Re:Pheonix vs Mozilla on Win32 (I prefer mozilla)
on
Phoenix 0.5 Has Arrived
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
This is not intended as a flame or anything, but what is the point of quicklaunch, really? I realize it must be important in Win32, as so many people are talking about it. I mean, I start things like Phoenix and Evolution, and then have them running continuously, until I need to reboot or restart phoenix due to a memory leak or something - it's usually running for weeks at a time.
My guess is that the work pattern is different on a Win32 desktop, and that you normally start an app, use it, then close it before you start another. Is it due to the lack of virtual desktops, or some other UI-related issue? I would not think it's resources, as Windows should swap out unused apps just like other OS:s.
If Pi is "normal" (approx.: infinite, nonrepeating, and each digit occurrs with equal probability) then yes, it is true. The question is of course whether Pi fulfils those criteria. There is a conjecture that it does, and there's quite a bit of circumstantial indications that it is true. To my knowledge it is not yet proven, though.
No. The rearranging of bases, sizes, images and so on is just diluting it even more.
Say we get a trillion digit sequence. Chances are that if you look long and hard enough, widening your parameters for what's acceptable enough, you will find something. Say you accept not just a perfect (according to some pixellization algorightm) circle exactly filling a 500x500 square in base eleven, but a pretty good approximation of any geometrical figure in any base up to some base and with an image size of anything from 32x32 up to those 500x500 - you suddenly have not just one chance per position in the sequence, but millions. That "Bible Code" scam worked exactly the same way - cast your net wide enough and you can't fail to find something.
No it's not. There are an infinite amount of normal numbers, and for a given position in the sequence, each image will be in that position for _some_ number (for an infinite amount of numbers, actually).
If we stumble upon a 500x500 base 11 encoding of a circle, it's a lucky break (assuming we care about it at all). For any place in the sequence, we have a 500x500 block of something, identifiable or not. We also have 495x495 blocks in the same position (which would be more natural, considering it's divisible by 11) which codes for some image in base 11. The same goes for any resolution, base and image. It's like the bible code - look long enough, cast a wide enough net, and you will statistically find something. it's not proof of anything.
Compare it to hands of Bridge. The chance of dealing a perfect hand is miniscule - yet it's not a message if it does happen to someone (except, possibly, "don't trust that dealer"). Fantastically improbable events happen all the time. If one of those events should happen to be finding that circle (or triangle or whatever) in the known expansion of Pi, then so be it. It shows nothing.
But hey, if you want to base your outlook on reality on a statistical coincidence (that, as you say hasn't happened yet and is unlikely to happen), then who am I to stop you?
I don't think you really understood the strength of Pi being normal (if it is). It means all those images, as well as anything else codable in a finite length by necessity exist somewhere along the decimal expansion. The probability for it is one. There is no "whoa" if you find any of those things, as we already know for certain they will be there somewhere.
Well, it seems pi is normal, which means any finite sequence appears somewhere along the expansion of the number. So trivially, that image of a circle is in there somewhere, as is an image of a triangle, the source to Linux 4.0, an image of Bush playing with G.I. Joe dolls on his desk and so on.
Well, yes, it's sort of stupid. It is also pretty explainable. Once, I was in an animated discussion with a friend while I was chopping onions. I managed to slice up my arm pretty well (probably through an over-enthusiastic explanatory wave of the hand holding the knife), and not until I stepped in the blood on the floor did I (or my friend) realize I've hurt myself. Our attention was elsewhere.
The point is, if you don't get strong, immediate pain signals (which you probably do not get when the heat is under that threshold), having your mind elsewhere is probably enough for you to ignore it for too long. Note that the blister and other effects did not turn up until hours after he put away the computer, so it was a very gradual thing.
The heating was gradual. There's a pretty well known fact that if you put a frog in cool water, then gradually heat it, it will never jump out but be boiled alive. To a lesser extent our own sensory systems work the same; they react to differentials rather than absolute values.
