Hm. The source code for Quake 3 measures roughly five megabytes. This person claims that he does not have the skills, on his own, to design and implement such a large project single-handedly. While it would greatly behoove him to learn enough to understand a 3D gaming engine, enough to create a rudimentary one alone and design a more feature-full one; it's not fair to give him a text editor and say "I expect pixel shaders working by next week".
Moreover, the original question was for a simple open source engine. Why specify open source if he didn't hope to learn about the engine itself?
Linus created a patch because of the virus. Thus, he created the patch for the virus. That is the meaning used in the article title.
What he patched was the Linux kernel. Thus, he created the patch for the kernel. You know this usage; however, it is not the only one. Your attempt at a correction was flawed.
The virus in question apparently wasn't infecting system files--it didn't have an elevation-of-privileges feature, so it couldn't access/bin,/usr, etc. (And/etc, too, though that's not relevant.)
So if a 'virus' is using standard OS features that legitimate applications also use, and suddenly the virus stops working, there's obviously been a change, and it breaks those legitimate applications.
In short, Torvalds didn't want to remove a feature without prior discussion.
So, you can do a skill check between the perception of those present and the theft success value (basically skill of the thief versus value of the item stolen). A successful check would mean that the thief gets away with the item on the spot.
Then you check the value of the stolen item versus the average value of the items in the owner's domain, and check that against the owner's carefulness rating. This determines whether the owner knows it's been stolen. To determine whether the thief's identified, you could check whether anyone had seen him recently and how many people were in the area to get a probability.
This means a little bit of math done every time you steal something and a few more integers to assign/remember for each NPC. It's an amortized cost of O(1). Why not do it?
Well, this is just one small thing. You have to add editor options or automatic tools for assigning domains to NPCs, establishing ownership, determining carefulness of an NPC, and so forth. If you want other interactions to be realistic, that's even more, with finite developers and resources.
At any rate, I would likely prefer it with a reasonably balanced but not terribly sophisticated system. It's almost as rewarding and also quite funny, for instance when someone ignores you as you cut their tapestries off the wall.
Video cards aren't optional. Your choice was between one with fewer features and a lower cost and one with more features but a higher price.
If we do see physics acceleration in the future, it'll probably start as a feature on some video cards, where it's a matter of $50 or so more for physics acceleration.
It might be possible, at that point, for a game to set up some rules for object interaction and let the video/physics card simply report what happens--the game would essentially be a set of instructions for the video card and a means to keep track of logical data (AI, player instructions, and so forth). That could be interesting.
Why do you need to modify logs in the first place? The only reason I can think of is when a logfile contains sensitive information such as the root password. And that won't be happening often, if at all.
So when it does happen, the main administrator can modify his privileges to allow write access to that logfile. But it's serious and rare enough that log files should not be writeable by normal sudoers.
I would ask anyone who can do so to provide me with a fictional or real example of evidence that would disprove intelligent design.
What would disprove evolution? A rabbit fossil in the Precambrian. Since there is a class of evidence that would disprove evolution if we actually had an example from it, evolution is a valid subject of science. If Intelligent Design cannot provide a similar method of disproving itself, it is not a valid theory; if it can provide that method, it is.
Related to that principle, to avoid licensing fees for WinCE, you'll be willing to write your own drivers for a large-scale product, especially since it's one you designed and manufactured yourself. Microsoft doesn't write drivers for Sony televisions, after all.
The issue is that getting the knowledge to know what to look for, and where, might take several years normally. Or you could attend a boot camp for a month or two and come out with a fair amount of knowledge.
I understand a desire for a reasonable level of DRM, even if I don't like it; but neither of these services support any OS except Windows 2000/XP, or any player except WMP10.
Does anyone know of a good, legal site for downloading movies in a universal format?
If your system will be used by more idiots than intelligent people, you should take adequate precautions. I shouldn't have to buy a hardware firewall to secure my computer; I shouldn't have to manually disable ports or services that I probably won't use. And I shouldn't have to work my ass off in order to make sure the operating system doesn't get a virus just because there's an infected computer in the area.
So, for instance, Ubuntu. Ubuntu ships with SSH installed, which means SSHD is on every Ubuntu computer (unless it's been manually removed). Few users will actually use SSHD on their machines, and it's simple enough to add the init script to start it when booting. So should the init script be enabled by default? Hell no; SSH is one of the main targets for remote attacks. Neither should Apache be active by default.
