Servers yeah linux or its ilk, say BSD, is the natural choice. Which is what this article seems to be about.
But for desktops?
The whole "World Domination" thing was originally, and deep down always, just a joke. Linux will always be niche. That's OK. A 5% share of desktops would be lovely, 10% better (but unlikely). For power users probably much much more. The thing is Linux comes with so many wonderful and powerful free tools, and it is so easy to use (for the cli aware) that it, or similar OS, is the perfect environment. Windows less so. I'm not talking word processing or spreadsheets or photo manip, though there are of course decent apps for those.
When I first moved to Qld I thought daylight saving would be a good idea, but now I've changed my mind.
Brisbane is so far east it should just about be in a diferent timezone not in Eastern Standard. Because of that the amount of daylight in the early mornings is amazing, there is actually time to do quite a bit if you get up early. And it is cool. Summer nights on the other hand in Brisbane can be very unpleasant, long protracted heat waves make doing stuff in the early morning very attractive.
As for cancer. Schools get out at 3pm. The recommended danger time for UV exposure is 10am - 2pm. But with DST schools are finishing with the sun at the 2pm position, and at this latitude there is less UV absorption... it is pretty intense. So the kids are exposed to more UV for longer.
But it did cause headaches for programmers. We had some sites that needed manual fixes for the extension before and after. Some real time data requires local time which means it has to know about DST. It was a PITA.
So. Since we are giving up some privacy for their extra profit I presume the cost of 2142 will be a token amount then. Like buying a newspaper. Yes? No? If no then why. Why should I pay good money for a game that then does this shit to me?
Come on. Look I'm not an American. But it seems to me that most of the US soldiers who fought in the War of Independence, and the World Wars were not fighting for economic or simple threat related reasons. Not saying it wasn't why the wars started but it wasn't why people fought it and it is not the reason still touted, at least to the world why. I thought one of the big things was about fighting tyranny. You know the whole liberty thing. Well seems to me that it is blindingly obvious that a loss of privacy means a loss of liberty... how can you be free if the powerful know what you are doing, and have the power to stop it and imprison you.. even if it is innocent. I'm not talking about freedom from a philosophical point of view (free will / determinism) but the range of options people realistically have to influence society and contribute.
I'm afraid those ideas are severely flawed, we definitly do have the resources to rise again, that isn't the issue.
So wrong I almost didn't bother replying. OK smart arse. How do you get from stone age to nuclear without fossil fuels?
And what scalable replacement energy solutions? Don't mention tar sands, ethanol, biofuels, nuclear or fusion... the lead times or inability to scale don't allow it.
Unless you have some brilliant solution I suspect your just mouthing over optimistic unrealistic stuff you read without questioning somewhere.
Rome didn't exhaust all of its natural resources. There were still forests, there was still plenty of iron, copper, tin, gold etc , coal if they knew how to use it, same for oil. They collapsed because of internal reasons and pressure from migrating peoples. Other civilisations collapsed because they exhausted the soil in their area or triggered salination of their fields... given time this can recover. But once the oil is gone it is gone. It used to ooze out of the ground in places... how likely do you think it will be to find sources like that after us?
Human beings are adaptable because they use their brain. They don't say "don't worry it will be ok" when faced with a problem. They work out what to do and head it off (unless it is long term), I don't see many farmers who don't plan for the year. There is a problem with our civilisation I think. Because we have had it so good for so long we are intrigued by disaster stories, but don't actually believe that anything bad can happen to us. So for many peak oil is entertaining but we keep on imagining that someone, somewhere will fix it for us. A technological Santa Claus. I don't believe in fairy tales. Bad things can indeed happen.
The sad fact is that this time around we've burned up many of the resources that a resurging civilization would need. Rome at its peak wasn't obliterating non-renewable resources the way we are.
