The humour depends on your politics; the balls to carry out an aggressive 30 minute assault on the president to his face is admirable. Make no mistake, this was not done out of comic pursuit; this was a statement. Not what he said, but the context in which it was delivered and for how freakin' long!
WTF? His career is based on bashing the Bush administration. It takes *NO* balls to do what he did because there's nothing at risk and a lot to gain. He'll get more viewers and several thousand geeks wetting their pants watching it.
I would have more respect for him if he just respected the event instead of using it to, well, repeat nothing he hasn't already repeated on his show(s).
You'll notice Bush shaked his hand and patted him at the end (as any statemans would). Unless colbert ends up dead in the potomac tomorrow, I really seriously think you need to get over the "he's so brave" crap.
Re:Staying Relevant
on
On The BBC 2.0
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Sure, what you say will get your modded up on/. but could you be any more unoriginal? Aeeeee!! The US is imperialistic *wank* *wank* and arrogant *wank* *wank*.
Perhaps the rest of the world could give back all their US AID and technology.
In Win95, another process could easily corrupt another one's process memory. A simple demonstration of this fact were all the in-memory game patch tools which never required driver-level access.
That's like saying that linux isn't secure cause driver-level access is never needed to play a sound file (you just pipe to/dev/pcm aeeee!!!).
Win95 *DOES* have protection from *accidentally* accessing another process's memory (easy process has its own seperated virtual memory space). Win95 (AND NT, XP etc) have APIs that allow you to access another process's memory but you have to do this *explicitly*. It's how debuggers (etc) work and it's a feature that almost all other operating systems have.
Yes, Win95 had lots of bugs and a few flaws but given the context, your example is just plain ignorant.
Re:Staying Relevant
on
On The BBC 2.0
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
and 5 billion people are anti-americans.
Yeah, and 99.999% of those "anti-americans" are the kind that burn american flags in response to danish cartoons tho most can't be bothered to get off their asses unless it's to collect their american aid.
Anti-Americanism is a fad and it really doesn't mean much that people are "anti-american". They're anti-American in the same way as Anti-Globalisation protestors who stop by starbucks and mcdonalds on the way home from a protest.
Well if they're going to be using things like SVG and other vector based strategies then there's nothing stopping you from viewing the site in the DPI you want. In fact, it'll be better cause it'll allow you to run sites at lower DPIs than what they would be now (if you want).
They never explicityly stated it but there are some hints..
When the machines find David, they touch him and download his memories. His memories are displayed on their faces (much like the earlier mechas that had displays instead of physical faces). I doubt aliens (organic ones at least) would have electronic-like displays integrated into their bodies.
Their faces and bodies were transparent/glass-like with internals that resemble electronic circuits showing.
The machines (through the blue fairy) stated that David was very important to them.
Watch the movie again and I think you'll find that the aliens being robots makes sense. The only thing which really makes you think they're aliens is their tall skinny "grey" alien *shape*. Everything else implies robotics/mechatronics.
By what logic is adding features to TCP/IP not changing it.
Jesus Christ you are retarded. They are adding features to their IP stack implementation and the API that exposes sockets to user apps. They are not changing *TCP/IP* in a way that would make non-windows implementations notice.
Will third party apps that have to communicate with Windows processes have to use these extensions. Will third party companies have to sign a 'license` to use such extensions. Has Microsoft copyrighted such extensions
You're obviously not a programmer and don't know what the hell you're talking about.
No he is simply getting less tolerant of "sloppy" programming. He is one of the very very few that believes in doing it the way that gives you the best speed.
Uh. Programming for "best speed" usually results in sloppy programming. Have you ever seen the code Lunus writes? Ick. Sloppy would be a polite way of putting it. He needs to take a course in software engineering. Does his code work? Yes. Is it easy to maintain? No. Is it sloppy? Yes.
TFA speculates that these oleds could become 100% efficient. Maybe these people should go to work on the perpetual motion machine. I'd bet the farm that they can't achieve 100%. "In this family we obey the laws of thermodynamics." etc. etc.
Um, why can't they reach 100% efficiency? If they design the chemicals so that 100% of the energy input is converted to light (no heat), is that not 100% efficiency? The loss of power from power generation and loss in transmission don't change the fact that the *light* itself is 100% efficient.
This has nothing to do with perpetual motion. There is no physical law that states that you can not convert electricity to light with 100% efficiency. Are you trying to imply that X amount of energy going into a device should produce less than X energy?
As far as efficiency is concerned, the seperation of Hydrogen and Oxygen (by electrolosis) from water and the subsequent recombination in a fuel cell (creating electrical energy) is over 95% efficient. That compares to around 30% for a good diesel engine.