In this case, the machine probably got warm, but not so quickly nor so much that it ever became really uncomfortable (and if your attention is fixed on your work, the threshold is even higher). Also, to some extent you can exchange temperature for time in getting an equivalent burn; ie. while something needs to be scalding hot to burn you with just a touch, it can be considerably cooler if it's in contact for a long period.
Re:Love/Hate... screw it, I love my Powerbook.
on
The Apple Name Game
·
· Score: 1
It's an asshole megacorp-wannabe that tries to fake Doing What's Right(tm) - just like most if not all other large corporations. Their only allegiance is to their shareholders and their executives (you decide the order). That's what a corporation is.
I don't think it is about people that are choosing between AOL and some other ISP; most of those have chosen already. This is rather about people that aren't using the net at all and are unsure if they ever will. Don't forget that this is a pretty sizeable part of the population. For some of them, the offer that you can get People magazine, Time and so on daily on the web may well be the final push needed to get an account.
so if you use console only - what time-management application might you use?
Well, vim:)
Basically, for the most part I'm pretty much stuck in front of a real desktop, and there I run Evolution. When I have a meeting, I'll just jot down any times and dates decided on on the inevitable reams of paper you get anyway, and then I move them over to Evo once I'm back at my desk.
The only time I really need PDA-like functionality is when I'm on the road (conferences and the like), and there I bring my laptop along anyway. I use it to take notes at seminars, demo simulations and such. Any itinerary, conference programs and so on I download or copy from mail, and keep in a couple of textfiles I can edit and annotate in any way I please.
I have a PalmIII which I used for about a year and a half. Eventually, the small screen, lack of a decent keyboard and the constant mess with syncing led me to simply carry my old but small Omnibook 800 around instead. I thus have a full Linux system (using the console only) with a far better screen and easy access to 'real' applications.
Yes, actually. I've been a teacher. But in none of those occupations do you actually have to keep going all the time for hours on end the same way that you do when interacting with your computer. And your voice _is_ tired and worn on those occasions when you have had to keep going for a full day.
And as I said, having to keep up a constant chatter is only one side of the coin; the other is to keep doing so while having to experience any number of other people doing the same; I won't even go into the problems of implementing speech recognition when the user is speaking in a sea of other voices and talking to other humans as well to the computer.
Voice being the natural way to interact with devices? Think it through: an entire office trying to dictate to their word processing program all at once, with people popping in to each other trying to talk about work; an airplane of road warriors all trying to dictate stuff to their respective laptops at once (without saying anything confidential); support departments trying to make dictation work with fifty other people speaking commands to their respective clients; or programmers trying to spell their way through their creations.
And have you ever actually tried speaking for eight to ten hours at a stretch? I'm not talking about random, occasional speech acts, but sustained, focused speech. You'd have about three weeks until laryngitis became an occupational hazard among white-collar workers.
Speech is nice, but it is very much a niche application. Not only now, but ever. A keyboard is faster than speech, and does not contribute to noise level or occupational damage nearly as much as sustained speech would. It's a nice, even essential, mode of operation for those apps when a keyboard just won't do; the disabled, firemen, surgeons and so on will rightly love the interface. For mainstream use, however, it's just not good enough even when it's perfect.
It could become an accessory input, on the lines of replacing menu commands for an app: mark text, say "cut", mark a place, say "paste" and so on, but it just would never replace keyboard input in any mainstream application.
And if the scientists in question are not interested in those areas? What do you suggest - making it illegal to fund "non-important" science? Who would have the say on what is important? And how exactly do you then stop those affected scientists from continuing their work at a university in another country, rather than toeing to the line and doing 'important' stuff? The science community is by it's nature a pretty mobile bunch of people; it's built into the system that spending time at other universities and other countries is seen as a good thing and a boon to one's career.
This is a parallel to those advocating the joining of competing open-source projects. It won't work to mandate what people work with there, and it won't work here. In both cases, people are working on what they do (or financing the work) because they find it fascinating and important, and no matter what others say they should be doing they will continue doing what they do.
Is there anything on earth more tiresome than a so-called "pagan"?
If there is, please post some examples here.
