Ever see one of those ancient machines with a row of toggle switches for setting bits and a push button to step to the next address? That will surely put hair on your chest.
After reading through this seemingly endless political bickering, some of which displays a level of ignorance and utter idiocy that is truly astonishing considering the usually intelligent readership of Slashdot, I have only one thing left to say about the Chinese rocket launch.
To all those who made it happen, congratulations on a job well done.
Damn, I was prepared to order this thing immidiately, and was very disappointed to find that it was all a mistake. The lack of children's software is one of the primary reasons that I keep Windows around. Still dreaming of the day when I can shake the microsoft monkey off my back.
6 has only one less factor than 12, and that factor happens to be 6 itself. Same is true when comparing 30 and 60. A prime factorization of 12 and 60 differs from that of 6 and 30 only in that two appears twice. Looking at it this way it seems like 6 and 30 would be the optimal choices for a base rather than 12 and 60. But alas, I can already see the answer to my own question. People more frequently divide things by small numbers than by larger ones. This means dividing by 4 is important. In fact, division by 2 and 4 are so common that we even have special names for this ("half" and "quarter") and include special symbols to represent 1/2 and 1/4 in some character sets (both on computers and the older technology of typewriters). Division by 5 happens much less often than division by four even though our chosen base 10 facilities division by 5 more easily than 4. So the extra prime factor of 2 in base 12 and base 60 makes sense after all.
I agree that it is unfortunate that we don't have 12 fingers. But I do not agree with your defense of imperial units. A system similar to the metric system built on top of a base 12 number system would be great. Overcoming the "installed base" to transition from imperial to metric has been difficult enough (and is still far from complete). Changing to base 12 would be many times more difficult. Whether it would be worth it in the long run is hard to say. The inifficiency of base 10 compared to base 12 isn't big. 10 certainly isn't the worst choice (imagine having a prime number as a base, like 7, 11, or 13). And for those intimately familiar with it, it is really very easy to deal with. Sure 12 is better, but seriously, would you even notice the greater ease when base 10 is so easy to deal with already? On the other hand, multiply that slight inefficency by 6 billion people and project that who knows how many generations into the future and it can still add up to a lot of wasted brainpower.
Metric units have much simpler relationships to each other, making many calculations much easier. This also makes it easier to understand, though that might not be immediately obvious to those who had to learn it AFTER already becoming familiar with imperial units. The difficulty comes from the tendency to try to understand the newly learned system in terms of the previously learned one. If we teach kids metric units first, this problem goes away, and the new generation will then immidiately recognize imperial units for the bizarre and unweildy mess that it is when it comes time to learn about it (hopefully only for the sake of dealing with "legacy" technology).
I agree that having a standard system is what we want to accomplish. This need is particularly obvious to those of us who design printed circuit boards and have to put up with a mix of metric and imperial lead spacings, component outlines, board outlines, etc. So having some kind of common standard may be more important than the specific details of that standard. But even so, all measurement systems are definitely not created equal.
Metric units have much simpler relationships to each other, making many calculations much easier. This also makes it easier to understand, though that might not be immediately obvious to those who had to learn it AFTER already becoming familiar with imperial units. The difficulty comes from the tendency to try to understand the newly learned system in terms of the previously learned one. If we teach kids metric units first, this problem goes away, and the new generation will then immidiately recognize imperial units for the bizarre and unweildy system that it is when it comes time to learn about it (hopefully only for the sake of dealing with "legacy" technology).
I think we'll see just the opposite. Indeed, the world has already made great strides in making the previously unattainable world of high tech (back in the days of mainframes and the "computer priesthood" that was privileged to work with them) more accessable to the masses. Computers, net access, and other communications technology have been on an ever downward cost spiral for several decades. Now we have high speed net connectivity (via DSL and Cable) available at prices that ordinary working folk can easily afford. If you told people in 1995 that in 3 years T1 connection speeds would be available in the home for no more than what it then cost for a regular 2nd phone line and dial up account (or a few premium channels) or that 400Mhz+ computers with multi-gigabyte hard drives and 64MB+ of RAM for under a kilobuck, many would have had a hard time believing you. But today this is the reality that is becoming available to a rapidly increasing number of people.
