I find it fascinating that a kernel developer would be concerned with O() rather than the actual runtime. I thought kernel developers in general just put an arbitrary upper bound so their "O(n^2) && n -lt 1024" was faster than the "O(log n)" for any n.
Now if what you are actually looking for is some fun how about embedding neko in the kernel, because while you can add some cool things like say tries (prefix trees) the real performance bottleneck is between apps and the kernel. Neko could safely call getpid() in the kernel 1000x more times than any user app could. This opens a lot of possibilites such as user code safely reading kernel structures directly with nearly zero overhead, functioning as event callbacks, etc.
As an example, take something like beagle where it ideally gets notified of every file change and then, at some later time re-index the files. Do you really want every file modification doing a kernel-user-kernel switch? Or some hideous complicated caching API to specifically send these events all in a batch? (inotify I am looking at you...). Think a generic BPF.
So at around the same time for $250 you can either get an also-ran music player or a brand-new game console. Zounds to me like they are going to lose a lot of tech geek sales.
Potentially you can say 'oops sorry' unless of course there is a smoking gun or it meets some legal 'should have known better' test. IANAL.
But if your hardware device contains GPL code, oh I don't know say maybe it is a router, do you open the rest of your code? or pay for a recall of millions of devices and refunds/returns and piss off customers with the hassle and have to rewrite and retest the code? Having to open up the whole product is absolutely a potential outcome.
If your program existed before their patents, then the patents are invalid. That's what "prior art" means. If not, then it doesn't matter what license you use, they can still sue you. Sucks, doesn't it?
Apparently you have not heard of "first to file", which will almost certainly be the case in the USA if the democrats do not retake either the House or Senate. And haven't read the GPLv3, from the 2nd draft:
However, this permission terminates, as to all such versions, if you bring suit against anyone for patent infringement of any of your essential patent claims in any such version, for making, using, selling or otherwise conveying a work based on the Program in compliance with this License.
If they sue, they can't use your software. If you software includes glibc, it's possible that effectively they couldn't use any GPLv3 covered software at all. That's a huge difference in patents from v2.
The license doesn't prevent you from creating linux-powered baby-mulchers. Or linux-powered atom bombs. Quick, someone hurry up and use software licenses to enforce our morality!
Version 3 would however prevent you from creating these things that run free software and preventing you from running your own code on them.
The GPLv3 is far, far more ambiguous.
For instance, when does the license expire? GPLv2: unspecified, GPLv3: when the copyright term ends. This is an issue in some regions.
I wonder why you can't think for youself on this issue.
It doesn't even require thought... GPLv3 > GPLv2 is a 'no-brainer'.
Linus has such a dislike for the FSF that he rants on these things that he doesn't even know about and what's worse, uses his position to spread his ignorance like a cancer, a malignant ignorance. Consider that he did not even know the 'meetings' took place over email and IRC. Or his repeated claims of having to give up his private key, which is shown wrong over and over by legal experts. Or saying committees don't take responsibility for decisions and then complaining that they didn't just blindly agree to whatever his kernel developers wanted.
What's interesting to me is when Torvolds says the GPL2 is where companies and open source people can meet in perfect harmony, as if companies like the GPL2. No company likes the prospect of having to open up their product because some 'tard put in GPL code without their knowledge. They put up with it because they have to, because it's a reality they can't escape. I know I have had many heated arguments about making code GPL when others on a project wanted BSD to be more 'corporate friendly'. Perfect harmony? Wtf world is he living in? Use GPLv3 and they will come and work with that too (even though they don't want to) and for the same reasons.
I think the real question is, as an open-source developer, why wouldn't you choose GPLv3 over v2? Because you want some company to use your program and then sue you because you made use of their patents? Or you want your software to make DRM devices cheaper to create? Or you want your license to be worded in a way that is ambiguous in some regions? I wonder why Linus wants linux to be licensed without patent protections, with ambiguous language, and in a way that supports DRM?