Um, christians waking you up on weekends to foist bright smiles, pamphlets and a "holier than thou"-attitude on you? Calmly undressing in front of them tends to scare them off, though.
In my opinion, the biggest stumbling block to replacing X on the desktop is having accelerated video drivers that work on other GUIs. I've talked to X developers about separating the video drivers into a layer that can be used directly by projects like PicoGUI, GGI, and Fresco, but they had no interest. From what I've seen of X developers, they want all the world to run in X.
Well, that would be a pretty natural attitude for any project developer.:)
XF86 does have a platform-agnostic module loader that (as far as I know) is used for drivers as well - why not implement that code and load the drivers the same way X does?
They have a responsibility to get their drivers to work as well as possible under XF86, and that's it. They have a publically documented, open interface between the server and the drivers; I'd say it'd be the responsibility of any other project to adapt to use their mechanism if they do not want to implement their own drivers. You really can't ask one project to take responsibility for other (competing?) projects to work.
I am looking to upgrade my machine. WIll I be getting the latest and greatest in insanely fast CPU:s? No. My current, aging machine (a 600Mhz Athlon) is actually well able to support just about everything I do today. While a speedup is nice, it has long since ceased to be on the 'must have'-list for me.
Instead, my interest is in getting a big laptop to use as a desktop replacement. Something with a decent-sized screen and keyboard, 3d (read: nvidia) graphics system and plenty of memory. Also needed is the ability to plug in a 'real' keyboard and mouse when I'm sitting by my desk. Whether the machine runs at 1.3, 1.7 or 2.2 Ghz really does not matter for me. What I'll have is a quieter desktop able to bring along wherever I am.
Looking around, this seems to be a bit of a trend; laptops are less expensive today than a few years ago and more capable. A number of my friends are also thinking along the same lines, and so are a lot of other people as well, judging by the increased sales of laptops.
Speed just is not the defining characteristic of computers today that it was just three or four years ago.
Digital is an advantage, as anyone with a digital cordless phone can tell you. You will not have a degradation of the signal (you're connected or you're not) so you won't get any interference, hissing, distortion or any other sound issues.
actually, that particular example would be a good thing. Current radar or laser based technology does have a tendency to make mistakes. It means both a small proportion of drivers getting speeding tickets erroneously, and a need for police departments to allow for a "speed rebate" - a margin of error which means you won't be stopped if you speed a little. And as any behavioral psychologist can tell you, if you have an 'accepted' margin for wrongdoing, it will lessen the respect and compliance for serious transgressions within the same field.
There are of course numerous far less benign uses for this, though./Janne
I did say "most", not "everybody" or even "most at the very highest level of power".
The vast majority of people in politics (at least in Sweden, and, I assume, in the US) are working at a local level, frequently without much in the way of pay, and usually with a day job to take care of. They, by and large, did not drift into politics because of the power (there is little at the local level) or the opportunities to enrich oneself (there is very little of that either, without starting to break laws). They entered politics because they felt it was important, and that they could make a positive difference. Some of those people sort of 'filter' up to the national level - and unfortunately, this does seem to concentrate the element of power seekers quite a bit - but even there, many are still motivated by the same things as when they started out.
It is always risky to compare different political systems, of course; I'm talking about politics and politicians in Sweden (as I see them), and you are talking about the US. There are a lot of differences between those systems, both in the power structures (where an individual politician in Sweden seems to be quite a bit more sircumscribed than his or her colleague in the US), and in how political activity is financed. It could be factors like that makes a huge difference, or it could be that people will behave the same regardless.
Now, I'm not saying a local council is composed of a bunch of saints with halo's on their heads; the same kind of backbiting, asslicking, railroading and so on goes on there as in any other organized enterprize. Any organization - whether political, hobby, religious, academic or whatever - will ahve the same kind of problems. I'm just saying that as a group, politicians are no better nor worse than the rest of us. The difference is really that a rotten, no-good politician can do a lot of damage and generate large headlines, while a rotten, no-good extension-cord salesman will not.
