Batman beyond, if it follows the kickass cartoon added with some of Stephensons techno-themes will be a very cool movie... think batman as badass as Hiro and a villian as wacked out as Raven...
Nobody ever admits that they just want a chance to see YT naked (hmmmm... maybe get Anna Paquin to play YT... yeah, I like it).:)
Not to look a gift compiler in the, er, mouth (parser?), but how good is the Watcom compiler? I'm especially curious about C++ support - does it support namespaces, templates, etc?
haha you really think someone is going to go to all that trouble just to email you?:) I am not trying to be a dick, but really.
Actually, I've gotten a few emails from people who have decoded it. And some AC made it a joke for a while to repsond to my posts with the decoded address.
Anyway, it amuses me to have it, so who cares. I've actually considered encoding
thisis@notareal.email.com
and using that, just to really mess with people. But I'm not that evil... usually.
SONY Digital handycams with 1394 look real promising.
I've got one on my desk right now. The picture quality really isn't the greatest. Might want to get one that uses the IEEE Camera interface, instead of DV.
1) In the wrong department (have you ever looked around at the average CS dept?
You are _so_ wrong. What CS deptartments lack in quantity, they well than make up for in quality. When I look at girls in my CS classes (which I do a lot, since I never pay attention to the professor), a solid 50 - 60% of the girls I see are really good looking. Those numbers seem significantly lower in my humanities classes. (Yeah, isolated statistic and all that, but don't assume stereotypes are universally true, you just gotta find the right university).
This is the one that has sold me on using SCSI on my next system. I 'mv'ed about 500 megs of files from one partition to another on my desktop box (IDE, of course), and mv took up about 3/4 of the CPU for 5 minutes. My workstation (which is SCSI) does stuff like that in maybe 30 seconds, with no noticable slowdown in my other programs.
What about "Firewire" (IEEE 1394)? I'm not that much of an expert, does it fit the bill? Is it still too expensive?
It's definitly fast enough, 200 Mbits/sec IIRC. The main problem is driver support (at least on Linux, I think Win98/2K is doing alright with it). I'm working on supporting IEEE 1394 cameras into a vision program this summer, and it requires a kernel patch and a couple of alpha-quality user space libraries to do _anything_. People are working on disk support, and IPv4 over 1394, but, again, very alpha.
It's also pretty expensive, I think. More so thank SCSI, even.
75 Gig hard drives! (I feel really old, sometimes.)
Yeah, I remember reading (not that long ago, I thought) about how 1 gig drives were coming out soon (at the time I think I had 200 megs). At the time, I though "In a few years, that'll seem tiny". I guess I was right, though 80 gigs really does seem excessive, at least for right now.
CSS is immoral. The engineers who designed CSS should have understood the consequences of what they where told to make, and should not have made them.
Hell, maybe they did. In case you weren't aware, CSS is pretty fscking weak. 40 bit keys (and it's not for export reasons; after all, how can someone use it to send a message?), and the algorithm isn't that great either. Xing's fuckup is what gave us the first key, but it was the small keyspace and weaknesses in the algorithm that let people grab the decoder keys for every vendor within a few months.
It's entirely possible that a couple of guys got hired to do this, and decided that, instead of not taking the job (wherupon the DVD consortium would hire somebody else), they would intentionally screw it up.
Of course, maybe they were just stupid, I don't know. Anyway, the sitiuation with CSS could be worse.
That's not to say that Kaplan is in any way correct. Hopefully the appeals court judge has some semblence of sanity. <sigh>
other than the fairly obvuous fact that "speech" does not necessarily have to be speech, or even text.
Well, despite the fact that it's obvious, quite a few people, include the govt, don't seem to get it. So the more people we get tell them that it _is_ obvious, maybe eventually they'll actually believe it.:(
But more to the point: Is it really only a few percent of the market? I've just ordered a dual PIII and I selected the chip specifically because I could get SMP support. Does anybody have any statistics on single-versus multiple CPU PIII systems shipped? Is it really only "a few percent"?
Probably. I mean, in the geek world / university lab environment where I live, SMP is the thing to have (most of our machines are dual P-IIIs, or else smaller machines (mostly Pentiums) built into robots), and I know a lot of people doing dual Celerons or P-II/III. But in the general case, it's not that common, mostly because you have to run a real OS to be able to actually use it.
Though it seems like this, coupled with the AMD 770 chipset, coming out RSN, is basically handing the high-end market to AMD. I mean, Merced isn't going to cut it (assuming it's ever released, that is), and if Thunderbird and Sledgehammer can do SMP but you can't do SMP on Intel unless you use (what will be) outdated P-IIIs, few are going to choose Intel.
