You can write console apps in Kylix (and Delphi). So the question really comes down to how well the compiler optimizes the code.
I can't imagine that
begin
writeln('Hello, world');
end.
would compile a lot different from
main() {
printf("Hello, world\n");
}
I guess it's conceivable that gcc would optimize some things better on Linux, since most of the development is tested on that platform. By the same token, I would think that bcc32 (Borland's cross-compiler) would do better on Windows platforms.
Magee: Where did the idea for Commercial-Advance come from? And how did you know it was an idea you could take all the way?
Lacomis: The idea came from an inventor named Jerry Iggulden, who had hired ADL in the past to promote another technology of his relating to infrared telecommunication. He became aware of ADLE's capabilities, and a year or two later he came to us with the idea of removing commercials from prerecorded programs. From the first time I heard about it, I felt there had to be a market for this if we could make it work at a reasonable price.
This is how the device works. While you're recording a television program on your VCR, Commercial-Advance collects the telltale "events" of commercials (such as imperceptible black frames at the beginning and end of commercials). Sensors detect and store these events, and a post-processing algorithm analyzes them to determine the location of all the commercials on the tape. During playback, the system analyzes the signals for commercials and triggers a fast-forward mechanism. Only by going past the commercials during the recording process and looking back at the events can you find them. That was the key notion to making the technology work accurately.
ADLE did some research and put together a team of ADL engineers to prove the feasibility of the technology on a broad level. We were able to convince prospective licensee companies that it was a worthwhile technology and there was a market. Then we hired an outside firm to help us develop the technology further.
Neat trick. Analysing the suspected commercial start/end points as a whole, after the fact is a simple and probably very effective way to cull false positives from the list.
One odd note is the reseachers' claim that the Web contains "nearly a billion documents," when one search engine alone claims to index more than a third beyond that
Look deeper, grasshopper:
...This expression predicts typically that the shortest path between two pages selected at random among the 800 million nodes (i.e. documents) that made up the Web in 1999 is around 19 assuming that such a path exists...
...the typical number of clicks between two Web pages is about 19, despite the fact that there are now over one billion pages out there...
Hey, Timothy, next time try reading the article instead if skimming it.
This may be redundant, but these quotes have to be seen to be believed (empahsis added in the following):
...Microsoft may be the only company in the world with the skill and clout to pull it off...
...the public will fully accept the HailStorm concept and Microsoft as a trusted repository within five to 10 years...
..Initially, HailStorm will consist of a universal password and a service...
...If you are in a car accident, HailStorm could automatically send your medical history and insurance information to the hospital before the ambulance arrived...
...Microsoft officials acknowledged the company has been vulnerable to attacks and system failures...
...They're the most attacked infrastructure there is on the Internet, they're the No. 1 target for hackers...
It'll never work. There is no fucking way I'd trust anyone, let alone microsoft, with that sort, or quantity, of private information.
Maybe this is just my paranoia speaking, but who else thinks this was deliberate? Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it was a deliberate security hole, but the release notes for that patch said that basically that they hadn't tested for the security hole on earlier versions of IE than 5.01.
Now, it's changed to "the patch doesn't work for earlier versions, you should download the latest version so the patch will work". Where do they say that the hole actually existed on earlier versions of IE? And why doesn't it affect 5.01 SP2? Why the hell wouldn't 5.5 include whatever code was in 5.01 SP2?
I've got a better idea. Install Opera, or better yet, Linux.
Fact 1: My mother couldn't install Debian to save her life. Or Windows.
Fact 2: Several friends of mine have muddled through windows installs, with 95% success, needing help only for things like getting a new modem driver or running dxdiag to check out problems with directX. A couple of those have also muddled through Debian and RH installs, needing only minimal tweaking at the end (simple security measures, xf86 configuration).
Fact 3: I have no trouble installing either, unless there's hardware problems or crap drivers.
From this, I conclude:
a) If you don't know what you're doing, installing either OS is impossible.
b) If you have some good user knowledge, but little administrator knowledge, you can almost install either OS.
c) If you have good adminstrator knowledge, you can install either OS easily.
d) If you have hardware problems or bad drivers, you're going to have difficulty installing either OS, pretty much regardless of how literate you are.
Yeah, actually. I've installed several versions of windows and linux, on a variety of boxes. The point was that it's not surprising that Microsoft suggests having windows pre-installed, given what a pain in the ass it is to install it manually for most lusers. Oh, and that windows is about as hard (or easy) to install as linux is. Understand that?
Microsoft says you'll have the best experience only if you buy a brand-new system with XP preinstalled.
Of course you will. Then you don't get to find out how difficult* windows is to install from scratch.
* About as difficult** as Debian, in case you were wondering.
** That is to say, practially impossible if you don't know what you're doing, difficult if you think you know what you're doing, and an absolute piece of cake*** if you've done it before.
*** Until you hit hardware conflicts or crappy drivers, then you're toast.
Actually, it'd be 'Redundant', wouldn't it? Since the 'by' line clearly indicates the post is #1.