Slashdot Mirror
This is not intended as a flame or anything, but what is the point of quicklaunch, really? I realize it must be important in Win32, as so many people are talking about it. I mean, I start things like Phoenix and Evolution, and then have them running continuously, until I need to reboot or restart phoenix due to a memory leak or something - it's usually running for weeks at a time.
My guess is that the work pattern is different on a Win32 desktop, and that you normally start an app, use it, then close it before you start another. Is it due to the lack of virtual desktops, or some other UI-related issue? I would not think it's resources, as Windows should swap out unused apps just like other OS:s.
If Pi is "normal" (approx.: infinite, nonrepeating, and each digit occurrs with equal probability) then yes, it is true. The question is of course whether Pi fulfils those criteria. There is a conjecture that it does, and there's quite a bit of circumstantial indications that it is true. To my knowledge it is not yet proven, though.
No. The rearranging of bases, sizes, images and so on is just diluting it even more.
Say we get a trillion digit sequence. Chances are that if you look long and hard enough, widening your parameters for what's acceptable enough, you will find something. Say you accept not just a perfect (according to some pixellization algorightm) circle exactly filling a 500x500 square in base eleven, but a pretty good approximation of any geometrical figure in any base up to some base and with an image size of anything from 32x32 up to those 500x500 - you suddenly have not just one chance per position in the sequence, but millions. That "Bible Code" scam worked exactly the same way - cast your net wide enough and you can't fail to find something.
Have fun.
No it's not. There are an infinite amount of normal numbers, and for a given position in the sequence, each image will be in that position for _some_ number (for an infinite amount of numbers, actually).
If we stumble upon a 500x500 base 11 encoding of a circle, it's a lucky break (assuming we care about it at all). For any place in the sequence, we have a 500x500 block of something, identifiable or not. We also have 495x495 blocks in the same position (which would be more natural, considering it's divisible by 11) which codes for some image in base 11. The same goes for any resolution, base and image. It's like the bible code - look long enough, cast a wide enough net, and you will statistically find something. it's not proof of anything.
Compare it to hands of Bridge. The chance of dealing a perfect hand is miniscule - yet it's not a message if it does happen to someone (except, possibly, "don't trust that dealer"). Fantastically improbable events happen all the time. If one of those events should happen to be finding that circle (or triangle or whatever) in the known expansion of Pi, then so be it. It shows nothing.
But hey, if you want to base your outlook on reality on a statistical coincidence (that, as you say hasn't happened yet and is unlikely to happen), then who am I to stop you?
No. I did write "seem" :) It does lokk like a pretty good conjecture, though, so I don't think anyone would be surprised if it it proven.
I don't think you really understood the strength of Pi being normal (if it is). It means all those images, as well as anything else codable in a finite length by necessity exist somewhere along the decimal expansion. The probability for it is one. There is no "whoa" if you find any of those things, as we already know for certain they will be there somewhere.
Well, it seems pi is normal, which means any finite sequence appears somewhere along the expansion of the number. So trivially, that image of a circle is in there somewhere, as is an image of a triangle, the source to Linux 4.0, an image of Bush playing with G.I. Joe dolls on his desk and so on.
Well, yes, it's sort of stupid. It is also pretty explainable. Once, I was in an animated discussion with a friend while I was chopping onions. I managed to slice up my arm pretty well (probably through an over-enthusiastic explanatory wave of the hand holding the knife), and not until I stepped in the blood on the floor did I (or my friend) realize I've hurt myself. Our attention was elsewhere.
The point is, if you don't get strong, immediate pain signals (which you probably do not get when the heat is under that threshold), having your mind elsewhere is probably enough for you to ignore it for too long. Note that the blister and other effects did not turn up until hours after he put away the computer, so it was a very gradual thing.
The heating was gradual. There's a pretty well known fact that if you put a frog in cool water, then gradually heat it, it will never jump out but be boiled alive. To a lesser extent our own sensory systems work the same; they react to differentials rather than absolute values.
