I went and found someone at the IGF, and he showed me a copy of an email sent to the Velox creators at limebird.com on November 16th 2004, because their website was apparently down. They never replied to this email, and so it was presumed that they were not entering the competition any more.
Why presume? Why not just call them on the telephone, or mail a different member of the team? Emails are lost all the time.
I appreciate that things like this are very upsetting, but I also find it upsetting that it has to be escalated to such a public forum before it's found out that there has been at least somewhat of a mix-up.
Sounds more like a "fuck-up", although the hyphen seems pretty redundant in either case.:p
Racists, sexists, and Rush Limbaugh won't even bother to tell you what a bizarre idiot you are for being a furry. So really, maybe he likes you MORE than they do.
Maybe because they never said that it voids your warranty in the first place.
You know, it wasn't FUD for people to read "Memory upgrade must be performed by an Apple Authorized Service provider" at http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html and assume some things. A misunderstanding, perhaps, and props to Apple for pulling the text, and presumably updating their warranty policy. But why does every Mac user have this persecution complex? You know what the acronym "FUD" means, right? You realize that this misunderstanding was completely Apple's fault, right? Right?
Why should prisoners who have been caught doing illegal things have access to certain things by default when half the country (exaggeration) can't even afford them?
Short answer: if it reduces recidivism, those "certain things" are probably things prisoners should have access to. That obviously doesn't much apply to video games or TV talk shows. It does apply to quality education, counseling, and probably a few other things which a lot of people in the country don't have access to.
People tend to view the function of prisons through an idealistic lens, trying to emphasize either rehabilitation or punishment. In reality it is in everyone's interest to reduce the liklihood that the prisoner will commit more crimes, and determining what works in that regard can be an empirical process, rather than some big ideological thing.
Sure, I understand that, but there are also thoroughly documented cards like the Radeon 8500 (and whatever the newer version of the same is... the 9100?) which offer these features with open-source drivers.
Which isn't really QUITE the point, the point is, even the substandard (when compared to the binary drivers) open source drivers for some newer Nvidia and ATI cards will offer everything Miller's card is meant to do, cheaper and faster.
It's hard to see what market niche he's filling, aside from the hobbiest gadget freaks. I obviously wish him luck, although I can think of much more useful projects for someone who is willing to go through the rigamarole of bringing a card to production in an open source way. How about an 802.11g card that doesn't require loading proprietary microcode from the driver?
This card isn't being created for gamers. It's been created for desktop users.
Then the question becomes "why bother?" If you don't need the most modern OpenGL features in silicon there are cards which are documented quite well enough to have completely open-source drivers. (In fact there are cards like some of the Radeons that actually HAVE some of these features in 100% open source drivers)
It's nice that somebody has a pet project, though.
All geometry and vertex processing will be done in software in the host computer.
Geometry acceleration was a newfangled, fancy feature five years ago. Something that previously required thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars worth of hardware. Now it's a considered a given, and there is no reason to buy a card without it.
Actually they are concrete manifestations of a general moral principle.
Not really. You've just dumbed down the meaning of "moral principle" to the point where it means "nice stuff happening instead of bad stuff," in fact it means a lot more than that. Or not, that's a question for the philosophers...
But even traffic laws are a codified moral principle in action.
No, they are not. They are not derived from a principle, they are rather utilitarian in that they are designed to avoid a bad outcome.
You drive on a particular side of the road and
this is enforced as a law because to do otherwise would be to violate the moral principle of recklessly endangering others.
Not really. You don't need a law to avoid endangering others, you could just use one-way streets, or robot cars, or something. There is no moral principle which dictates this law must exist, it simply addresses a utilitarian concern.
Unlike laws against murder, which address a moral concern, and can be said to derive necessarily from a moral principle.
It is as simple as that. Like all software, if it is the best thing since sliced bread but nobody can use it, then what is the point?
People don't use it because they don't give a shit about email security. It's not the friendliest software in the world, but still, it is not as though lots of people are trying to use PGP and giving up because it is hard to use. It never gets to that point: they aren't even trying it.