It's a matter of sane configurations, and I wouldn't trust a company that has an unencrypted remote desktop service to have sane configurations.
It looks like you, and probably most people, will benefit more from SVG and sleeker artwork than any effects.
Windows would be much prettier if it had a native, supported theme system (and changing colors doesn't count). You know, like just about every other window system available.
The current version of Enlightenment is Developers' Release 16. The next version is DR17. The Enlightenment dev team is apparently claiming that their software is in the alpha stage.
Even if you don't take that into consideration, consider this: DR16 was released six years ago. I personally expect Enlightenment DR17 to be officially released around 2008, or perhaps late 2007.
Library of Congress is better--the call number for each book is unique. With Dewey, you have a subject heading, and all the books within that subject are basically unordered, as far as the system goes. If you can't find the author of a book, then, what do you go by? Just the title?
Still, your personal system depends largely on how you usually remember your books. Do you usually say 'I had a green book about so high and maybe four or five hundred pages long'? If so, you might find it most intuitive to have your books physically ordered by appearance and use a database to browse by subject or author. Or do you usually do research on a particular subject? Then going by the Library of Congress system would probably be best. Or if you binge on particular authors, you might prefer categorizing authors by field and then arranging books by author.
Disclaimer: I am a librarian, and I work in a university library using LoC call numbers.
They don't argue that the concept of an individual who can leap tall buildings in a single bound is trademarked--you would have to patent the concept, and we don't have such patents yet (as far as I recall).
Rather, they say you can only use the term 'superhero' if you pay them a royalty.
Superman, used as a proper noun, refers to a guy who wears blue tights and red underwear with a red cape, shoots lasers from his eyes, flies, and is vulnerable to kryptonite.
Superman, used as a common noun, is a variant of superhuman.
The former usage is clearly covered by trademark; the latter is clearly not.
In this case, the term 'superhero' is common enough to be outside trademark, in my opinion. It's a plain compound, and while the decomposition would refer to a superset of the composed meaning, it's pretty damn close. Anyway, the OED first lists the term being used in 1917 by Greenhill Press, so they would hold the trademark if anyone. The company appears to be defunct, though.
Then Vista will get some exposure, virus writers will actually bother looking into its vulnerabilities and release exploits, and we'll be back where we started.
Though not quite--virus writers will come to a least common denominator of vulnerabilities or start writing heterogenous vector viruses.
The benefit of a source-based distribution is that./configure is executed, not just make; so the end user has a much larger set of options in configuring a package.
The benefit of a binary distribution is that the package maintainer only has to make sure that ONE configuration actually works, and only has to create one set of options for it.
In order for a binary distribution to maintain the same number of options, it would have to store a much larger library of binary packages, though it could present an identical interface to the end user. In order for a source-based distribution to maintain that number of options, however, the maintainer has to set the correct options for the correct USE flags and set up dependencies for each configuration (most likely, one set of dependencies for each USE flag, and just do union for multiple flags).
Yes, a binary distribution can use plugins and binary patches, but plugins require that the application be created in a particular manner. Binary patches are close to the same functionality, I believe, but correct me if I'm wrong.
So it's a question of storage versus number of options, and for that, source seems to be most efficient.
Still, the time spent compiling is quite annoying and may offset any other advantages presented by using source packages rather than binary packages.
I use Gentoo because I like the package manager more than anything else. And getting a system that has a complete GNU toolchain--autoconf, automake, so forth--by default; that it has little else until I install it; and its init system. It's hella annoying to wait for packages to compile, though.
How do you get Gentoo to do that? It's never actually slapped an editor on me when it's got a new version of a config file in/etc; it only prints a message "IMPORTANT: 238 files in/etc need updating". I could use OpenOffice to edit them if I wanted to.
Slashdot Mirror
Some people download music legally--for instance, Mirko Vidovic's work, or Orak's. I happen to have some GPL'd French metal on my computer, even.
Hm. The source code for Quake 3 measures roughly five megabytes. This person claims that he does not have the skills, on his own, to design and implement such a large project single-handedly. While it would greatly behoove him to learn enough to understand a 3D gaming engine, enough to create a rudimentary one alone and design a more feature-full one; it's not fair to give him a text editor and say "I expect pixel shaders working by next week".
