Not so long ago this would have been considered an error, but after the latest M$ execs testimony it is indeed a duel between M$ and Linux. Long live the accidental evolution of language!
You seem to be the one that needs to be rational. No one at the trial is talking about the M$ Windows kernel. They are talking about the product that contains the kernel, web browser, email, word processors, spread sheets, etc... That is what billy bob is claiming is too integrated to break up.
"You can't remove IE without crippling Windows!!"
That is complete bullshit and is not comparable to anything Linux/hurd/solaris/... have ever done.
The reason is ignorance but not on the part of the publishers.
Acrobat is shit.
ggv will view.ps,.pdf,.ps.bz2,.ps.gz, probably others. Works great. There is no reason to differentiate between any of them. And if you really must ps2pdf works quite well.
It is only censorship if "killed at the source" means to literally kill the fucknut sending the spam. Death is the most convienient and widely implemented form of censorship in places like China.
Preventing someone from sending emails is NEVER censorship by definition. They can always go to Kinkos and make plain old paper mailings and then mail them to everyone on the planet.
t.
Re:At What Cost? -- Why waste trees?
on
Lunar Power
·
· Score: 2
Calling all photoshop geeks! Wanted one mock-up of the Matrix scene where people are hooked up for power, except do it with cows!
t.
Re:One teensy weensy problem though...
on
Lunar Power
·
· Score: 2
I can see the headlines now:...and now on CNN, an update today on...fzzzt
Sounds like reason enough to start testing a MDR (media death ray).
I don't have a reference handy but I remember seeing a calculation of the energy in a lightning strike and it
turns out to be a dismally small amount of energy when
put in terms of hours it could drive a 100 Watt light bulb. Sure the voltage is enourmous but only for fractions of a second.
t.
Re:People seem to forget...
on
Lunar Power
·
· Score: 2
The moon is a dusty place, no?
Yeah, all that wind up there is the pits.
t.
Re:Doesn't the earth receive more?
on
Lunar Power
·
· Score: 2
There already exists a product that resembles ordinary roofing tiles except it is a mini solar panel. The problem with it and all solar panels is that they cost more.
btw, rooves, although quite humourous, is not the plural of roof. I leave the plural as an exercise to the readers.
It looked to me that if you worked there and knew damn well what the fire alarm does, that you would have had time to scurry under the door before it closed.
Personally I thought the whole rationale for the guy to leave the area was bogus. It would have been better to stay in the conference room and scream for protection since he only had to stall for a couple of minutes anyway.
And what the reply was trying to say is that it would be like adding salt to the water. You would clearly notice the taste since caffiene is quite bitter.
How the hell is this insightful? If this guy thinks anyone can "cure" a broken bone then he needs to shut the star trek off and enter the real world. Not to mention the crack pipe induced reference to whatever the hell "capital pleasures" is.
Then again, I guess he is insightful like a crazed lunatic can be.
Isn't the way Ti forms a surface layer of corrosion, thus protecting the metal underneath much like the way Al corrodes? The oxides that form on Al form an airtight seal, thus keeping the insides corrosion free. Whereas steel corrodes more like gangrene.
t.
Re:I am partially made of Titanium
on
The Sexiest Metal
·
· Score: 1
I've always heard the head-expansion theory but really, has anyone actually gone through the calculations to see what the expansion is for one degree of off body temperature?
Personally I've wondered if it was due to vibration maybe, the drumming of the shower. It wouldn't resonate the same as the rest of your bones. You said it aches after a hot bath too... Perhaps you could test out whether vibration alone has any affect on the aches? Or perhaps you already know the answer to that one...
If I understand correctly, AOL is the one that is keeping Jabber from connecting. It's not any lack of capability in Jabber. AOL is afraid of a distributed open-source, ad-free alternative to their IM dominance.
I find statements like this quite amusing. The fact is that AOL pays $$$$$ for the servers, in return they expect you to view ads. You come to/. and for that free access you have to view ads. What is so hard to understand?
From what I've heard is that MSN is having a hard enough time not dropping connections of people using the real MSN apps. Besides, the M$ pattern is to wait till their competition is nearly dead before they start "innovating".
Did you hear of the researchers who were buying random samples of a supposed legal meat and then testing the DNA to find that it could be pretty much any animal whose meat looked remotely similar.