I don't really disagree with any of your points, but lets cut to the chase:
The kernel developers like companies contributing to linux and they don't want to jeopardize that. That's pretty much what their response is all about, whether they even realize it or not.
Also you mention Red Hat... from the RH people I've talked to personally they seem pretty gung-ho about GPLv3. Probably because it protects them far more than v2 since it basically means they are immune from the majority of patent suits.
1) We dont want to change a winning formula 2) Even one more open-source license is too many 3) We need corporate contributions to linux 4) We don't own the copyright so we can't change 5.1) *NO* DRM can be restricted unless absolutely ALL innocent use is allowed. 5.2) GPL3 will fragment licenses by being compatible with more of them 5.3) Companies cannot benefit from som GPL programs without giving up patent claims against all GPL programs (and we have to keep our corporate backers happy). 6) There is no reason at all to use GPL3. It provides absolutely nothing of value over GPL2.
Sorry but these reasons are just crap... 1) fear of change is not a reason, 2) there are hundreds of open-source licenses and one more is not going to break the camel's back, 3) pleasing corporations is not a tenant of oss and never has been, 4) they can change piecemeal on new parts, 5) drm is incompatible with oss, end-of-line, qed and 6) they are just being wankers.
Personally I've looked into the kernel a lot and I'm not all that impressed... the code is good and fast, but the design choices are sometimes pretty shabby. For example the IOKit c++ based driver model in OS X is far superior. Or take their diss'ing of DTrace for instance. In fact, I would love to see a split that creates an alternative kernel for Linux. It would be a great thing in the long run.
People don't vote because they are lazy, ignorant, and/or don't care, not because there's nothing worth voting for. There's always something worth voting for that actually does make a difference. You can vote for the lesser of two evils, or an independent, or a local referendum that actually affects you, or in the worst case cast an empty vote to lodge your protest. Even casting an empty ballot is worth doing.
I think you'll find 99% of the time this is just an excuse to hide a personal fault. Which would you rather tell somebody, that you didn't vote because you were just lazy or because "they're all the same"? Would you rather tell somebody you didn't vote because you were too ignorant to know that the richest school district in the state doesn't actually need extra money on the referendum, or that "one vote won't make a difference". Would you rather tell people that you didn't vote for an 3rd party candidate because you didn't even know what day was election day or because "a vote for a 3rd party is a wasted vote"?
The broader point is that Nintendo will be shipping a system capable of graphics, wireless web browsing, playing music, storing data, and whatever else but they don't need to do much of anything to protect it or lock it down.
Nintendo can create a Linux boot disc that lets you do web browsing, play music / videos, write documents in ooffice using wiimote as a 'giant pen' to write in 'air cursive', etc. Or if somebody else does that they won't care one bit, because even if people buy their system and never play a single game they still make money on it. In fact the only thing they would even care about is if you can use that to boot illegal copies of games, but even then only if it's easy enough for the masses to use and then only to protect some of their extra profit from games and to protect other developers making games for Wii.
Well, I call bs on YARV ruby vm being "about as fast as Java and.NET in most situations". I benchmarked Java vs C vs Smalltalk, and the results were basically:
GCC: 1 Java: 0.8-2, sometimes upto 4 Smalltalk: 4-20, sometimes upto 80
This was against highly optimized cincom smalltalk, the fastest around at the time, and even on OO tests like method dispatch. And Ruby has all the same issues as smalltalk (dynamic dispatch, boundless integers, blocks/closures, etc).
Ruby, Python, Perl, Smalltalk, etc sometimes test well when the benchmark is something like "compress this 1mb" or "match this regular expression" because they all call out to the same C libraries to do this. There's something to be said for that, but when you need to step away from the standard libraries you'll see a much different picture.