In this case, the machine probably got warm, but not so quickly nor so much that it ever became really uncomfortable (and if your attention is fixed on your work, the threshold is even higher). Also, to some extent you can exchange temperature for time in getting an equivalent burn; ie. while something needs to be scalding hot to burn you with just a touch, it can be considerably cooler if it's in contact for a long period.
It's an asshole megacorp-wannabe that tries to fake Doing What's Right(tm) - just like most if not all other large corporations. Their only allegiance is to their shareholders and their executives (you decide the order). That's what a corporation is.
I don't think it is about people that are choosing between AOL and some other ISP; most of those have chosen already. This is rather about people that aren't using the net at all and are unsure if they ever will. Don't forget that this is a pretty sizeable part of the population. For some of them, the offer that you can get People magazine, Time and so on daily on the web may well be the final push needed to get an account.
so if you use console only - what time-management application might you use?
:)
Well, vim
Basically, for the most part I'm pretty much stuck in front of a real desktop, and there I run Evolution. When I have a meeting, I'll just jot down any times and dates decided on on the inevitable reams of paper you get anyway, and then I move them over to Evo once I'm back at my desk.
The only time I really need PDA-like functionality is when I'm on the road (conferences and the like), and there I bring my laptop along anyway. I use it to take notes at seminars, demo simulations and such. Any itinerary, conference programs and so on I download or copy from mail, and keep in a couple of textfiles I can edit and annotate in any way I please.
I have a PalmIII which I used for about a year and a half. Eventually, the small screen, lack of a decent keyboard and the constant mess with syncing led me to simply carry my old but small Omnibook 800 around instead. I thus have a full Linux system (using the console only) with a far better screen and easy access to 'real' applications.
Yes, actually. I've been a teacher. But in none of those occupations do you actually have to keep going all the time for hours on end the same way that you do when interacting with your computer. And your voice _is_ tired and worn on those occasions when you have had to keep going for a full day.
And as I said, having to keep up a constant chatter is only one side of the coin; the other is to keep doing so while having to experience any number of other people doing the same; I won't even go into the problems of implementing speech recognition when the user is speaking in a sea of other voices and talking to other humans as well to the computer.
Voice being the natural way to interact with devices? Think it through: an entire office trying to dictate to their word processing program all at once, with people popping in to each other trying to talk about work; an airplane of road warriors all trying to dictate stuff to their respective laptops at once (without saying anything confidential); support departments trying to make dictation work with fifty other people speaking commands to their respective clients; or programmers trying to spell their way through their creations.
And have you ever actually tried speaking for eight to ten hours at a stretch? I'm not talking about random, occasional speech acts, but sustained, focused speech. You'd have about three weeks until laryngitis became an occupational hazard among white-collar workers.
Speech is nice, but it is very much a niche application. Not only now, but ever. A keyboard is faster than speech, and does not contribute to noise level or occupational damage nearly as much as sustained speech would. It's a nice, even essential, mode of operation for those apps when a keyboard just won't do; the disabled, firemen, surgeons and so on will rightly love the interface. For mainstream use, however, it's just not good enough even when it's perfect.
It could become an accessory input, on the lines of replacing menu commands for an app: mark text, say "cut", mark a place, say "paste" and so on, but it just would never replace keyboard input in any mainstream application.
And if the scientists in question are not interested in those areas? What do you suggest - making it illegal to fund "non-important" science? Who would have the say on what is important? And how exactly do you then stop those affected scientists from continuing their work at a university in another country, rather than toeing to the line and doing 'important' stuff? The science community is by it's nature a pretty mobile bunch of people; it's built into the system that spending time at other universities and other countries is seen as a good thing and a boon to one's career.
This is a parallel to those advocating the joining of competing open-source projects. It won't work to mandate what people work with there, and it won't work here. In both cases, people are working on what they do (or financing the work) because they find it fascinating and important, and no matter what others say they should be doing they will continue doing what they do.
Of course, the difference is that none of the above show up on my doorstep on saturday mornings trying to make me join them.
Is there anything on earth more tiresome than a so-called "pagan"?
If there is, please post some examples here.