Fred Hoyle pointed this out over 40 years ago in his book "Of Men and Galaxies". For our world this is intelligent life's only chance to become advanced technologically. I found it very depressing when I first read, primarily because it was so logical... even though I am an optimist. If we collapse we wont have the resources to rise again.
A similar, more recent, effort at this kind of depressing analysis is an essay titled "The Road to Olduvai Gorge".
He's not talking about simple momentum transfer of photons. Seems a bit dodgy but lets see if his machine works.
Also it's not in the same league as perpetual motion since it requires a reasonable power source (1 kw magnetron) to generate pitiful thrust (300 millinewtons). Seems to me that the device is going to be hard to build and very inefficient.
People are remaking theories all the time. Whether they stand up to evidence is another matter. This guy might be onto something. If he has a working example then theory is on the back foot.
As for examples of the issue you were discussing. Hmm. How about crystal sets. They used a solid state diode before the theory existed for semiconductors. Of course semiconductors couldn't advance without the theory, since a good predictive theory is very useful for applications.
Very high energy cosmic rays do this often in our atmosphere. I would have thought that if it was that dangerous we wouldn't be here to argue about it.
Your post is so much like the old "people who say that, haven't tried linux in years" posts it is creepy. Looks like a parody, but not sure... is it or isn't it. Making my head spin.
Yeah. And it's not like it's a big deal to reduce the number of planets you have to remember at school from 9 to 8. And it's the last one, the one most people find hardest to remember.
OTOH. If they included Pluto, Xena and Ceres as planets then people would just get confused. People like to think they know the planets, but don't give a rat's about other things like asteroids, apollos, Kuiper objects, moons, comets etc. I'm sure they can handle dropping one easier than it was to add one in 1930.
I would have thought the strongest evolutionary pressure for stereoscopic vision is simply gravity. Snakes might be an occassional threat but for a tree dwelling creature falling would be a greater risk. Second would be finding the next meal -- this is where the colour vision comes in. Snakes? Snakes are reptiles with a slower metabolism... and hence a long time between feeds. Mammals need to eat often. I would think the snakes would be at a disadvantage in such an environment.
Obligatory Futurama quote: "you win again gravity", Zap
Why don't you guys use real statistics and not something the NRA made up. This stuff is an urban myth. Also realise the situation in Australia is different. In Oz 60% of homicides happen in the home, in the US most happen in the street.
Do you mean "immature" or "childlike"? The former is not worth having, the latter has often been valued but is often confused (incorrectly) with immaturity. I prefer to regard myself as childlike.
Take a look at the kind of discourses on design patterns and pattern languages. Pure philosophy.
Also I'd say computer science people will have a totally different take on Descarte's Mind-Body problem. As in 'what problem'. And I can think of a bunch of other things that CS will change your outlook on.
JPEG is a great format. At about 0.8 quality it is pretty hard to tell the difference between lossless and lossy. 0.9 is practically lossless. There is also a lossless part of the standard though I don't know if it is ever implemented. Of course if you are reprocessing an image all the time then I can understand people's concern, it should be in another format (TIFF). But there is a vast difference between an image of 0.2 and 0.8 quality for most purposes. If it starts at 0.8 is converted and manipulated in a lossless format and then converted back to a 0.8 JPEG then I don't think you would be able to tell.
Also PNG was devised to circumvent the GIF patent.
Heh heh. Yeah. I tried installing from a CD onto a machine that used a TSR CD driver... oh the humanity! So you had to start up dos. Then warmboot to get the boot from the CD then discover halfway through the install all these arcane 'trap' messages... argggh! Then used rawwrite (or whatever the OS2 version was) to create all those floppies and then still have the thing barf on some obscure driver. Not happy.
After that installing red hat and slack were a breeze even without the curses installer.
Slashdot Mirror
Servers yeah linux or its ilk, say BSD, is the natural choice. Which is what this article seems to be about.
But for desktops?