The code was supposed to be funny on multiple levels, including the more than several errors I included on purpose. You obviously missed the subjoke about hungarian notation causing more errors than it prevents.;-(
The question is, are souls affected by gravity and if so do they have enough velocity on death to escape said black hole? I say we find a heathen, put him on the moon, create a black hole there and then see if some mormons can successfully convert him to mormonism, ex post facto. If so, lets build the biggest damn black hole we can and get this over with.
Even if the moon becomes a black hole, at first it will only have the same mass so we should be ok for quite a while:
Report describes proper operation of Capitalism 2.0 (see spec at Constitution/1_8#commerce). Please read project documentation before submitting further bug reports.
It seems to me that whenever someone comes up with a great new service, some other company barges into the market, undercuts them out of existence, then jacks their prices, cuts their quality of service, and starts finding ways to force additional product down your throat that you don't want. Or ads.
Occasionally I'll get on YouTube's site and search for something or browse through the top viewed/rated. I might sit through one 15 or 30-second ad, but often I watch a video for less than 10 seconds anyway. I'm not going to watch a 15 sec ad for that.
Another time I see the videos is stumbling on some blog with them embedded. Usually there are several embedded in the blog. If the video or the description looks interesting I might give it 5-10 seconds to decide whether to watch it or click stop.
I don't think I am the only ytuber like that. With anything more than 1-2 seconds I'm just not going to watch it unless I *know* it's something I *really* want to see. And I can't imagine kids having more patience than me.
YouTube could easily get away with putting a static ad on the movie before it plays the first time. This wouldn't be too annoying and tied in with google adsense would work really well. Maybe it could be a transleucent so you could still see what the video was. I wouldn't mind that much, but any ad I have to actually sit through means a adblock on http://*youtube.com/*
Also they are doing to hold what, 25-50gb? By the time they catch on we'll have finger-sized read/write drives that hold that much. That means the only use for HD-DVD or BlueRay is for one-way distribution of games/movies (music is too small to need more than 5gb of normal dvd).
But who really wants to go out these days and actually get a physical cd? This is the ipod age, where people are ditching read-only physical media in droves in favor of lower quality digital copies. By the time either could pick up steam most places will have enough bandwidth for streaming of DVD-quality movies (even in America where we are behind the speed curve).
Laptops in a functioning school system are a requirement, not a problem. The problem is with virtually all of our schools in America. This complaining about laptops and their so-called misuse is just a weak reflection of the real problem: the schools just plain suck.
Back when I was in school we had to do PowerPoints called "posters". And you know what? I haven't done a single poster since. Way back then I used to sleep in class to avoid the tedium instead of playing games or instant messaging. It's the same old same-old. It was so bad I averaged 1-2 letter grades down from what I tested at (all A's) because I never did busywork like this (I still had a full year's worth of AP credits fyi).
Where are the engaging conversations that students would rather listen to than IM? Where are the tests that fail students that don't learn what is taught because they are plaing games? Where are the reprecussions from failing? In all my years at public school (maybe 50 teachers over 7 years) there was one who actually a good teacher and he was the freakin basketball coach teaching history and computers without a teaching degree because of staffing.
Personally I blame the problem on 'soft' teachers trying to nurture rather than educate. It's a mix of feminists trying to make girls score better and too many female teachers that think competition is a four-letter word -- not that any of that is bad in the proper balance. Honestly I would have loved to take the lower grades in English because I couldn't cut the Yeates as well and the higher grade in multi-variable.
What do you think pop music is? Like Saturday morning cartoons used to be (transformers I am looking at you), Pop music is the ad so you'll go buy the band's CD / concert ticket / merchandise.
Music used to be about expressing some emotion, a message, or telling a story. Now it's all about "we're so cool go buy our CD."
Slashdot Mirror
I find it fascinating that a kernel developer would be concerned with O() rather than the actual runtime. I thought kernel developers in general just put an arbitrary upper bound so their "O(n^2) && n -lt 1024" was faster than the "O(log n)" for any n.