Moreover, the original question was for a simple open source engine. Why specify open source if he didn't hope to learn about the engine itself?
Linus created a patch because of the virus. Thus, he created the patch for the virus. That is the meaning used in the article title.
What he patched was the Linux kernel. Thus, he created the patch for the kernel. You know this usage; however, it is not the only one. Your attempt at a correction was flawed.
The virus in question apparently wasn't infecting system files--it didn't have an elevation-of-privileges feature, so it couldn't access /bin, /usr, etc. (And /etc, too, though that's not relevant.)
So if a 'virus' is using standard OS features that legitimate applications also use, and suddenly the virus stops working, there's obviously been a change, and it breaks those legitimate applications.
In short, Torvalds didn't want to remove a feature without prior discussion.
So, you can do a skill check between the perception of those present and the theft success value (basically skill of the thief versus value of the item stolen). A successful check would mean that the thief gets away with the item on the spot.
Then you check the value of the stolen item versus the average value of the items in the owner's domain, and check that against the owner's carefulness rating. This determines whether the owner knows it's been stolen. To determine whether the thief's identified, you could check whether anyone had seen him recently and how many people were in the area to get a probability.
This means a little bit of math done every time you steal something and a few more integers to assign/remember for each NPC. It's an amortized cost of O(1). Why not do it?
Well, this is just one small thing. You have to add editor options or automatic tools for assigning domains to NPCs, establishing ownership, determining carefulness of an NPC, and so forth. If you want other interactions to be realistic, that's even more, with finite developers and resources.
At any rate, I would likely prefer it with a reasonably balanced but not terribly sophisticated system. It's almost as rewarding and also quite funny, for instance when someone ignores you as you cut their tapestries off the wall.
Video cards aren't optional. Your choice was between one with fewer features and a lower cost and one with more features but a higher price.
If we do see physics acceleration in the future, it'll probably start as a feature on some video cards, where it's a matter of $50 or so more for physics acceleration.
It might be possible, at that point, for a game to set up some rules for object interaction and let the video/physics card simply report what happens--the game would essentially be a set of instructions for the video card and a means to keep track of logical data (AI, player instructions, and so forth). That could be interesting.
Why do you need to modify logs in the first place? The only reason I can think of is when a logfile contains sensitive information such as the root password. And that won't be happening often, if at all.
So when it does happen, the main administrator can modify his privileges to allow write access to that logfile. But it's serious and rare enough that log files should not be writeable by normal sudoers.
I would ask anyone who can do so to provide me with a fictional or real example of evidence that would disprove intelligent design.
What would disprove evolution? A rabbit fossil in the Precambrian. Since there is a class of evidence that would disprove evolution if we actually had an example from it, evolution is a valid subject of science. If Intelligent Design cannot provide a similar method of disproving itself, it is not a valid theory; if it can provide that method, it is.
Related to that principle, to avoid licensing fees for WinCE, you'll be willing to write your own drivers for a large-scale product, especially since it's one you designed and manufactured yourself. Microsoft doesn't write drivers for Sony televisions, after all.
There are no hard subjects, only hard problems. And there is only one hard problem. (Or two; one being NP-hard and one being NP-complete.)
The issue is that getting the knowledge to know what to look for, and where, might take several years normally. Or you could attend a boot camp for a month or two and come out with a fair amount of knowledge.
I understand a desire for a reasonable level of DRM, even if I don't like it; but neither of these services support any OS except Windows 2000/XP, or any player except WMP10.
Does anyone know of a good, legal site for downloading movies in a universal format?
If your system will be used by more idiots than intelligent people, you should take adequate precautions. I shouldn't have to buy a hardware firewall to secure my computer; I shouldn't have to manually disable ports or services that I probably won't use. And I shouldn't have to work my ass off in order to make sure the operating system doesn't get a virus just because there's an infected computer in the area.
So, for instance, Ubuntu. Ubuntu ships with SSH installed, which means SSHD is on every Ubuntu computer (unless it's been manually removed). Few users will actually use SSHD on their machines, and it's simple enough to add the init script to start it when booting. So should the init script be enabled by default? Hell no; SSH is one of the main targets for remote attacks. Neither should Apache be active by default.