The whole "World Domination" thing was originally, and deep down always, just a joke. Linux will always be niche. That's OK. A 5% share of desktops would be lovely, 10% better (but unlikely). For power users probably much much more. The thing is Linux comes with so many wonderful and powerful free tools, and it is so easy to use (for the cli aware) that it, or similar OS, is the perfect environment. Windows less so. I'm not talking word processing or spreadsheets or photo manip, though there are of course decent apps for those.
When I first moved to Qld I thought daylight saving would be a good idea, but now I've changed my mind.
Brisbane is so far east it should just about be in a diferent timezone not in Eastern Standard. Because of that the amount of daylight in the early mornings is amazing, there is actually time to do quite a bit if you get up early. And it is cool. Summer nights on the other hand in Brisbane can be very unpleasant, long protracted heat waves make doing stuff in the early morning very attractive.
As for cancer. Schools get out at 3pm. The recommended danger time for UV exposure is 10am - 2pm. But with DST schools are finishing with the sun at the 2pm position, and at this latitude there is less UV absorption ... it is pretty intense. So the kids are exposed to more UV for longer.
But it did cause headaches for programmers. We had some sites that needed manual fixes for the extension before and after. Some real time data requires local time which means it has to know about DST. It was a PITA.
My 2 cents.
But there is for the PAQ algorithm (see link in summary) with mention of the awarding of the Hutter prize.
So. Since we are giving up some privacy for their extra profit I presume the cost of 2142 will be a token amount then. Like buying a newspaper. Yes? No? If no then why. Why should I pay good money for a game that then does this shit to me?
Come on. Look I'm not an American. But it seems to me that most of the US soldiers who fought in the War of Independence, and the World Wars were not fighting for economic or simple threat related reasons. Not saying it wasn't why the wars started but it wasn't why people fought it and it is not the reason still touted, at least to the world why. I thought one of the big things was about fighting tyranny. You know the whole liberty thing. Well seems to me that it is blindingly obvious that a loss of privacy means a loss of liberty ... how can you be free if the powerful know what you are doing, and have the power to stop it and imprison you .. even if it is innocent. I'm not talking about freedom from a philosophical point of view (free will / determinism) but the range of options people realistically have to influence society and contribute.
I'm afraid those ideas are severely flawed, we definitly do have the resources to rise again, that isn't the issue.
So wrong I almost didn't bother replying. OK smart arse. How do you get from stone age to nuclear without fossil fuels?
And what scalable replacement energy solutions? Don't mention tar sands, ethanol, biofuels, nuclear or fusion ... the lead times or inability to scale don't allow it.
Unless you have some brilliant solution I suspect your just mouthing over optimistic unrealistic stuff you read without questioning somewhere.
Rome didn't exhaust all of its natural resources. There were still forests, there was still plenty of iron, copper, tin, gold etc , coal if they knew how to use it, same for oil. They collapsed because of internal reasons and pressure from migrating peoples. Other civilisations collapsed because they exhausted the soil in their area or triggered salination of their fields ... given time this can recover. But once the oil is gone it is gone. It used to ooze out of the ground in places ... how likely do you think it will be to find sources like that after us?
Human beings are adaptable because they use their brain. They don't say "don't worry it will be ok" when faced with a problem. They work out what to do and head it off (unless it is long term), I don't see many farmers who don't plan for the year. There is a problem with our civilisation I think. Because we have had it so good for so long we are intrigued by disaster stories, but don't actually believe that anything bad can happen to us. So for many peak oil is entertaining but we keep on imagining that someone, somewhere will fix it for us. A technological Santa Claus. I don't believe in fairy tales. Bad things can indeed happen.
The sad fact is that this time around we've burned up many of the resources that a resurging civilization would need. Rome at its peak wasn't obliterating non-renewable resources the way we are.
Fred Hoyle pointed this out over 40 years ago in his book "Of Men and Galaxies". For our world this is intelligent life's only chance to become advanced technologically. I found it very depressing when I first read, primarily because it was so logical ... even though I am an optimist. If we collapse we wont have the resources to rise again.