Now if what you are actually looking for is some fun how about embedding neko in the kernel, because while you can add some cool things like say tries (prefix trees) the real performance bottleneck is between apps and the kernel. Neko could safely call getpid() in the kernel 1000x more times than any user app could. This opens a lot of possibilites such as user code safely reading kernel structures directly with nearly zero overhead, functioning as event callbacks, etc.
As an example, take something like beagle where it ideally gets notified of every file change and then, at some later time re-index the files. Do you really want every file modification doing a kernel-user-kernel switch? Or some hideous complicated caching API to specifically send these events all in a batch? (inotify I am looking at you...). Think a generic BPF.
It depends on what the definition of the phhrase "is is" is.
Smalltalk and LISP, obviously. Like Merlin, they were born fully formed and age backwards, getting more and more relevant as time passes.
So at around the same time for $250 you can either get an also-ran music player or a brand-new game console. Zounds to me like they are going to lose a lot of tech geek sales.
''Intellectuals think they're smart.''
Proof follows:
Intellectuals think, therefore they are smart. QWiiD.
I so hope the next president declares Bush an enemy combatant and sends him to gitmo. If for no other reason, the irony would be so delicious!
Prospect: a potential or likely candidate.
Potentially you can say 'oops sorry' unless of course there is a smoking gun or it meets some legal 'should have known better' test. IANAL.
But if your hardware device contains GPL code, oh I don't know say maybe it is a router, do you open the rest of your code? or pay for a recall of millions of devices and refunds/returns and piss off customers with the hassle and have to rewrite and retest the code? Having to open up the whole product is absolutely a potential outcome.
Apparently you have not heard of "first to file", which will almost certainly be the case in the USA if the democrats do not retake either the House or Senate. And haven't read the GPLv3, from the 2nd draft:
If they sue, they can't use your software. If you software includes glibc, it's possible that effectively they couldn't use any GPLv3 covered software at all. That's a huge difference in patents from v2.
The license doesn't prevent you from creating linux-powered baby-mulchers. Or linux-powered atom bombs. Quick, someone hurry up and use software licenses to enforce our morality!
Version 3 would however prevent you from creating these things that run free software and preventing you from running your own code on them.
The GPLv3 is far, far more ambiguous.
For instance, when does the license expire? GPLv2: unspecified, GPLv3: when the copyright term ends. This is an issue in some regions.
I wonder why you can't think for youself on this issue.
It doesn't even require thought... GPLv3 > GPLv2 is a 'no-brainer'.
Linus has such a dislike for the FSF that he rants on these things that he doesn't even know about and what's worse, uses his position to spread his ignorance like a cancer, a malignant ignorance. Consider that he did not even know the 'meetings' took place over email and IRC. Or his repeated claims of having to give up his private key, which is shown wrong over and over by legal experts. Or saying committees don't take responsibility for decisions and then complaining that they didn't just blindly agree to whatever his kernel developers wanted.
What's interesting to me is when Torvolds says the GPL2 is where companies and open source people can meet in perfect harmony, as if companies like the GPL2. No company likes the prospect of having to open up their product because some 'tard put in GPL code without their knowledge. They put up with it because they have to, because it's a reality they can't escape. I know I have had many heated arguments about making code GPL when others on a project wanted BSD to be more 'corporate friendly'. Perfect harmony? Wtf world is he living in? Use GPLv3 and they will come and work with that too (even though they don't want to) and for the same reasons.
I think the real question is, as an open-source developer, why wouldn't you choose GPLv3 over v2? Because you want some company to use your program and then sue you because you made use of their patents? Or you want your software to make DRM devices cheaper to create? Or you want your license to be worded in a way that is ambiguous in some regions? I wonder why Linus wants linux to be licensed without patent protections, with ambiguous language, and in a way that supports DRM?