WTF? But the diesel from the diesel engine is pumped out of the ground. There an energy potential in the oil. With the fuel cell, you have to use energy from somewhere (probably diesel) to make the energy potential (hydrogen). It wouldn't matter if the conversion from the hydrogen/oxygen to electricity was 100% efficient instead of 95%.
The USA has 5% of the world's population but uses 25% of the energy.
So the solution is for the americans to irresponsibly have more children than they can confortably support and maintain a wealthy & healthy lifestyle?
I wonder, do you think the fat lady living in a trailer park having 7 kids has a point when she complains about the couple with 2 kids having a better living?
If anything, the irresponsibility in the world is nations with populations larger than their ability to provide for them. Want a better, safer, cleaner world/nation? Have less kids. Many nations seem to just do the opposite: Have more kids and then demand that wealthy nations (usually, nations with less kids) pay for them to have those kids!
That's what they say but I believe lazy has something to do with it. I find it hard to believe that good engineers would purposely create bad designs for just about *any* reason. The reality is that a well designed good driver ABI for a kernel is not all that easy to design (or easy to design quickly)
want to be able to break it whenever they feel like and
I'm sorry, but perhaps they should just take a course in software engineering. It's slightly different from hacking "what works" and changing whatever variables or consts they want. Windows has a well designed driver interface for just about every bit of hardware out there and drivers from 6 years ago still work on XPSP2 today and many will work in Vista. That's a bit different from not being able to get a driver from 2.6.11 working on 2.6.13 without code changes and recompilation.
they want closed source modules, which is most modules outside the main kernel tree, to be a pain to maintain. Remember when one of the early 2.6 kernels (2.6.4 or thereabouts) broken nVidia's kernel module
That's vindictive and ultimately self-defeating.
Well, if closed source modules were the norm rather than the exception, you'd see that all the time. Unless the kernel devs had to keep old code around for backwards compatibility, which is roughly where Vista is at now.
Actually that is not the case. Vista will have a new model for display and usb drivers. Old code is "around" for others but 1 few K of code here and there is hardly a big issue. I believe that the drivers that are open source would exist despite the fact there is no stable ABI and not because there is no stable ABI. Most of the drivers in the kernel have been reverse engineered or done by third parties. There few drivers that have actually been written by the hardware manufacturers. This would change if they made a stable ABI.
Not to mention they'd get a ton more problems they couldn't debug because it was some closed source module that went freakazoid
That doesn't stop determined hardware companies from writing closed source drivers for each kernel version. The reality is that most companies just flat right refuse to write linux drivers or refuse to update their drivers for breaking changes in the kernel (which seems to happen regularly). This means is that you might need kernel version 2.6.X to run a certain driver but need 2.6.Y to run some other driver. Even if the drivers were open source, sometimes it can be an damn pain to get them both working in the same kernel. Some OSS drivers are't in the kernel and are not regularly maintained (VIA EPIA drivers for example) and not everyone wants to work out what changes were made in the kernel and modify their driver source appropriately.
Having a stable propery kernel ABI is more than just about allowing closed source drivers. It's *GOOD DESIGN*. It will help both closed source *AND* open source drivers.
I really don't think so. it would be a gain. But seeing how far they've come with the current policy, I don't think there's any reason to stop now. As far as "system-level" things holding linux back, it's mostly that they can't ship patented stuff like mp3 decoding and DMCA-protected stuff like DVD playback out of the box. That is a much bigger issue to most people that the really odd piece of hardware that doesn't have a driver, I think.
Most package management systems etc make it piss easy to download mplayer or something similar. Getting drivers for your digital camera, video card or winmodem working on your current kernel version is a *totally* different matter...
Let's put all this another way. A stable Kernel ABI is a *STANDARD* and standards are good. Imagine if the X or VNC protocol changed with every minor version "to stop closed source third party clients".
Slashdot Mirror
The humour depends on your politics; the balls to carry out an aggressive 30 minute assault on the president to his face is admirable. Make no mistake, this was not done out of comic pursuit; this was a statement. Not what he said, but the context in which it was delivered and for how freakin' long!
WTF? His career is based on bashing the Bush administration. It takes *NO* balls to do what he did because there's nothing at risk and a lot to gain. He'll get more viewers and several thousand geeks wetting their pants watching it.
I would have more respect for him if he just respected the event instead of using it to, well, repeat nothing he hasn't already repeated on his show(s).
You'll notice Bush shaked his hand and patted him at the end (as any statemans would). Unless colbert ends up dead in the potomac tomorrow, I really seriously think you need to get over the "he's so brave" crap.
Sure, what you say will get your modded up on /. but could you be any more unoriginal? Aeeeee!! The US is imperialistic *wank* *wank* and arrogant *wank* *wank*.