Now, this post is Offtopic.
Of course, I could throw in a comment about the article to change that, but I can't seem to actually see the article. You have requested an item that requires a subscription to PNAS Online.
Yes. And I can't remember the last time I had something that wouldn't run on my fairly typical system (GeForce 2 GTS, Sound Blaster Live, Pentium III 800).
Yeah, because that seems to be the 'stock' test system nowdays. I had hideous problems getting my on-board sound chip working properly, and I finally gave up and bought an SB Live. EVERYTHING seems to support GeForce/SBLive (including xfree86/gnome). Move from that combo at your peril.
Childproof medicine bottles. The hard-to-open caps were introduced in 1972. W. Kip Viscusi, a professor at Harvard Law School, took a close look at the number of children who were poisoned before and after the change. He found that, contrary to what anyone could have imagined, there was absolutely no net savings of life. "First, a lot of people left the caps off, and we had a lot of open-bottle poisonings," he says. "Second, parents were lulled into a false sense of security; a fair number of preschool kids can still open these bottles."
Now I grant you, it's not possible to keep an eye on your kids 24/7, but it seems there's a growing trend among parents to hand off the responsibility any way they can. If parents actually used this sort of technology as a tool, in addition to responsible parenting practices, it'd be a great idea. But I fear that it'll be just one more area that parents will disown the responsibility, and hand it off to the government. Ack. Maybe I'm just too pessimistic, but if this works anything like a v-chip, it won't be a guaranteed offensive content blocker anyway. Not to mention the whole "the government is deciding what constitutes offensive" argument.
What a content-free article! As far as I can tell, this is the only paragraph that contains any information on the drawbacks of overclocking, and even then is pretty light!
Knowledgeable overclockers can keep a system running smoothly for years, but risks still abound. The most common overclocking techniques increase the power supplied to everything connected to the motherboard, meaning that graphics processors, hard drives and other components may overheat or perform erratically. But stray cooling fluids can short out components, and a wrong setting or loose screw can wreak havoc.
I'm interested in overclocking, and I'd like to know what damage I could do if I'm not careful. Can someone who actually knows what they're talking about list some specifc drawbacks to overclocking?
Slashdot Mirror
3D w/o Goggles
3-D Monitor From Deep Video Imaging
How hard is this? Perhaps with all the money you're reaping from these ads, you could hire some poor sap to search for dupes?
Like those with no GUI, for example.
You can write console apps in Kylix (and Delphi). So the question really comes down to how well the compiler optimizes the code.
I can't imagine that
begin
writeln('Hello, world');
end.
would compile a lot different from
main() {
printf("Hello, world\n");
}
I guess it's conceivable that gcc would optimize some things better on Linux, since most of the development is tested on that platform. By the same token, I would think that bcc32 (Borland's cross-compiler) would do better on Windows platforms.
From http://www.adlenterprises.com/prism.html
Magee: Where did the idea for Commercial-Advance come from? And how did you know it was an idea you could take all the way?
Lacomis: The idea came from an inventor named Jerry Iggulden, who had hired ADL in the past to promote another technology of his relating to infrared telecommunication. He became aware of ADLE's capabilities, and a year or two later he came to us with the idea of removing commercials from prerecorded programs. From the first time I heard about it, I felt there had to be a market for this if we could make it work at a reasonable price.
This is how the device works. While you're recording a television program on your VCR, Commercial-Advance collects the telltale "events" of commercials (such as imperceptible black frames at the beginning and end of commercials). Sensors detect and store these events, and a post-processing algorithm analyzes them to determine the location of all the commercials on the tape. During playback, the system analyzes the signals for commercials and triggers a fast-forward mechanism. Only by going past the commercials during the recording process and looking back at the events can you find them. That was the key notion to making the technology work accurately.
ADLE did some research and put together a team of ADL engineers to prove the feasibility of the technology on a broad level. We were able to convince prospective licensee companies that it was a worthwhile technology and there was a market. Then we hired an outside firm to help us develop the technology further.
Neat trick. Analysing the suspected commercial start/end points as a whole, after the fact is a simple and probably very effective way to cull false positives from the list.
One odd note is the reseachers' claim that the Web contains "nearly a billion documents," when one search engine alone claims to index more than a third beyond that
...This expression predicts typically that the shortest path between two pages selected at random among the 800 million nodes (i.e. documents) that made up the Web in 1999 is around 19 assuming that such a path exists...
...the typical number of clicks between two Web pages is about 19, despite the fact that there are now over one billion pages out there...
Look deeper, grasshopper:
Hey, Timothy, next time try reading the article instead if skimming it.
This may be redundant, but these quotes have to be seen to be believed (empahsis added in the following):
...Microsoft may be the only company in the world with the skill and clout to pull it off...
...the public will fully accept the HailStorm concept and Microsoft as a trusted repository within five to 10 years...
..Initially, HailStorm will consist of a universal password and a service...