Some user education needs to occur, yes, but it's not that people need to be taught how to use the complicated software. They need to be taught that there is an actual threat.
Oh, so as I understand it RFC2440 was written and THEN PGP v1 was written?
Thanks for history v2.0
Huh? You asked a question, I answered it.
I certainly don't think RFC2440 is any less valid or useful for having been created after a successful implementation was created. That's how standards ought to be created. Standards created before the implementations, or in conjunction, are more likely to suck.
The comparison with PGP and GPG is illustrative of why this new toy will not be leading to any new standards. No open source, no peer review, no new needs being addressed, no new ground being broken. Who gives a shit?
I read part of Beowulf in high school (of course) but didn't read it all the way through, and enjoy it, until I read Seamus Heaney's translation a couple of years ago. One thing I found striking while I was reading the later portion of the book, which wasn't required reading in high school, was how much Tolkien borrowed from Beowulf.
He borrows from Arthurian myth among other things, but the whole bit about the thief sneaking in and stealing a goblet from the dragon, and the dragon razing the countryside, was obviously taken from Beowulf.
In the grave on the hill a hoard it guarded, in the stone-barrow steep. A strait path reached it, unknown to mortals. Some man, however, came by chance that cave within to the heathen hoard. In hand he took a golden goblet, nor gave he it back, stole with it away, while the watcher slept, by thievish wiles: for the warden's wrath prince and people must pay betimes!
Yadda yadda yadda... this etext translation isn't as good as Heaney's.:)
That's certainly possible - these LCDs are 17" with 1024x768, not the greatest density, although they perform adequately in most other respects. I'll have another try if I use a different setup.
Kind of OT, but important - if you are running XP with an LCD screen, don't forget to turn on ClearType [microsoft.com]. ClearType dramatically improves the quality of text displayed on screen, to the point where my work laptop almost looks as good as my OS X box w/CRT at home.
Am I the only one who finds cleartype really distracting? I tried it after hearing everyone (online) talk about how great it is (I use dual LCDs at work), and found that text just looked dirty to me. It's as though the user is expected not to notice that his black-on-white text is no longer really black-on-white around the edges. Maybe I'm unusual, but I noticed and found it annoying.
Slashdot Mirror
Why presume? Why not just call them on the telephone, or mail a different member of the team? Emails are lost all the time.
Sounds more like a "fuck-up", although the hyphen seems pretty redundant in either case.
Racists, sexists, and Rush Limbaugh won't even bother to tell you what a bizarre idiot you are for being a furry. So really, maybe he likes you MORE than they do.
Feel the love!
You should really just stop there.
Spot on!
Or that they just wanted a really good engineer, one who happened to be available after the meltdown of Bell Labs.
Oh wait. That's a stretch. That they would hire someone just because they were a good engineer... crazy talk.
You know, it wasn't FUD for people to read "Memory upgrade must be performed by an Apple Authorized Service provider" at http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html and assume some things. A misunderstanding, perhaps, and props to Apple for pulling the text, and presumably updating their warranty policy. But why does every Mac user have this persecution complex? You know what the acronym "FUD" means, right? You realize that this misunderstanding was completely Apple's fault, right? Right?
Well, of course not. You're a Mac user.
Zimmerman asserts the precisely opposite in the article. Of course, his credibility can't compare to Anonymous Coward.
Short answer: if it reduces recidivism, those "certain things" are probably things prisoners should have access to. That obviously doesn't much apply to video games or TV talk shows. It does apply to quality education, counseling, and probably a few other things which a lot of people in the country don't have access to.
People tend to view the function of prisons through an idealistic lens, trying to emphasize either rehabilitation or punishment. In reality it is in everyone's interest to reduce the liklihood that the prisoner will commit more crimes, and determining what works in that regard can be an empirical process, rather than some big ideological thing.
Sure, I understand that, but there are also thoroughly documented cards like the Radeon 8500 (and whatever the newer version of the same is... the 9100?) which offer these features with open-source drivers.