Perhaps the rest of the world could give back all their US AID and technology.
Are you like, retarded or something?
Yeah, why don't we just pay everyone $10000 an hour?!!!!!
If only everyone had the economic skills that rivals your own.
In Win95, another process could easily corrupt another one's process memory. A simple demonstration of this fact were all the in-memory game patch tools which never required driver-level access.
That's like saying that linux isn't secure cause driver-level access is never needed to play a sound file (you just pipe to
Win95 *DOES* have protection from *accidentally* accessing another process's memory (easy process has its own seperated virtual memory space). Win95 (AND NT, XP etc) have APIs that allow you to access another process's memory but you have to do this *explicitly*. It's how debuggers (etc) work and it's a feature that almost all other operating systems have.
Yes, Win95 had lots of bugs and a few flaws but given the context, your example is just plain ignorant.
and 5 billion people are anti-americans.
Yeah, and 99.999% of those "anti-americans" are the kind that burn american flags in response to danish cartoons tho most can't be bothered to get off their asses unless it's to collect their american aid.
Anti-Americanism is a fad and it really doesn't mean much that people are "anti-american". They're anti-American in the same way as Anti-Globalisation protestors who stop by starbucks and mcdonalds on the way home from a protest.
Uh, ADSL2 is still only 3MB/s and that is less than your 8megs/sec claim and less than the 10MB/s of the grandparent.
Everybody's a libertarian 'till their neighbour's becomes a crack house.
The plural of "neighbour" is "neighbours". The apostrophe makes your signature very hard to understand.
I think that was part of his point...
Well if they're going to be using things like SVG and other vector based strategies then there's nothing stopping you from viewing the site in the DPI you want. In fact, it'll be better cause it'll allow you to run sites at lower DPIs than what they would be now (if you want).
Well I doubt a squid has the ability to download and display the contents of a robot boy's electronic brain by touching him.
They never explicityly stated it but there are some hints..
When the machines find David, they touch him and download his memories. His memories are displayed on their faces (much like the earlier mechas that had displays instead of physical faces). I doubt aliens (organic ones at least) would have electronic-like displays integrated into their bodies.
Their faces and bodies were transparent/glass-like with internals that resemble electronic circuits showing.
The machines (through the blue fairy) stated that David was very important to them.
Watch the movie again and I think you'll find that the aliens being robots makes sense. The only thing which really makes you think they're aliens is their tall skinny "grey" alien *shape*. Everything else implies robotics/mechatronics.
Much more life in that (if you'll pardon the pun) than the whole "aliens giving David his one wish for a day"
Aliens? They were robots.
By what logic is adding features to TCP/IP not changing it.
Jesus Christ you are retarded. They are adding features to their IP stack implementation and the API that exposes sockets to user apps. They are not changing *TCP/IP* in a way that would make non-windows implementations notice.
Will third party apps that have to communicate with Windows processes have to use these extensions. Will third party companies have to sign a 'license` to use such extensions. Has Microsoft copyrighted such extensions
You're obviously not a programmer and don't know what the hell you're talking about.
No he is simply getting less tolerant of "sloppy" programming. He is one of the very very few that believes in doing it the way that gives you the best speed.
Uh. Programming for "best speed" usually results in sloppy programming. Have you ever seen the code Lunus writes? Ick. Sloppy would be a polite way of putting it. He needs to take a course in software engineering. Does his code work? Yes. Is it easy to maintain? No. Is it sloppy? Yes.
They were also better than Gore's.
Coming from a guy who's not afraid to rip on bush in public.
Do you guys listen to yourselves?
What, I wonder, will you and your crack moderators do when bush leaves office?
Increasing order always costs energy.
I can think of no system that converts energy from one form to another with 100% efficiency. There is always a loss
Unless your energy conversion decreases order.
Anyway, where does this "energy loss" go to and who says it's a loss wrt to light generation?
TFA speculates that these oleds could become 100% efficient. Maybe these people should go to work on the perpetual motion machine. I'd bet the farm that they can't achieve 100%. "In this family we obey the laws of thermodynamics." etc. etc.
Um, why can't they reach 100% efficiency? If they design the chemicals so that 100% of the energy input is converted to light (no heat), is that not 100% efficiency? The loss of power from power generation and loss in transmission don't change the fact that the *light* itself is 100% efficient.
This has nothing to do with perpetual motion. There is no physical law that states that you can not convert electricity to light with 100% efficiency. Are you trying to imply that X amount of energy going into a device should produce less than X energy?
