The story came out a few hours ago and you want documented evidence now?
Microsoft has a loooong history of astroturfing, starting fake grass roots campaigns, etc.
OTOH, yes. There's a reason Macs don't have viruses and it's not because Macs are more secure, it's because there's no need for them in botnets yet (there's no shortage of Windows machines in sight so why go to the bother of coding for Mac...?)
You can't change the way Strings are stored in C++ without breaking things pretty badly for many programs.
Sure you can.... you just need a suitable conversion operator and the compiler will do the rest, generating temporary std::strings as needed.
It may not be the most efficient way but I assume you have a *very* good reason for not using std::string so the tradeoff would need to be measured for your particular case.
Null termination sounds lovely when you've a teenager writing assembly and doing register allocation by hand, but it's obviously bad once you've seriously thought about runtimes, like after taking an algorithms class. You shouldn't need to traverse strings to determine their lengths.
Going the other way has lots of problems, too.
eg. Given this line of text: "Content-Length: 12345", how do you pass a pointer to the "12345" to a function which converts strings to integers?
As a design decision, it was FAR better to trade some runtime efficiency for the flexibility that null-terminated strings give you.
You'd know that if you'd written some real programs instead of just sitting through an algorithms class.
Things can be illegal in more than one place at the same time.
Looks like the UK has had an outbreak of common sense.
I'm particularly amazed by the line: "...the government endorses a recent intellectual property report". WTF? Heads will be rolling around the floor of the MAFIIA offices today.
Yep, and a massive part of this is the fact that it's cheap enough that they can put together kits containing an Arduino with a breadboard and some wires and a book and a whole bunch of electronic components for less than $100 (ie. people can buy Arduino on a whim).
The big limitations of the Arduino is very little RAM and very little processing power.
There's bigger Arduinos available. There's even ARM boards which are compatible with Arduino shields, etc.
If the low-powered Arduinos are so popular it's probably because people figured out you don't need much RAM or processing power to do what people are using them for.
Yep. For less then the price of the main board of those I can get something like the Sparkfun Inventors kit which is the sort of thing everybody should have.
If building little arcade machines like in the article is your thing then you can get (eg.) Arduino+Gameguino (again for less than the price of *just* their main board).
comes with classes that let you use the modules without having to go 'low level.'
Um, so does Arduino. Using a servo (or whatever) is two lines of code.
Arduino killer? Maybe for.Net hipsters with over-rich parents...
Problem is...by the time the average machine is really able to do all this then we won't be too worried about having a billion polygons on screen either.
i.e. It's a sort of self-obsoleting technology - it looks good today but by the time it's finally available nobody will want it.
Blatant sarcasm aside, most of us have little time to do these sorts of things anymore.
It's not just time either. You used to be able to display only old thing at those fairs. These days it has to be a twenty foot tall transforming animatronic with lasers and pyrotechnics and ten thousand Watts of rumbling sounds. Who's got the resources to build stuff like that as a hobby?
Slashdot Mirror
I bet if you met him in person you'd be setting up a direct debit after ten minutes listening to his exploits...
Seems quite high
The law has this thing about repeat offenders...
Is he never going to learn the difference between right/wrong?
Throw him in jail and fill the door lock with epoxy resin.
The story came out a few hours ago and you want documented evidence now?
Microsoft has a loooong history of astroturfing, starting fake grass roots campaigns, etc.
OTOH, yes. There's a reason Macs don't have viruses and it's not because Macs are more secure, it's because there's no need for them in botnets yet (there's no shortage of Windows machines in sight so why go to the bother of coding for Mac...?)
... find an enormous range of CDs which still sell well.
Blasphemer! Everybody knows you can only ever sell one copy of a CD these days and then piracy takes care of the rest!!
You can't change the way Strings are stored in C++ without breaking things pretty badly for many programs.
Sure you can.... you just need a suitable conversion operator and the compiler will do the rest, generating temporary std::strings as needed.
