It's not like you were filling up that 20Mb harddrive with text files.
No, but I could see back then that putting music on a computer would be cool.
It's not like you were filling up that 1Gb harddrive with black and white bitmaps and low fidelity samples.
No, but I could see back then that putting video on a computer would be cool.
And you're not going to fill that 1Tb harddrive with JPGs, movies and MP3.
I think I will. Because seriously, there's no obvious next step, which there was before. I don't want 3D environments until I have a 3D display and input device. I don't want to pick from hundreds of camera angles. Once I can fit my DVD collection comfortably on a drive (which I can't yet, but it's not that far away) I really don't think there's anywhere else to go.
It's worth ripping your DVDs just for convenience, I find, and they're about 8GB a pop.I recently took my two 160GB drives out of raid1 because I don't have the space.
So to sum up: some computer geeks thought it would be convenient for them to redefine the metric system to work using powers of two rather than powers of ten. This was fine as long as they were only interacting with other computer geeks. When computers spilled over into the world at large, however, this little shortcut conflicted with the way the terms were/are used by everyone else. Since the traditional (powers of ten) definition has both seniority and wider usage, it is now winning out, and rightly so.
It's not winning. Was your last stick of RAM sized in decimal megabytes? Doubt it. Memory stick? Nuh-uh. How about processor cache? Nope. The only place decimal megabytes are used is by hard drive makers, and that's because they're scumbags.
Actually, I don't think there is. A quick Googlin' turned up this site which informs us that uncompressed 1920x1080 video at 24 frames/second takes up space at around 400 GB/hour. So, one of these new 750GB drives maps to about one uncompressed high-definition movie, and it can't even be two hours in length (the site also tells us that this drive wouldn't even be capable of playing back such a movie - not enough bandwidth).
That still gives a limit, and a pretty close one. Five years ago I was having this conversation about audio files. Today, with my entire CD collection sitting in flac format and taking up about a third of my available drive space, I can in all seriousness say I don't need, and never will need, any more space for music.
Now, yes, we may not "need" to see uncompressed movies, but it could easily be argued that we don't "need" quality better than good old NTSC, either.
NTSC is good enough in the same way MP3 was. I'll happily go for higher quality stuff, but NTSC doesn't seriously hamper my viewing pleasure, and I suspect within a few years it'll get to the stage where I really wouldn't notice a higher quality video format.
And, seriously, where do we go then? I really can't think what we would use more storage for. There's usually been a "next format" to look to - in the early days we were always looking for the space to do images, then high quality images and tinny music, then good quality music and postage-stamp sized video, and now good quality video. But what's next? Judging by the size of my quake 4 install, maybe games, but I think that will also reach a limit when the eye really can't tell if the textures/models become more detailled. Photorealism is pretty close to there. Sure, there will be specialists who need the space, but I really think that in a few years we'll reach a point where the home user never fills their hard drive.
I doubt NASA and others are investing money to develop ways of killing astronauts with radiation.
No, that's precisely why they're investing in positrons rather than antiprotons, because using antiprotons would kill astronauts with radiation.
Storing any quantity of charged antimatter in electromagnetic vacuum containment will be problematical because of the strong mutual electrostatic repulsion. It is more likely practical storage schemes will employ antihydrogen microcrystals, which are neutral.
Erm, how the hell would you contain something neutral? electromagnetic containment, while damn tricky, does at least work. I can't see how you'd stop a neutral object flying into your chamber wall and anhiliating (sp?).
So when people tell you they'll do something, you expect them not to do it unless they explicitly say "I promise?" Or do you require some sort of pinky swear?
People I trust. They have honour and morals. Corporations however do not and can not. The only thing you can trust a corporation to do is maximise their profit, so you trust only what you have a written contract for. That's not even anything insightful, it's basic common sense. If a corporation can make money by lying, it not only can but must do so.
*Use* the new features. I like transparency, partly because it looks nice, but mostly because it's genuinely useful to be able to look through a window to the one behind. Likewise colours, when used properly to distinguish between things, give an exponential improvement in actual usability. Though it's sadly rare to see an animation employed properly, again, it is genuinely useful - progress bars are a good example, when you can tell whether they're moving without looking at them.
maybe they married into it, maybe they're raising kids and want to give them a certain moral frame of reference,PErm, I'd imagine that's pretty unlikely for a gay person.
Encryption keeps information secret, the very thing stallman is against, yet GnuPG is an official GNU project.
He's not against keeping information secret. He's against selling people only partial access to information.
DRM simply adds different layers of trust, more than just the two that you have with encryption. You can have partial or full trust with DRM. You only get two options with plain old encryption.