And the difference is poverty and population density. You should look at a map and population figures sometime, you'll find that the US is quite large on a per person basis.
You put your credibility on the line when you said that anyone can understand the code if they want to. That's quite the lofty claim. Why do the linux kernel guys bother to comment anything since anyone who can understand code can figure it out.
It's version 0.0.7. big deal. His intro comment states that he has implemented a JPEG-2000 codec. Clearly that is not the same as saying I've got the beginnings of a, or an alpha version... He even follows it with a it would be nice to see it work in his favourite browsers. If all that doesn't mean version 1.0 to you then I can't imagine you ever releasing any code over version 0.0.50.
And btw, available == released. Especially when one states they'd like to see it in their favourite browsers.
Two warnings? Your point? Does two warnings mean that the math is correct? That the rounding is correct for a reversible transform? I'd rather have code with a 1000 warnings and lots of test code to ensure that it works correctly.
And once more, saying it'd be nice to see it in a browser does imply a certain level of fitness.
As far as how "we" work in the open source world, I've always been under the impression that it is a cooperative. Part of working with other people is sharing knowledge.
Bottom line is you are taking this the wrong way. The guy obviously went through a lot of work to write it. He released it with the intention of it being used. As widely as possibly since it is BSD-licensed. So the question still remains why release it with zero docs. All it will do is needlessly frustrate the many people who really do want something like this.
You should say that it shouldn't be too difficult to figure out if you have the specs and are really familar with jp2k. Looking at the code I can only assume that you only have support for the lossy 9/7 wavelet. You usage statement says to use -r rates but you don't explain that any further. Nobody else will understand what the means. Even if they spend copius quantity of time looking through the code.
Most people will have a hard enough time figuring out that e.g., numgbits stands for number of guard bits much less what the hell a guard bit is and why is it set to 2.
I didn't mean to sound so harsh, I'm just amazed. Do you always code like that? Very much anti-Knuth, comments are for wussies.
And i'm curious why you have stepsize calculations in the example program.
Ah I see, you have a -I option to set ir=1. That selects how to set your stepsize. You don't even have that switch in your example usage. This pretty much proves my point that it is extremely difficult to figure out.
The spec is only available to deep pockets. If he's coded this then he must
have the specs. And no, you can't look at some bits of code and understand what
for example a trellis quantizer is doing. Not any easier than getting a paper
on it and writing it yourself. And if anyone is seriously going to run this
software then what happens if there is some mysterious bug that they can't fix?
Do you expect me to believe the code is perfect?
Your argument fails just like the video manufacter that tried to give an open
source version of their driver by running the code through the pre-processor
first. People took one look at that and said it was rubbish.
Or how about the other guy who said his company wanted to release their code
after running it through an obfusucator. Changing every variable and word with
some random characters?
And what the hell is the deal with luratech?
If you go to jpeg.org you'll see
that there are 3 other companies supplying code. There is jasper which seems to be pretty
good.
And obviously you have not worked with jp2k otherwise you would know that it
is more complicated than saying give me an 80% quality image.
And no I don't work for anyone.
t.
Re:Testing it out (formatted this time... :-P)
on
JPEG2000 Coming Soon
·
· Score: 2
That's actually not true, when you transcode from one lossy format to another, the second encoder can't tell the difference between artifacts from the previous encoder and stuff thats supposed to be there. So it ends up spending more bits trying to recreate it than the original encoder did. Or if you expect the same bitrate, then it spends bits on the original content and the artifacts. Note that the artifacts may be difficult to see to the human eye but the lossy jp2k wavelet has a support of only 9/7 pixels, whereas the artifacts from DCTs (jpeg) occur in 8 pixel wide blocks. I imagine they may not play very well.
You could try it yourself, go to that nasa site blue earth or something, get a 50 MB tiff and compress it to a jpeg. Then compress the original and the jpeg with jp2k and see what the difference is. An increase in filesize of two doesn't seem that unreasonable to me. Transcoding only works when the first encoder is very near to lossless.
t.
Re:Testing it out (formatted this time... :-P)
on
JPEG2000 Coming Soon
·
· Score: 2
Well considering that you said nothing about the source image, one serious problem with what you did is called transcoding. The same problem occurs when people convert mp3's to ogg's. If you have some wacked jpeg with high frequency compression artifacts everywhere then transcoding will fuck up. Try a losslessly compressed original next time. And pretty much 99.999999% of all jpg's are lossy since no one supports the lossless version.