I don't really disagree with any of your points, but lets cut to the chase:
The kernel developers like companies contributing to linux and they don't want to jeopardize that. That's pretty much what their response is all about, whether they even realize it or not.
Also you mention Red Hat... from the RH people I've talked to personally they seem pretty gung-ho about GPLv3. Probably because it protects them far more than v2 since it basically means they are immune from the majority of patent suits.
1) We dont want to change a winning formula
2) Even one more open-source license is too many
3) We need corporate contributions to linux
4) We don't own the copyright so we can't change
5.1) *NO* DRM can be restricted unless absolutely ALL innocent use is allowed.
5.2) GPL3 will fragment licenses by being compatible with more of them
5.3) Companies cannot benefit from som GPL programs without giving up patent claims against all GPL programs (and we have to keep our corporate backers happy).
6) There is no reason at all to use GPL3. It provides absolutely nothing of value over GPL2.
Sorry but these reasons are just crap... 1) fear of change is not a reason, 2) there are hundreds of open-source licenses and one more is not going to break the camel's back, 3) pleasing corporations is not a tenant of oss and never has been, 4) they can change piecemeal on new parts, 5) drm is incompatible with oss, end-of-line, qed and 6) they are just being wankers.
Personally I've looked into the kernel a lot and I'm not all that impressed... the code is good and fast, but the design choices are sometimes pretty shabby. For example the IOKit c++ based driver model in OS X is far superior. Or take their diss'ing of DTrace for instance. In fact, I would love to see a split that creates an alternative kernel for Linux. It would be a great thing in the long run.
People don't vote because they are lazy, ignorant, and/or don't care, not because there's nothing worth voting for. There's always something worth voting for that actually does make a difference. You can vote for the lesser of two evils, or an independent, or a local referendum that actually affects you, or in the worst case cast an empty vote to lodge your protest. Even casting an empty ballot is worth doing.
I think you'll find 99% of the time this is just an excuse to hide a personal fault. Which would you rather tell somebody, that you didn't vote because you were just lazy or because "they're all the same"? Would you rather tell somebody you didn't vote because you were too ignorant to know that the richest school district in the state doesn't actually need extra money on the referendum, or that "one vote won't make a difference". Would you rather tell people that you didn't vote for an 3rd party candidate because you didn't even know what day was election day or because "a vote for a 3rd party is a wasted vote"?
The broader point is that Nintendo will be shipping a system capable of graphics, wireless web browsing, playing music, storing data, and whatever else but they don't need to do much of anything to protect it or lock it down.
Nintendo can create a Linux boot disc that lets you do web browsing, play music / videos, write documents in ooffice using wiimote as a 'giant pen' to write in 'air cursive', etc. Or if somebody else does that they won't care one bit, because even if people buy their system and never play a single game they still make money on it. In fact the only thing they would even care about is if you can use that to boot illegal copies of games, but even then only if it's easy enough for the masses to use and then only to protect some of their extra profit from games and to protect other developers making games for Wii.
Well, I call bs on YARV ruby vm being "about as fast as Java and .NET in most situations". I benchmarked Java vs C vs Smalltalk, and the results were basically:
GCC: 1
Java: 0.8-2, sometimes upto 4
Smalltalk: 4-20, sometimes upto 80
This was against highly optimized cincom smalltalk, the fastest around at the time, and even on OO tests like method dispatch. And Ruby has all the same issues as smalltalk (dynamic dispatch, boundless integers, blocks/closures, etc).
Ruby, Python, Perl, Smalltalk, etc sometimes test well when the benchmark is something like "compress this 1mb" or "match this regular expression" because they all call out to the same C libraries to do this. There's something to be said for that, but when you need to step away from the standard libraries you'll see a much different picture.