As far as efficiency is concerned, the seperation of Hydrogen and Oxygen (by electrolosis) from water and the subsequent recombination in a fuel cell (creating electrical energy) is over 95% efficient. That compares to around 30% for a good diesel engine.
WTF? But the diesel from the diesel engine is pumped out of the ground. There an energy potential in the oil. With the fuel cell, you have to use energy from somewhere (probably diesel) to make the energy potential (hydrogen). It wouldn't matter if the conversion from the hydrogen/oxygen to electricity was 100% efficient instead of 95%.
The USA has 5% of the world's population but uses 25% of the energy.
So the solution is for the americans to irresponsibly have more children than they can confortably support and maintain a wealthy & healthy lifestyle?
I wonder, do you think the fat lady living in a trailer park having 7 kids has a point when she complains about the couple with 2 kids having a better living?
If anything, the irresponsibility in the world is nations with populations larger than their ability to provide for them. Want a better, safer, cleaner world/nation? Have less kids. Many nations seem to just do the opposite: Have more kids and then demand that wealthy nations (usually, nations with less kids) pay for them to have those kids!
True, except lazy has nothing to do with it
That's what they say but I believe lazy has something to do with it. I find it hard to believe that good engineers would purposely create bad designs for just about *any* reason. The reality is that a well designed good driver ABI for a kernel is not all that easy to design (or easy to design quickly)
want to be able to break it whenever they feel like and
I'm sorry, but perhaps they should just take a course in software engineering. It's slightly different from hacking "what works" and changing whatever variables or consts they want. Windows has a well designed driver interface for just about every bit of hardware out there and drivers from 6 years ago still work on XPSP2 today and many will work in Vista. That's a bit different from not being able to get a driver from 2.6.11 working on 2.6.13 without code changes and recompilation.
they want closed source modules, which is most modules outside the main kernel tree, to be a pain to maintain. Remember when one of the early 2.6 kernels (2.6.4 or thereabouts) broken nVidia's kernel module
That's vindictive and ultimately self-defeating.
Well, if closed source modules were the norm rather than the exception, you'd see that all the time. Unless the kernel devs had to keep old code around for backwards compatibility, which is roughly where Vista is at now.
Actually that is not the case. Vista will have a new model for display and usb drivers. Old code is "around" for others but 1 few K of code here and there is hardly a big issue. I believe that the drivers that are open source would exist despite the fact there is no stable ABI and not because there is no stable ABI. Most of the drivers in the kernel have been reverse engineered or done by third parties. There few drivers that have actually been written by the hardware manufacturers. This would change if they made a stable ABI.
Not to mention they'd get a ton more problems they couldn't debug because it was some closed source module that went freakazoid
That doesn't stop determined hardware companies from writing closed source drivers for each kernel version. The reality is that most companies just flat right refuse to write linux drivers or refuse to update their drivers for breaking changes in the kernel (which seems to happen regularly). This means is that you might need kernel version 2.6.X to run a certain driver but need 2.6.Y to run some other driver. Even if the drivers were open source, sometimes it can be an damn pain to get them both working in the same kernel. Some OSS drivers are't in the kernel and are not regularly maintained (VIA EPIA drivers for example) and not everyone wants to work out what changes were made in the kernel and modify their driver source appropriately.
Having a stable propery kernel ABI is more than just about allowing closed source drivers. It's *GOOD DESIGN*. It will help both closed source *AND* open source drivers.
I really don't think so. it would be a gain. But seeing how far they've come with the current policy, I don't think there's any reason to stop now. As far as "system-level" things holding linux back, it's mostly that they can't ship patented stuff like mp3 decoding and DMCA-protected stuff like DVD playback out of the box. That is a much bigger issue to most people that the really odd piece of hardware that doesn't have a driver, I think.
Most package management systems etc make it piss easy to download mplayer or something similar. Getting drivers for your digital camera, video card or winmodem working on your current kernel version is a *totally* different matter...
Let's put all this another way. A stable Kernel ABI is a *STANDARD* and standards are good. Imagine if the X or VNC protocol changed with every minor version "to stop closed source third party clients".
Or more specifically, half way between hawaii and new zealand. "Somewhere between Australia and South America" covers most of the south pacific.
since USA is the direct responsible for most of the gases that cause the greenhouse effect, it's reasonable that they do something.
And the USA is also directly responsible for producing products and technology that benefits the world.
Signing the Kioto protocol would be a good start.
I'm not suprised you don't understand the Kyoto protocol since you can't even spell it properly. Have you even read a single thing about it?
Not that this adds anything to the conversation other than a weird coincidence of him telling me about this and now seeing the story.
Your dad tells you about a current event and you read it on a news web site not soon after Amazing!
What would be really a coincidence is if you found out your dad has the same last name as you or something.