I suppose their logic is that they don't want the P4 to compete with IA64 in the high end space, but it seems likely that the P4 will be _faster_ than Merced anyway. Intel is on crack.
you have to have GNOME+KDE(both so you have full compatibility)+Mozilla+X+kernel. Not to mention the multiple versions of glibc and all the additional (often redundant) libraries all the apps use.
I've never, ever had to have multiple glibc versions running on a machine. Also, you only need the base libraries for GNOME and KDE to actually run the apps - most of the stuff is only useful if you're using the full desktop.
In terms of memory usage, Linux blows NT4 out of the water (a bad thing) and is quite close to Windows 2000's bloat.
Not in my experience. Obviously, this kind of article is just going to lead to a flame fest all around, but I've run RH 6.1 on a 25 Mhz 486 with 16 megs of RAM - WITH X+KDE. And it wasn't noticalbly slower than the Win 3.1 it replaced. Try running NT4 on something like that - it ran poorly enough on my 350 Mhz P-II with 64 megs.
Linux DOESN'T take full advantage of hardware.
Linux doesn't support DirectX, and thus automatically lacks support for a lot of hardware features that are in DirectX complient hardware. The main reason was because transparant usage of hardware was a major design consideration for DirectX. It is based on the concept to support many different hardware features, have all applications use them, and then emultate those not supported by hardware. When the hardware supports new features, all apps and the OS automatically take advantage of them. Also, X doesn't have as compelete a support for many graphics operations that are possible in DirectX.
What the HELL are you talking about? DirectX is a development API. Vendors can also write drivers which allow DirectX to use the full abilities of their hardware - just as is done with every other graphics API, such as OpenGL or Glide, both of which run on Linux fine. My games run much faster when I use Glide than DirectX - if DirectX somehow magically makes hardware faster, how do you explain that?
Itanium is in fact yielding ok, but the extraordinarily complex compilers needed for EPIC are currently producing such slow code that Intel needs to pretend they can't make the chips to save face.
Actually, Intel recently bought the vendor of a very nice compiler set, KAI. I'm wondering if part of their purchuse desision was based on the fact that they might be able to write a compiler for it that actually worked. (Obviously I have no way of knowing, just some off-topic speculation).
McKinley will probably be able to compete on a performance basis with Sun's US3, and maybe even IBM's Power4. (The Alpha 21364 will cream it, but what else is new?)
I wonder how Sledgehammer will compare? I doubt it could match performance, but OTOH, if it can do (for example) 1/2 as fast as a Power4 at 1/4 of the cost, it's still pretty good. (BTW, you know anything about release dates for the 364? Haven't heard anything about that for a long time.)
My point is online gaming on Quake/UT/TFC/CS sucks when it fluctuates like that.
50 kbytes / sec is too slow? What kind of games are you playing?!?! I can see that if it dropped below 150 kbits/sec, but 400?!?! Maybe if the latency got too high, you'd be having problems, but bandwidth doesn't seem to be an issue there.
The difference between bits and bytes is probably what causes the confusion, which is why ISP's resorted to using megabits and kilobits in their ads instead: the numbers look bigger to customers, who think they're getting a better deal.
True, but personally, even if I could get a cable modem (the lines are too old in Baltimore for it to work), I wouldn't. First, @Home (which is selling cable modems in the surrounding counties), is supposed to be a particularly crappy ISP, especially for people who want to run servers (aka, me). Also, DSL offers nicities like multiple IPs (8 for $25 / month, in my case), reverse DNS, etc.
For the average Win9x home user, cable modem may well be the best choice. But for the geek, DSL kicks ass, even if it is slower.
it must open up those lines (by law) to competitors, at some reasonable prices (I don't know how they determine this!).
Though they don't neccesarily do so. For instance, here in Baltimore, there are a good half dozen DSL providers, but you can only have voice + data on the same line if you go through Bell Atlantic - and BA will try to screw you for all you're worth if you want to get a second line installed - one guy I know got an estimate of $1000 for getting a new line installed so he could get DSL. And if you go with BA, you have to deal with the outages, bad service, slow speeds, and atrocious network administration associated with them.
So I guess I'll be getting a cell phone or something.:)
I was excited about Freespace because of the multiplayer aspect, but unfortunately my system couldn't hack it at the time
Fortunatly, I was lucky enough to win a new video card when I bought Freespace2 so my system can handle it pretty well (though I think I need to upgrade my CPU - the framerate gets slow when there's > ~30 ships in the mission at once). And once I get my 1.5 Mbit DSL line installed, oh, baby, let the explosions begin.:)
From A10 Tankkiller to Wing Commander to (gulp) MS Flight, there's only so much you can do. Shoot, turn, shoot, loop, turn, crash into a mountain.