The code was supposed to be funny on multiple levels, including the more than several errors I included on purpose. You obviously missed the subjoke about hungarian notation causing more errors than it prevents. ;-(
The question is, are souls affected by gravity and if so do they have enough velocity on death to escape said black hole? I say we find a heathen, put him on the moon, create a black hole there and then see if some mormons can successfully convert him to mormonism, ex post facto. If so, lets build the biggest damn black hole we can and get this over with.
Even if the moon becomes a black hole, at first it will only have the same mass so we should be ok for quite a while:
mass_of(moon)/sizeof(moon) == mass_of(moon)/0.0
Original troll never writes any bugs, so his hello world is more like this:
Product: Captitalism
Reported Agains: 2.0
Severity: Critical
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: WONTFIX
Report describes proper operation of Capitalism 2.0 (see spec at Constitution/1_8#commerce). Please read project documentation before submitting further bug reports.
Occasionally I'll get on YouTube's site and search for something or browse through the top viewed/rated. I might sit through one 15 or 30-second ad, but often I watch a video for less than 10 seconds anyway. I'm not going to watch a 15 sec ad for that.
Another time I see the videos is stumbling on some blog with them embedded. Usually there are several embedded in the blog. If the video or the description looks interesting I might give it 5-10 seconds to decide whether to watch it or click stop.
I don't think I am the only ytuber like that. With anything more than 1-2 seconds I'm just not going to watch it unless I *know* it's something I *really* want to see. And I can't imagine kids having more patience than me.
YouTube could easily get away with putting a static ad on the movie before it plays the first time. This wouldn't be too annoying and tied in with google adsense would work really well. Maybe it could be a transleucent so you could still see what the video was. I wouldn't mind that much, but any ad I have to actually sit through means a adblock on http: //*youtube.com/*
Also they are doing to hold what, 25-50gb? By the time they catch on we'll have finger-sized read/write drives that hold that much. That means the only use for HD-DVD or BlueRay is for one-way distribution of games/movies (music is too small to need more than 5gb of normal dvd).
But who really wants to go out these days and actually get a physical cd? This is the ipod age, where people are ditching read-only physical media in droves in favor of lower quality digital copies. By the time either could pick up steam most places will have enough bandwidth for streaming of DVD-quality movies (even in America where we are behind the speed curve).
Laptops in a functioning school system are a requirement, not a problem. The problem is with virtually all of our schools in America. This complaining about laptops and their so-called misuse is just a weak reflection of the real problem: the schools just plain suck.
Back when I was in school we had to do PowerPoints called "posters". And you know what? I haven't done a single poster since. Way back then I used to sleep in class to avoid the tedium instead of playing games or instant messaging. It's the same old same-old. It was so bad I averaged 1-2 letter grades down from what I tested at (all A's) because I never did busywork like this (I still had a full year's worth of AP credits fyi).
Where are the engaging conversations that students would rather listen to than IM? Where are the tests that fail students that don't learn what is taught because they are plaing games? Where are the reprecussions from failing? In all my years at public school (maybe 50 teachers over 7 years) there was one who actually a good teacher and he was the freakin basketball coach teaching history and computers without a teaching degree because of staffing.
Personally I blame the problem on 'soft' teachers trying to nurture rather than educate. It's a mix of feminists trying to make girls score better and too many female teachers that think competition is a four-letter word -- not that any of that is bad in the proper balance. Honestly I would have loved to take the lower grades in English because I couldn't cut the Yeates as well and the higher grade in multi-variable.
Surely it would take at least six days of hard work to compile enough observations to contradict evolution. One the seventh day you could rest though.
all administrations are taken to task when watchful (and slightly paranoid) people catch them with their hands inside the cookie jar of liberty.
Bush doesn't just take from the cookie jar, he chews liberty with his mouth open.
What do you think pop music is? Like Saturday morning cartoons used to be (transformers I am looking at you), Pop music is the ad so you'll go buy the band's CD / concert ticket / merchandise.
Music used to be about expressing some emotion, a message, or telling a story. Now it's all about "we're so cool go buy our CD."