Um, christians waking you up on weekends to foist bright smiles, pamphlets and a "holier than thou"-attitude on you? Calmly undressing in front of them tends to scare them off, though.
Why do you feel "muggle" is derogatory?
In my opinion, the biggest stumbling block to replacing X on the desktop is having accelerated video drivers that work on other GUIs. I've talked to X developers about separating the video drivers into a layer that can be used directly by projects like PicoGUI, GGI, and Fresco, but they had no interest. From what I've seen of X developers, they want all the world to run in X.
:)
Well, that would be a pretty natural attitude for any project developer.
XF86 does have a platform-agnostic module loader that (as far as I know) is used for drivers as well - why not implement that code and load the drivers the same way X does?
They have a responsibility to get their drivers to work as well as possible under XF86, and that's it. They have a publically documented, open interface between the server and the drivers; I'd say it'd be the responsibility of any other project to adapt to use their mechanism if they do not want to implement their own drivers. You really can't ask one project to take responsibility for other (competing?) projects to work.
I am looking to upgrade my machine. WIll I be getting the latest and greatest in insanely fast CPU:s? No. My current, aging machine (a 600Mhz Athlon) is actually well able to support just about everything I do today. While a speedup is nice, it has long since ceased to be on the 'must have'-list for me.
Instead, my interest is in getting a big laptop to use as a desktop replacement. Something with a decent-sized screen and keyboard, 3d (read: nvidia) graphics system and plenty of memory. Also needed is the ability to plug in a 'real' keyboard and mouse when I'm sitting by my desk. Whether the machine runs at 1.3, 1.7 or 2.2 Ghz really does not matter for me. What I'll have is a quieter desktop able to bring along wherever I am.
Looking around, this seems to be a bit of a trend; laptops are less expensive today than a few years ago and more capable. A number of my friends are also thinking along the same lines, and so are a lot of other people as well, judging by the increased sales of laptops.
Speed just is not the defining characteristic of computers today that it was just three or four years ago.
Digital is an advantage, as anyone with a digital cordless phone can tell you. You will not have a degradation of the signal (you're connected or you're not) so you won't get any interference, hissing, distortion or any other sound issues.
actually, that particular example would be a good thing. Current radar or laser based technology does have a tendency to make mistakes. It means both a small proportion of drivers getting speeding tickets erroneously, and a need for police departments to allow for a "speed rebate" - a margin of error which means you won't be stopped if you speed a little. And as any behavioral psychologist can tell you, if you have an 'accepted' margin for wrongdoing, it will lessen the respect and compliance for serious transgressions within the same field.
/Janne
There are of course numerous far less benign uses for this, though.
I did say "most", not "everybody" or even "most at the very highest level of power".
The vast majority of people in politics (at least in Sweden, and, I assume, in the US) are working at a local level, frequently without much in the way of pay, and usually with a day job to take care of. They, by and large, did not drift into politics because of the power (there is little at the local level) or the opportunities to enrich oneself (there is very little of that either, without starting to break laws). They entered politics because they felt it was important, and that they could make a positive difference. Some of those people sort of 'filter' up to the national level - and unfortunately, this does seem to concentrate the element of power seekers quite a bit - but even there, many are still motivated by the same things as when they started out.
It is always risky to compare different political systems, of course; I'm talking about politics and politicians in Sweden (as I see them), and you are talking about the US. There are a lot of differences between those systems, both in the power structures (where an individual politician in Sweden seems to be quite a bit more sircumscribed than his or her colleague in the US), and in how political activity is financed. It could be factors like that makes a huge difference, or it could be that people will behave the same regardless.
Now, I'm not saying a local council is composed of a bunch of saints with halo's on their heads; the same kind of backbiting, asslicking, railroading and so on goes on there as in any other organized enterprize. Any organization - whether political, hobby, religious, academic or whatever - will ahve the same kind of problems. I'm just saying that as a group, politicians are no better nor worse than the rest of us. The difference is really that a rotten, no-good politician can do a lot of damage and generate large headlines, while a rotten, no-good extension-cord salesman will not.