monopolies were created by a 2 provider per area limit back in the day which was facilitated by the government regulating all EM spectrum. "Municipalities" "Regulate" cable layers and create all these other broad-sweeping ancillary problems.
You're right though, remove the regulation, remove the monopoly.
Finally, someone who's thought this through.
I'm thinking remove their incumbent advantage instead of adding another layer. Open them up to free market forces. Land, mineral right, and time, all pseudo tangible ownership objects are traded on the free market and do just fine. EM spectrum and cabling can be done the same.
I don't know why you're trying to get the government to protect you. In democracy 51% tells 49% they're wrong. The vast majority of people don't need fast internet connections. You should be scared of what the majority will do to you because if you're a high bandwidth user, you're the minority and your opinion means squat.
We need to remove the tools of power that regulate to protect ourselves from the stupid majority.
Both sides of this story are lying about their intentions. Extra regulation will not make the net more neutral. Only removing the tools of power used by governments to regulate the internet at all, will make it neutral.
Does 60% of all threads debating a person qualify them for "You can debate them" status?
I'm just saying this out of consideration for our mods who have a lot of -1 off topics to do, otherwise.
Explain again why 95% of people need fiber to their home. 5% of internet users use 50% of the bandwidth. Even if that's not correct, why are we talking about wiring fiber to people's homes when there are thousands of starving children in the US? Get out of your ivory towers.
Remember when all those "crazy libertarians" with theirs "heartless ideals" said public funding of schools was a bad idea and that politicians corrupt the best of intentions?
I'd like to point out that you are now being taxed by the government to enforce RIAA policies for our children. Not exactly the income redistribution paradise people envisioned I think.
Who asked kdawson for his opinion? I'm seeing 4 articles from him and nothing but tags saying how drama filled his posts are; I don't subscribe.
You can give out what you own to anyone you want.
If I read this correctly
No, you're reading it incorrectly.
Prediction: The gravity 'constant' is not constant everywhere in the universe.
I'm guessing it's bigger than it should be because with a lower gravity constant it isn't as dense for its mass.
I'm not a message board troll, but do you have any idea what you're talking about?
1, nothing is free, energy comes from somewhere. 2, human energy comes from food at 4% thermal efficiency. Terrible idea.
It just doesn't make any sense. They're trying to put fiber in to homes, something that is not very profitable and companies have failed many times in the past. This is something all nerds would love, unlimited bandwidth to the home but the only article I see are about how they're cutting copper off and replacing it with fiber? Who cares?
This constant trumpeting of how terrible Verizon is makes me wonder what Slashdot editors have to gain through constantly posting these articles. Every other story posted here has some sort of editorial ulterior motive but I haven't been able to figure out the motive for hating Verizon yet. Any thoughts?
I'd pay 50$ dollars to never read a man-page or hear "RTFM" by a Linux zealot again.
I agree with the above poster. Bio Diesel, natural algae, etc.
Denial
of
service
The original post was mostly tongue in cheek but it's interesting what comments it draws.
I'd like to see how you ensure the (int) member of a structure always has a value between 1 and 10 in the face of a new programmer modifying the source code and doesn't know that it in fact needs to be between those values. You could make all other code have precondition contracts but that doesn't specify who set the member wrong in the first place. If the bug isn't found for a long time, you'll be hunting forever trying to catch something real DbC would have found in milliseconds. You could say "comment the code" but empirically as code changes, the comment don't get updated, even if there were comments in the first place.
Checking correct mutex usage is simple, enforce a total ordering on all mutex lock acquires. Eiffel could do that very easily, I don't know where you get the idea it can't. Knowing the system is deadlocked is different than being able to do something about it. Mutex deadlock would mean a kernel panic or killing of the offending processes in order to 'solve' the problem.
Explain again how a for loop is different than a from loop? for(i = 10; i >= 0; i--) from i:= 0 until i=10 loop i:=i+1 end But back to DbC, with Eiffel you could put in a loop invariant to make sure your loop is always one step closer to completing, something you can't implement in C without a lot of hackery, but then again, C programmers love hacking.
True, C is probably still the best language for kernel development.