A similar, more recent, effort at this kind of depressing analysis is an essay titled "The Road to Olduvai Gorge".
You could even christen it the POS Microsoft (Piece of Ship)
He's not talking about simple momentum transfer of photons. Seems a bit dodgy but lets see if his machine works.
Also it's not in the same league as perpetual motion since it requires a reasonable power source (1 kw magnetron) to generate pitiful thrust (300 millinewtons). Seems to me that the device is going to be hard to build and very inefficient.
People are remaking theories all the time. Whether they stand up to evidence is another matter. This guy might be onto something. If he has a working example then theory is on the back foot.
As for examples of the issue you were discussing. Hmm. How about crystal sets. They used a solid state diode before the theory existed for semiconductors. Of course semiconductors couldn't advance without the theory, since a good predictive theory is very useful for applications.
Yeah. Get the prototype tested. Evidence beats theory any day, well almost.
Very high energy cosmic rays do this often in our atmosphere. I would have thought that if it was that dangerous we wouldn't be here to argue about it.
Your post is so much like the old "people who say that, haven't tried linux in years" posts it is creepy. Looks like a parody, but not sure ... is it or isn't it. Making my head spin.
Yeah. And it's not like it's a big deal to reduce the number of planets you have to remember at school from 9 to 8. And it's the last one, the one most people find hardest to remember.
OTOH. If they included Pluto, Xena and Ceres as planets then people would just get confused. People like to think they know the planets, but don't give a rat's about other things like asteroids, apollos, Kuiper objects, moons, comets etc. I'm sure they can handle dropping one easier than it was to add one in 1930.
Actually, I think it is funny that the parent post is rated "Funny" instead of insightful.
I would have thought the strongest evolutionary pressure for stereoscopic vision is simply gravity. Snakes might be an occassional threat but for a tree dwelling creature falling would be a greater risk. Second would be finding the next meal -- this is where the colour vision comes in. Snakes? Snakes are reptiles with a slower metabolism ... and hence a long time between feeds. Mammals need to eat often. I would think the snakes would be at a disadvantage in such an environment.
Obligatory Futurama quote: "you win again gravity", Zap
This reminded me that prehistoric peoples were able to make obsidian blades with edges of molecular width. Though atomic thinness beats that I guess.
Why don't you guys use real statistics and not something the NRA made up. This stuff is an urban myth. Also realise the situation in Australia is different. In Oz 60% of homicides happen in the home, in the US most happen in the street.
Do you mean "immature" or "childlike"? The former is not worth having, the latter has often been valued but is often confused (incorrectly) with immaturity. I prefer to regard myself as childlike.
Take a look at the kind of discourses on design patterns and pattern languages. Pure philosophy.
Also I'd say computer science people will have a totally different take on Descarte's Mind-Body problem. As in 'what problem'. And I can think of a bunch of other things that CS will change your outlook on.
JPEG is a great format. At about 0.8 quality it is pretty hard to tell the difference between lossless and lossy. 0.9 is practically lossless. There is also a lossless part of the standard though I don't know if it is ever implemented. Of course if you are reprocessing an image all the time then I can understand people's concern, it should be in another format (TIFF). But there is a vast difference between an image of 0.2 and 0.8 quality for most purposes. If it starts at 0.8 is converted and manipulated in a lossless format and then converted back to a 0.8 JPEG then I don't think you would be able to tell.
Also PNG was devised to circumvent the GIF patent.
Heh heh. Yeah. I tried installing from a CD onto a machine that used a TSR CD driver ... oh the humanity! So you had to start up dos. Then warmboot to get the boot from the CD then discover halfway through the install all these arcane 'trap' messages ... argggh! Then used rawwrite (or whatever the OS2 version was) to create all those floppies and then still have the thing barf on some obscure driver. Not happy.
After that installing red hat and slack were a breeze even without the curses installer.