The current trends indicate that computers and networks will be (and indeed, already are) a unifying force that bridges the economic class bounderies and creates greater opportunities for those on the bottom to improve thier condition.
MS will be hard pressed to not support it if users demand it.
And if they do try to use WebTV's dominance in it's niche to squeeze out the competition and force acceptance of their own alternative, that could ultimately end up backfiring and being a boon for consumers by opening the doors to competitors in the set-top-box/internet-appliance space.
Come to think of it, it might be just the opening that a certain near-mythical ancient computer platform that's had some recent sightings on slashdot needs. Granted they haven't produced any significant products in ages, but something is going on behind the scenes, as evidenced by numerous fairly recent patents, mostly relating to set-top boxes.
I was finding the "liberal" references in some of the posts rather confusing. Your post seems to imply that "liberal" and "conservative" have very different meanings in the context of Aussie politics than in some other parts of the world. I was beginning to suspect this myself, but wasn't sure. Could someone clear this up a bit?
A few years ago, Telegrafix (of RipTerm fame) proposed, as a solution to the Unisys LZW patent problem, that the LZW compression be replaced by LZHUF leaving the GIF format otherwise unchanged. This idea was published in an open letter to Compuserv and the online community in general.
This apparently didn't get much attention outside of the BBS community, which at that time was already beginning to lose ground due to growing availability of the Internet.
For anyone who cares, Telegrafix still exists, and is currently promoting the latest incarnation of RipScrip as a vector format for the web. It's interesting, but would be a lot more useful if it were more open. Some folks didn't like RIP back in the BBS days, but I always thought it was a fundamentally good idea that just suffered from being too proprietary.
Slashdot Mirror
Ever see one of those ancient machines with a row of toggle switches for setting bits and a push button to step to the next address? That will surely put hair on your chest.
---
Peace,
vilvoy
After reading through this seemingly endless political bickering, some of which displays a level of ignorance and utter idiocy that is truly astonishing considering the usually intelligent readership of Slashdot, I have only one thing left to say about the Chinese rocket launch.
To all those who made it happen, congratulations on a job well done.
---
Peace,
vilvoy
They probably just mean that it can read those file systems. An ability common to existing linux distros.
---
Peace,
Vilvoy
Damn, I was prepared to order this thing immidiately, and was very disappointed to find that it was all a mistake. The lack of children's software is one of the primary reasons that I keep Windows around. Still dreaming of the day when I can shake the microsoft monkey off my back.
Peace,
vilvoy
6 has only one less factor than 12, and that factor happens to be 6 itself. Same is true when comparing 30 and 60. A prime factorization of 12 and 60 differs from that of 6 and 30 only in that two appears twice. Looking at it this way it seems like 6 and 30 would be the optimal choices for a base rather than 12 and 60. But alas, I can already see the answer to my own question. People more frequently divide things by small numbers than by larger ones. This means dividing by 4 is important. In fact, division by 2 and 4 are so common that we even have special names for this ("half" and "quarter") and include special symbols to represent 1/2 and 1/4 in some character sets (both on computers and the older technology of typewriters). Division by 5 happens much less often than division by four even though our chosen base 10 facilities division by 5 more easily than 4. So the extra prime factor of 2 in base 12 and base 60 makes sense after all.
I agree that it is unfortunate that we don't have 12 fingers. But I do not agree with your defense of imperial units. A system similar to the metric system built on top of a base 12 number system would be great. Overcoming the "installed base" to transition from imperial to metric has been difficult enough (and is still far from complete). Changing to base 12 would be many times more difficult. Whether it would be worth it in the long run is hard to say. The inifficiency of base 10 compared to base 12 isn't big. 10 certainly isn't the worst choice (imagine having a prime number as a base, like 7, 11, or 13). And for those intimately familiar with it, it is really very easy to deal with. Sure 12 is better, but seriously, would you even notice the greater ease when base 10 is so easy to deal with already? On the other hand, multiply that slight inefficency by 6 billion people and project that who knows how many generations into the future and it can still add up to a lot of wasted brainpower.