It's a matter of sane configurations, and I wouldn't trust a company that has an unencrypted remote desktop service to have sane configurations.
http://www.realhamster.com/
If you tell anyone about this, don't mention my name.
It looks like you, and probably most people, will benefit more from SVG and sleeker artwork than any effects.
Windows would be much prettier if it had a native, supported theme system (and changing colors doesn't count). You know, like just about every other window system available.
The current version of Enlightenment is Developers' Release 16. The next version is DR17. The Enlightenment dev team is apparently claiming that their software is in the alpha stage.
Even if you don't take that into consideration, consider this: DR16 was released six years ago. I personally expect Enlightenment DR17 to be officially released around 2008, or perhaps late 2007.
Library of Congress is better--the call number for each book is unique. With Dewey, you have a subject heading, and all the books within that subject are basically unordered, as far as the system goes. If you can't find the author of a book, then, what do you go by? Just the title?
Still, your personal system depends largely on how you usually remember your books. Do you usually say 'I had a green book about so high and maybe four or five hundred pages long'? If so, you might find it most intuitive to have your books physically ordered by appearance and use a database to browse by subject or author. Or do you usually do research on a particular subject? Then going by the Library of Congress system would probably be best. Or if you binge on particular authors, you might prefer categorizing authors by field and then arranging books by author.
Disclaimer: I am a librarian, and I work in a university library using LoC call numbers.
Somehow, it doesn't seem to want to install under WINE.
They don't argue that the concept of an individual who can leap tall buildings in a single bound is trademarked--you would have to patent the concept, and we don't have such patents yet (as far as I recall).
Rather, they say you can only use the term 'superhero' if you pay them a royalty.
Superman, used as a proper noun, refers to a guy who wears blue tights and red underwear with a red cape, shoots lasers from his eyes, flies, and is vulnerable to kryptonite.
Superman, used as a common noun, is a variant of superhuman.
The former usage is clearly covered by trademark; the latter is clearly not.
In this case, the term 'superhero' is common enough to be outside trademark, in my opinion. It's a plain compound, and while the decomposition would refer to a superset of the composed meaning, it's pretty damn close. Anyway, the OED first lists the term being used in 1917 by Greenhill Press, so they would hold the trademark if anyone. The company appears to be defunct, though.
Then Vista will get some exposure, virus writers will actually bother looking into its vulnerabilities and release exploits, and we'll be back where we started.
Though not quite--virus writers will come to a least common denominator of vulnerabilities or start writing heterogenous vector viruses.
Rape's all well and good as long as it's consensual. Though that technically is role-playing rather than rape...
Hey, let's just gang up on the LARPers.
The benefit of a source-based distribution is that ./configure is executed, not just make; so the end user has a much larger set of options in configuring a package.
The benefit of a binary distribution is that the package maintainer only has to make sure that ONE configuration actually works, and only has to create one set of options for it.
In order for a binary distribution to maintain the same number of options, it would have to store a much larger library of binary packages, though it could present an identical interface to the end user. In order for a source-based distribution to maintain that number of options, however, the maintainer has to set the correct options for the correct USE flags and set up dependencies for each configuration (most likely, one set of dependencies for each USE flag, and just do union for multiple flags).
Yes, a binary distribution can use plugins and binary patches, but plugins require that the application be created in a particular manner. Binary patches are close to the same functionality, I believe, but correct me if I'm wrong.
So it's a question of storage versus number of options, and for that, source seems to be most efficient.
Still, the time spent compiling is quite annoying and may offset any other advantages presented by using source packages rather than binary packages.
I use Gentoo because I like the package manager more than anything else. And getting a system that has a complete GNU toolchain--autoconf, automake, so forth--by default; that it has little else until I install it; and its init system. It's hella annoying to wait for packages to compile, though.
How do you get Gentoo to do that? It's never actually slapped an editor on me when it's got a new version of a config file in /etc; it only prints a message "IMPORTANT: 238 files in /etc need updating". I could use OpenOffice to edit them if I wanted to.
I'd argue that removing the scrollbar would be a useability issue, just like removing the address bar.
Speaking of which, does anyone know how to disallow that in Firefox (without recompiling)?