...If you are in a car accident, HailStorm could automatically send your medical history and insurance information to the hospital before the ambulance arrived...
...Microsoft officials acknowledged the company has been vulnerable to attacks and system failures...
...They're the most attacked infrastructure there is on the Internet, they're the No. 1 target for hackers...
It'll never work. There is no fucking way I'd trust anyone, let alone microsoft, with that sort, or quantity, of private information.
Maybe this is just my paranoia speaking, but who else thinks this was deliberate? Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it was a deliberate security hole, but the release notes for that patch said that basically that they hadn't tested for the security hole on earlier versions of IE than 5.01.
Now, it's changed to "the patch doesn't work for earlier versions, you should download the latest version so the patch will work". Where do they say that the hole actually existed on earlier versions of IE? And why doesn't it affect 5.01 SP2? Why the hell wouldn't 5.5 include whatever code was in 5.01 SP2?
I've got a better idea. Install Opera, or better yet, Linux.
Fact 1: My mother couldn't install Debian to save her life. Or Windows.
Fact 2: Several friends of mine have muddled through windows installs, with 95% success, needing help only for things like getting a new modem driver or running dxdiag to check out problems with directX. A couple of those have also muddled through Debian and RH installs, needing only minimal tweaking at the end (simple security measures, xf86 configuration).
Fact 3: I have no trouble installing either, unless there's hardware problems or crap drivers.
From this, I conclude:
a) If you don't know what you're doing, installing either OS is impossible.
b) If you have some good user knowledge, but little administrator knowledge, you can almost install either OS.
c) If you have good adminstrator knowledge, you can install either OS easily.
d) If you have hardware problems or bad drivers, you're going to have difficulty installing either OS, pretty much regardless of how literate you are.
Yeah, actually. I've installed several versions of windows and linux, on a variety of boxes. The point was that it's not surprising that Microsoft suggests having windows pre-installed, given what a pain in the ass it is to install it manually for most lusers. Oh, and that windows is about as hard (or easy) to install as linux is. Understand that?
Microsoft says you'll have the best experience only if you buy a brand-new system with XP preinstalled.
Of course you will. Then you don't get to find out how difficult* windows is to install from scratch.
* About as difficult** as Debian, in case you were wondering.
** That is to say, practially impossible if you don't know what you're doing, difficult if you think you know what you're doing, and an absolute piece of cake*** if you've done it before.
*** Until you hit hardware conflicts or crappy drivers, then you're toast.
Actually, it'd be 'Redundant', wouldn't it? Since the 'by' line clearly indicates the post is #1.
Now, this post is Offtopic.
Of course, I could throw in a comment about the article to change that, but I can't seem to actually see the article.
You have requested an item that requires a subscription to PNAS Online.
Yes. And I can't remember the last time I had something that wouldn't run on my fairly typical system (GeForce 2 GTS, Sound Blaster Live, Pentium III 800).
Yeah, because that seems to be the 'stock' test system nowdays. I had hideous problems getting my on-board sound chip working properly, and I finally gave up and bought an SB Live. EVERYTHING seems to support GeForce/SBLive (including xfree86/gnome). Move from that combo at your peril.
Excellent! It's a maglev rollercoaster for atoms!
There's no difference between this and childproof lids on medicine
Interesting example. Did you know that childproof medicine bottles may have actually increased the number of accidental child poisonings?
Check out this. I quote:
Childproof medicine bottles. The hard-to-open caps were introduced in 1972. W. Kip Viscusi, a professor at Harvard Law School, took a close look at the number of children who were poisoned before and after the change. He found that, contrary to what anyone could have imagined, there was absolutely no net savings of life. "First, a lot of people left the caps off, and we had a lot of open-bottle poisonings," he says. "Second, parents were lulled into a false sense of security; a fair number of preschool kids can still open these bottles."
Now I grant you, it's not possible to keep an eye on your kids 24/7, but it seems there's a growing trend among parents to hand off the responsibility any way they can. If parents actually used this sort of technology as a tool, in addition to responsible parenting practices, it'd be a great idea. But I fear that it'll be just one more area that parents will disown the responsibility, and hand it off to the government. Ack. Maybe I'm just too pessimistic, but if this works anything like a v-chip, it won't be a guaranteed offensive content blocker anyway. Not to mention the whole "the government is deciding what constitutes offensive" argument.
What a content-free article! As far as I can tell, this is the only paragraph that contains any information on the drawbacks of overclocking, and even then is pretty light!
Knowledgeable overclockers can keep a system running smoothly for years, but risks still abound. The most common overclocking techniques increase the power supplied to everything connected to the motherboard, meaning that graphics processors, hard drives and other components may overheat or perform erratically. But stray cooling fluids can short out components, and a wrong setting or loose screw can wreak havoc.
I'm interested in overclocking, and I'd like to know what damage I could do if I'm not careful. Can someone who actually knows what they're talking about list some specifc drawbacks to overclocking?
--