---
vilvoy
Metric units have much simpler relationships to each other, making many calculations much easier. This also makes it easier to understand, though that might not be immediately obvious to those who had to learn it AFTER already becoming familiar with imperial units. The difficulty comes from the tendency to try to understand the newly learned system in terms of the previously learned one. If we teach kids metric units first, this problem goes away, and the new generation will then immidiately recognize imperial units for the bizarre and unweildy mess that it is when it comes time to learn about it (hopefully only for the sake of dealing with "legacy" technology).
I agree that having a standard system is what we want to accomplish. This need is particularly obvious to those of us who design printed circuit boards and have to put up with a mix of metric and imperial lead spacings, component outlines, board outlines, etc. So having some kind of common standard may be more important than the specific details of that standard. But even so, all measurement systems are definitely not created equal.
---
vilvoy
Metric units have much simpler relationships to each other, making many calculations much easier. This also makes it easier to understand, though that might not be immediately obvious to those who had to learn it AFTER already becoming familiar with imperial units. The difficulty comes from the tendency to try to understand the newly learned system in terms of the previously learned one. If we teach kids metric units first, this problem goes away, and the new generation will then immidiately recognize imperial units for the bizarre and unweildy system that it is when it comes time to learn about it (hopefully only for the sake of dealing with "legacy" technology).
---
vilvoy
I think we'll see just the opposite. Indeed, the world has already made great strides in making the previously unattainable world of high tech (back in the days of mainframes and the "computer priesthood" that was privileged to work with them) more accessable to the masses. Computers, net access, and other communications technology have been on an ever downward cost spiral for several decades. Now we have high speed net connectivity (via DSL and Cable) available at prices that ordinary working folk can easily afford. If you told people in 1995 that in 3 years T1 connection speeds would be available in the home for no more than what it then cost for a regular 2nd phone line and dial up account (or a few premium channels) or that 400Mhz+ computers with multi-gigabyte hard drives and 64MB+ of RAM for under a kilobuck, many would have had a hard time believing you. But today this is the reality that is becoming available to a rapidly increasing number of people.
The current trends indicate that computers and networks will be (and indeed, already are) a unifying force that bridges the economic class bounderies and creates greater opportunities for those on the bottom to improve thier condition.
---
vilvoy
Fine.
MS will be hard pressed to not support it if users demand it.
And if they do try to use WebTV's dominance in it's niche to squeeze out the competition and force acceptance of their own alternative, that could ultimately end up backfiring and being a boon for consumers by opening the doors to competitors in the set-top-box/internet-appliance space.
Come to think of it, it might be just the opening that a certain near-mythical ancient computer platform that's had some recent sightings on slashdot needs. Granted they haven't produced any significant products in ages, but something is going on behind the scenes, as evidenced by numerous fairly recent patents, mostly relating to set-top boxes.
---
vilvoy
I was finding the "liberal" references in some of the posts rather confusing. Your post seems to imply that "liberal" and "conservative" have very different meanings in the context of Aussie politics than in some other parts of the world. I was beginning to suspect this myself, but wasn't sure. Could someone clear this up a bit?
A few years ago, Telegrafix (of RipTerm fame) proposed, as a solution to the Unisys LZW patent problem, that the LZW compression be replaced by LZHUF leaving the GIF format otherwise unchanged. This idea was published in an open letter to Compuserv and the online community in general.
This apparently didn't get much attention outside of the BBS community, which at that time was already beginning to lose ground due to growing availability of the Internet.
For anyone who cares, Telegrafix still exists, and is currently promoting the latest incarnation of RipScrip as a vector format for the web. It's interesting, but would be a lot more useful if it were more open. Some folks didn't like RIP back in the BBS days, but I always thought it was a fundamentally good idea that just suffered from being too proprietary.
---
vilvoy