Slashdot Mirror
t.
"You can't remove IE without crippling Windows!!"
That is complete bullshit and is not comparable to anything Linux/hurd/solaris/... have ever done.
t.
158213 Apr 19 09:41 bhs.ps.bz2
t.
Acrobat is shit.
ggv will view .ps, .pdf, .ps.bz2, .ps.gz, probably others. Works great. There is no reason to differentiate between any of them. And if you really must ps2pdf works quite well.
t.
Preventing someone from sending emails is NEVER censorship by definition. They can always go to Kinkos and make plain old paper mailings and then mail them to everyone on the planet.
t.
t.
Sounds like reason enough to start testing a MDR (media death ray).
t.
t.
Yeah, all that wind up there is the pits.
t.
btw, rooves, although quite humourous, is not the plural of roof. I leave the plural as an exercise to the readers.
t.
Personally I thought the whole rationale for the guy to leave the area was bogus. It would have been better to stay in the conference room and scream for protection since he only had to stall for a couple of minutes anyway.
t.
And what the reply was trying to say is that it would be like adding salt to the water. You would clearly notice the taste since caffiene is quite bitter.
Then again, I guess he is insightful like a crazed lunatic can be.
t.
The telephone pole he hit was only secondary...
t.
Personally I've wondered if it was due to vibration maybe, the drumming of the shower. It wouldn't resonate the same as the rest of your bones. You said it aches after a hot bath too... Perhaps you could test out whether vibration alone has any affect on the aches? Or perhaps you already know the answer to that one...
t.
I find statements like this quite amusing. The fact is that AOL pays $$$$$ for the servers, in return they expect you to view ads. You come to
t.
t.
And now for that crack about eating anything that moves, it's better than you whites who'll fuck anything. Or stick it up your ass.
And the difference is poverty and population density. You should look at a map and population figures sometime, you'll find that the US is quite large on a per person basis.
t.
It's version 0.0.7. big deal. His intro comment states that he has implemented a JPEG-2000 codec. Clearly that is not the same as saying I've got the beginnings of a, or an alpha version... He even follows it with a it would be nice to see it work in his favourite browsers. If all that doesn't mean version 1.0 to you then I can't imagine you ever releasing any code over version 0.0.50.
And btw, available == released. Especially when one states they'd like to see it in their favourite browsers.
Two warnings? Your point? Does two warnings mean that the math is correct? That the rounding is correct for a reversible transform? I'd rather have code with a 1000 warnings and lots of test code to ensure that it works correctly.
And once more, saying it'd be nice to see it in a browser does imply a certain level of fitness.
As far as how "we" work in the open source world, I've always been under the impression that it is a cooperative. Part of working with other people is sharing knowledge.
Bottom line is you are taking this the wrong way. The guy obviously went through a lot of work to write it. He released it with the intention of it being used. As widely as possibly since it is BSD-licensed. So the question still remains why release it with zero docs. All it will do is needlessly frustrate the many people who really do want something like this.
t.
I didn't mean to sound so harsh, I'm just amazed. Do you always code like that? Very much anti-Knuth, comments are for wussies.
And i'm curious why you have stepsize calculations in the example program.
Ah I see, you have a -I option to set ir=1. That selects how to set your stepsize. You don't even have that switch in your example usage. This pretty much proves my point that it is extremely difficult to figure out.
t.
Your argument fails just like the video manufacter that tried to give an open source version of their driver by running the code through the pre-processor first. People took one look at that and said it was rubbish.
Or how about the other guy who said his company wanted to release their code after running it through an obfusucator. Changing every variable and word with some random characters?
And what the hell is the deal with luratech? If you go to jpeg.org you'll see that there are 3 other companies supplying code. There is jasper which seems to be pretty good.
And obviously you have not worked with jp2k otherwise you would know that it is more complicated than saying give me an 80% quality image.
And no I don't work for anyone.
t.
You could try it yourself, go to that nasa site blue earth or something, get a 50 MB tiff and compress it to a jpeg. Then compress the original and the jpeg with jp2k and see what the difference is. An increase in filesize of two doesn't seem that unreasonable to me. Transcoding only works when the first encoder is very near to lossless.
t.
t.