Partial trust...like the kind you have when you give someone a binary without source?
I don't think so. Everyone has secrets, and they have a right to keep them and trust them with whomever they want. DRM gives you that ability. Encryption does not.
Encryption gives you the choice. You should give/sell someone the data to do what they want with, or not at all. This is exactly the same as the GPL - you give someone the software to do what they want with, or not at all.
So the situation with antiprotons is slightly more complex than the article suggests, and the stated reasoning for preferring positrons overly simplistic.
You seem to be just showing off here. Whatever the details of the reaction, if the end result inncludes uncontrollable high energy gamma rays, it's pretty useless for propelling astronauts.
Sure, but you'd need at least three and probably five flips for each letter you wanted to write. The whole thing of a one-time pad is you can only use it once.
It can't be perfect but it can very easily be plenty good enough. I think your comparison says more about poor A-D on some flatpanels than innate problems with VGA.
Get a flat panel monitor with a VGA and a DVI input. Then hook both the inputs into a dual head video card. Then mirror the outputs so they are the same. Then switch between the inputs on the monitor - the difference is very obvious, no matter how good the monitor and the video card are - you'll be able to tell the difference between the DVI and VGA inputs at a glance.
That's poor A-D on the flatpanel, not inferiority of the VGA signal
My eyes are fine. I can see the the compression artifacts when I'm playing an (unscaled) video at that res. I routinely use 8x6 console fonts. I don't know anything about the tech, but I can see it's unnecessary.
In the days of DVI connectors, this product is DOA. It uses VGA connectors only. 3840x1024 outta analog VGA is going to look.. umm.. less than perfect.
I've used VGA at 2500-ish and it looks beautiful. I don't want, need or care about DVI - only DVI output I have goes straight into a converter back to VGA. DVI is a solution in search of a problem.
Untrue, or rather imprecise. Copyright law primarily upholds licensing agreements. The licensing agreement may say you can install it on 100 machines.
Correct as stated. Copyright law prevents you doing that unless you have a license allowing you to do so.
This makes no sense whatsoever. Licenses are useful for tons of things, depending on the interests of the parties etc. Your understanding of the relationship of licensing agreements to statutory IP rights is incorrect. The former is not an annex of the latter.
A license is a set of exemptions to your copyright. Sometimes you will obtain one through a contract, but that is not and should not be confused with the license itself. And going back to the original issue of the windows "EULA", it cannot be the latter for a variety of reasons, the only valid provisions it can make are (unilateral grants of) the former.
I wonder if that's anything to do with how "nice" the respective codebases are. Mono is new and so
(one would hope) relatively clean, while Mozilla has a reputation for being quite horrible. And this is IME the most important factor in how enjoyable it is to work on a particular project.
This would make it easier to shut down zombies though. Port 25 open? On the list then? Nope? Blam, internet cutoff. It could even be done automatically.
In fact, this sounds identical to my university's policy, and I know several ISPs do the same. It seems excessive for the govt to do it, but IIRC in china the govt effectively *is* the ISP. In which case this is absolutely normal.
Slashdot Mirror
The internet. Seriously, that's what, about two days' worth of alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.female?
No, but I could see back then that putting music on a computer would be cool.
It's not like you were filling up that 1Gb harddrive with black and white bitmaps and low fidelity samples.
No, but I could see back then that putting video on a computer would be cool.
And you're not going to fill that 1Tb harddrive with JPGs, movies and MP3.
I think I will. Because seriously, there's no obvious next step, which there was before. I don't want 3D environments until I have a 3D display and input device. I don't want to pick from hundreds of camera angles. Once I can fit my DVD collection comfortably on a drive (which I can't yet, but it's not that far away) I really don't think there's anywhere else to go.
It's worth ripping your DVDs just for convenience, I find, and they're about 8GB a pop.I recently took my two 160GB drives out of raid1 because I don't have the space.
It's not winning. Was your last stick of RAM sized in decimal megabytes? Doubt it. Memory stick? Nuh-uh. How about processor cache? Nope. The only place decimal megabytes are used is by hard drive makers, and that's because they're scumbags.
That still gives a limit, and a pretty close one. Five years ago I was having this conversation about audio files. Today, with my entire CD collection sitting in flac format and taking up about a third of my available drive space, I can in all seriousness say I don't need, and never will need, any more space for music.
Now, yes, we may not "need" to see uncompressed movies, but it could easily be argued that we don't "need" quality better than good old NTSC, either.
NTSC is good enough in the same way MP3 was. I'll happily go for higher quality stuff, but NTSC doesn't seriously hamper my viewing pleasure, and I suspect within a few years it'll get to the stage where I really wouldn't notice a higher quality video format.