It may not be the most efficient way but I assume you have a *very* good reason for not using std::string so the tradeoff would need to be measured for your particular case.
Null termination sounds lovely when you've a teenager writing assembly and doing register allocation by hand, but it's obviously bad once you've seriously thought about runtimes, like after taking an algorithms class. You shouldn't need to traverse strings to determine their lengths.
Going the other way has lots of problems, too.
eg. Given this line of text: "Content-Length: 12345", how do you pass a pointer to the "12345" to a function which converts strings to integers?
As a design decision, it was FAR better to trade some runtime efficiency for the flexibility that null-terminated strings give you.
You'd know that if you'd written some real programs instead of just sitting through an algorithms class.
You do it without storing the decrypted data.
They're talking about repealing the extradition treaty as well (cite).
The treaty was originally only for "terrorists" but as usual the USA has been abusing it for their own purposes
How do you format shift a DVD without decrypting it?
Even more awesome is that somebody in government actually read a "recent intellectual property report" that wasn't supplied by the MAFIAA.
Things can be illegal in more than one place at the same time.
Looks like the UK has had an outbreak of common sense.
I'm particularly amazed by the line: "...the government endorses a recent intellectual property report". WTF? Heads will be rolling around the floor of the MAFIIA offices today.
Point is: The real "killers" are decided by the public, not the marketers or dreamers.
Yep, and a massive part of this is the fact that it's cheap enough that they can put together kits containing an Arduino with a breadboard and some wires and a book and a whole bunch of electronic components for less than $100 (ie. people can buy Arduino on a whim).
Reading comprehension fail.
The question wasn't whether a technology has ever killed another (it has).
The question was whether a marketer calling something a "XXX killer" has ever worked out for anybody.
The big limitations of the Arduino is very little RAM and very little processing power.
There's bigger Arduinos available. There's even ARM boards which are compatible with Arduino shields, etc.
If the low-powered Arduinos are so popular it's probably because people figured out you don't need much RAM or processing power to do what people are using them for.
Yep. For less then the price of the main board of those I can get something like the Sparkfun Inventors kit which is the sort of thing everybody should have.
If building little arcade machines like in the article is your thing then you can get (eg.) Arduino+Gameguino (again for less than the price of *just* their main board).
comes with classes that let you use the modules without having to go 'low level.'
Um, so does Arduino. Using a servo (or whatever) is two lines of code.
Arduino killer? Maybe for .Net hipsters with over-rich parents...
Regurgitated by a giant squid...?
10,000? They'll be out loooong before you are.
Problem is...by the time the average machine is really able to do all this then we won't be too worried about having a billion polygons on screen either.
i.e. It's a sort of self-obsoleting technology - it looks good today but by the time it's finally available nobody will want it.
There's an awful lot of object instancing in their videos (same object repeated multiple times).
The numbers they're quoting are the number of 'atoms' you see on screen, not the number of atoms in the computer's memory.
He's a con artist who can program graphics (or get other people to while he takes all the credit).
Is it even possible? It's only impossible until someone ignores conventional thought and does it anyhow.
(I've done some things on computers that were 'impossible', I just didn't accept the limitations and did something nobody had thought of before.
Um, no. Some things really are impossible. The 'impossible' things you did all had quote marks around them.
There's an awful lot of instancing in the scene...if you calculate the total when the instances are baked then you can get those numbers.
This is a hoax, or an exceptionally ill-advised way to generate developer interest in their middleware
Yep. My prediction is that they're just after investor money and this will never be more than a tech demo.
Blatant sarcasm aside, most of us have little time to do these sorts of things anymore.
It's not just time either. You used to be able to display only old thing at those fairs. These days it has to be a twenty foot tall transforming animatronic with lasers and pyrotechnics and ten thousand Watts of rumbling sounds. Who's got the resources to build stuff like that as a hobby?