Which isn't really QUITE the point, the point is, even the substandard (when compared to the binary drivers) open source drivers for some newer Nvidia and ATI cards will offer everything Miller's card is meant to do, cheaper and faster.
It's hard to see what market niche he's filling, aside from the hobbiest gadget freaks. I obviously wish him luck, although I can think of much more useful projects for someone who is willing to go through the rigamarole of bringing a card to production in an open source way. How about an 802.11g card that doesn't require loading proprietary microcode from the driver?
What the hell does that response have to do with what I posted?
Then the question becomes "why bother?" If you don't need the most modern OpenGL features in silicon there are cards which are documented quite well enough to have completely open-source drivers. (In fact there are cards like some of the Radeons that actually HAVE some of these features in 100% open source drivers)
It's nice that somebody has a pet project, though.
blah blah
Which is why driver software has never had anything to do with the success or failure of graphics cards in the market.
Geometry acceleration was a newfangled, fancy feature five years ago. Something that previously required thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars worth of hardware. Now it's a considered a given, and there is no reason to buy a card without it.
This card is going to suck.
Not really. You've just dumbed down the meaning of "moral principle" to the point where it means "nice stuff happening instead of bad stuff," in fact it means a lot more than that. Or not, that's a question for the philosophers...
No, they are not. They are not derived from a principle, they are rather utilitarian in that they are designed to avoid a bad outcome.
Not really. You don't need a law to avoid endangering others, you could just use one-way streets, or robot cars, or something. There is no moral principle which dictates this law must exist, it simply addresses a utilitarian concern.
Unlike laws against murder, which address a moral concern, and can be said to derive necessarily from a moral principle.
Come on. You don't have to look very hard to find laws which act as counterexamples to that utterly absurd statement...
People don't use it because they don't give a shit about email security. It's not the friendliest software in the world, but still, it is not as though lots of people are trying to use PGP and giving up because it is hard to use. It never gets to that point: they aren't even trying it.
Some user education needs to occur, yes, but it's not that people need to be taught how to use the complicated software. They need to be taught that there is an actual threat.
Huh? You asked a question, I answered it.
I certainly don't think RFC2440 is any less valid or useful for having been created after a successful implementation was created. That's how standards ought to be created. Standards created before the implementations, or in conjunction, are more likely to suck.
The comparison with PGP and GPG is illustrative of why this new toy will not be leading to any new standards. No open source, no peer review, no new needs being addressed, no new ground being broken. Who gives a shit?
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2440.txt
Okay, "soon to be audited" and "I've been working on for the last three years" in the same sentence don't really inspire confidence.
I read part of Beowulf in high school (of course) but didn't read it all the way through, and enjoy it, until I read Seamus Heaney's translation a couple of years ago. One thing I found striking while I was reading the later portion of the book, which wasn't required reading in high school, was how much Tolkien borrowed from Beowulf.
:)
He borrows from Arthurian myth among other things, but the whole bit about the thief sneaking in and stealing a goblet from the dragon, and the dragon razing the countryside, was obviously taken from Beowulf.
In the grave on the hill a hoard it guarded,
in the stone-barrow steep. A strait path reached it,
unknown to mortals. Some man, however,
came by chance that cave within
to the heathen hoard. In hand he took
a golden goblet, nor gave he it back,
stole with it away, while the watcher slept,
by thievish wiles: for the warden's wrath
prince and people must pay betimes!
Yadda yadda yadda... this etext translation isn't as good as Heaney's.
That's certainly possible - these LCDs are 17" with 1024x768, not the greatest density, although they perform adequately in most other respects. I'll have another try if I use a different setup.
Am I the only one who finds cleartype really distracting? I tried it after hearing everyone (online) talk about how great it is (I use dual LCDs at work), and found that text just looked dirty to me. It's as though the user is expected not to notice that his black-on-white text is no longer really black-on-white around the edges. Maybe I'm unusual, but I noticed and found it annoying.
you would get your ass kicked calling somebody a "Quant". Just saying.
Sure it is.