And, seriously, where do we go then? I really can't think what we would use more storage for. There's usually been a "next format" to look to - in the early days we were always looking for the space to do images, then high quality images and tinny music, then good quality music and postage-stamp sized video, and now good quality video. But what's next? Judging by the size of my quake 4 install, maybe games, but I think that will also reach a limit when the eye really can't tell if the textures/models become more detailled. Photorealism is pretty close to there. Sure, there will be specialists who need the space, but I really think that in a few years we'll reach a point where the home user never fills their hard drive.
No, that's precisely why they're investing in positrons rather than antiprotons, because using antiprotons would kill astronauts with radiation.
Storing any quantity of charged antimatter in electromagnetic vacuum containment will be problematical because of the strong mutual electrostatic repulsion. It is more likely practical storage schemes will employ antihydrogen microcrystals, which are neutral.
Erm, how the hell would you contain something neutral? electromagnetic containment, while damn tricky, does at least work. I can't see how you'd stop a neutral object flying into your chamber wall and anhiliating (sp?).
I envy your faith in humanity
People I trust. They have honour and morals. Corporations however do not and can not. The only thing you can trust a corporation to do is maximise their profit, so you trust only what you have a written contract for. That's not even anything insightful, it's basic common sense. If a corporation can make money by lying, it not only can but must do so.
*Use* the new features. I like transparency, partly because it looks nice, but mostly because it's genuinely useful to be able to look through a window to the one behind. Likewise colours, when used properly to distinguish between things, give an exponential improvement in actual usability. Though it's sadly rare to see an animation employed properly, again, it is genuinely useful - progress bars are a good example, when you can tell whether they're moving without looking at them.
Then you don't belong here. Seriously. GTFO. I don't know anything about them, but I would definitely want to learn.
maybe they married into it, maybe they're raising kids and want to give them a certain moral frame of reference,PErm, I'd imagine that's pretty unlikely for a gay person.
He's not against keeping information secret. He's against selling people only partial access to information.
DRM simply adds different layers of trust, more than just the two that you have with encryption. You can have partial or full trust with DRM. You only get two options with plain old encryption.
Partial trust...like the kind you have when you give someone a binary without source?
I don't think so. Everyone has secrets, and they have a right to keep them and trust them with whomever they want. DRM gives you that ability. Encryption does not.
Encryption gives you the choice. You should give/sell someone the data to do what they want with, or not at all. This is exactly the same as the GPL - you give someone the software to do what they want with, or not at all.
Yes he does. Just like many people believe your business shouldn't pollute, even if it would be cheaper to do so. He cares about his ethics.
You seem to be just showing off here. Whatever the details of the reaction, if the end result inncludes uncontrollable high energy gamma rays, it's pretty useless for propelling astronauts.
AIUI he was using it to encrypt things for himself, so this doesn't really matter. Of course keeping the key secure is important.
Well, it becomes a bit different with public-key cryptography
Sure, but you'd need at least three and probably five flips for each letter you wanted to write. The whole thing of a one-time pad is you can only use it once.
It can't be perfect but it can very easily be plenty good enough. I think your comparison says more about poor A-D on some flatpanels than innate problems with VGA.
That's poor A-D on the flatpanel, not inferiority of the VGA signal
My eyes are fine. I can see the the compression artifacts when I'm playing an (unscaled) video at that res. I routinely use 8x6 console fonts. I don't know anything about the tech, but I can see it's unnecessary.
I've used VGA at 2500-ish and it looks beautiful. I don't want, need or care about DVI - only DVI output I have goes straight into a converter back to VGA. DVI is a solution in search of a problem.
No reason at all. IIRC gnunet can already do this.
Correct as stated. Copyright law prevents you doing that unless you have a license allowing you to do so.
This makes no sense whatsoever. Licenses are useful for tons of things, depending on the interests of the parties etc. Your understanding of the relationship of licensing agreements to statutory IP rights is incorrect. The former is not an annex of the latter.
A license is a set of exemptions to your copyright. Sometimes you will obtain one through a contract, but that is not and should not be confused with the license itself. And going back to the original issue of the windows "EULA", it cannot be the latter for a variety of reasons, the only valid provisions it can make are (unilateral grants of) the former.
I wonder if that's anything to do with how "nice" the respective codebases are. Mono is new and so (one would hope) relatively clean, while Mozilla has a reputation for being quite horrible. And this is IME the most important factor in how enjoyable it is to work on a particular project.
In fact, this sounds identical to my university's policy, and I know several ISPs do the same. It seems excessive for the govt to do it, but IIRC in china the govt effectively *is* the ISP. In which case this is absolutely normal.