The Freespace series has actually managed to make it more than that. There's at least some element of strategy (what ships and loadout do I choose for myself and my wingmates, what ship should I order my wing to attack, so on).I've played through both games, plus innumerable user-created missions, and will readily buy Freespace 3, assuming it comes out.
Only games that give us more to explore and kill actually make it.
True, which is why I'm starting to like console gaming more and more. Really enourmous games, that take you months and months to win, and even then you know you haven't found everything (I'm still missing some big ones in The Ocarina of Time, I think).
Not really -- I wouldn't mind IE for Linux. I've become quite the IE convert here recently. I wouldn't mind using it on Linux as well.
If you really want it, you can probably do it. IE for Solaris (and HP-UX) exists, and I'm pretty sure that with the right libraries and tools you can run a Solaris binary on Linux. I've also heard IE for Solaris is about the most horrible monstrosity ever created, but hey, that's your concern, not mine.:P
Though personally I've been doing ok with Netscape. (Of course, the first GUI browser I ever used was Mosaic, so I'm used to the way Netscape does stuff).
They can create their own Win32GNU layer, obfuscated or whatever, they can change it as often as they wish, and they can muck with Linux *all* the time.
Who cares? Exactly who is going to buy MS Linux?
A) Regular Linux/*BSD/etc users wouldn't touch it with a 30 foot pole.
B) MS users would hate even more. 'cmon, there is no way MS could port the entire Windows UI/libs/etc to Linux in less than, say 3 years (I'm being optimistic here: I doubt it could be done at all). Not to mention the fact that non-MS windows apps would take quite a while to get ported (hell, most Windows stuff doesn't even run on NT, much less a 'MS-Linux').
In short, very little threat. Of course, I could be wrong.:P
So, this is probably a work-around. Well, that wouldn't matter if it's illegal bits'n'bytes.
Not neccessarily. Crypto export was only prohibited for machine readable code. The books weren't considered to be machine readable (though of course they were with OCR software). In this case (thanks to that modern marvel the DMCA), any kind of possesion or transfer may well be illegal (those as IANAL, I'm not sure).
Ah, well, there's always good 'ol civil disobedience.:)
Until I followed this link I wasn't even aware that there was an IBM Open Source License.
They've released stuff under it before, including the jikes compiler. Though they have released stuff under the GPL when neccessary (like the Haifa optimizations to gcc).
Personally, I agree with you, I think that BSD, GPL, and LGPL cover at least 95% of all code released under these other random licenses. But, hey, as long as it's free, right?;)
Slashdot Mirror
Batman beyond, if it follows the kickass cartoon added with some of Stephensons techno-themes will be a very cool movie... think batman as badass as Hiro and a villian as wacked out as Raven...
:)
Nobody ever admits that they just want a chance to see YT naked (hmmmm... maybe get Anna Paquin to play YT... yeah, I like it).
What about those hour-and-a-half commercials known as Pokemon: The Movie and Pokemon: The Movie 2000?
:)
Don't forget the Digimon movie! I'm really looking forward to that one (seriously!). Though even the regular cartoon is basically a commercial.
Not to look a gift compiler in the, er, mouth (parser?), but how good is the Watcom compiler? I'm especially curious about C++ support - does it support namespaces, templates, etc?
haha you really think someone is going to go to all that trouble just to email you? :) I am not trying to be a dick, but really.
Actually, I've gotten a few emails from people who have decoded it. And some AC made it a joke for a while to repsond to my posts with the decoded address.
Anyway, it amuses me to have it, so who cares. I've actually considered encoding
thisis@notareal.email.com
and using that, just to really mess with people. But I'm not that evil... usually.
SONY Digital handycams with 1394 look real promising.
I've got one on my desk right now. The picture quality really isn't the greatest. Might want to get one that uses the IEEE Camera interface, instead of DV.
1) In the wrong department (have you ever looked around at the average CS dept?
You are _so_ wrong. What CS deptartments lack in quantity, they well than make up for in quality. When I look at girls in my CS classes (which I do a lot, since I never pay attention to the professor), a solid 50 - 60% of the girls I see are really good looking. Those numbers seem significantly lower in my humanities classes. (Yeah, isolated statistic and all that, but don't assume stereotypes are universally true, you just gotta find the right university).
9. CPU utilization (much better than ATA DMA)
This is the one that has sold me on using SCSI on my next system. I 'mv'ed about 500 megs of files from one partition to another on my desktop box (IDE, of course), and mv took up about 3/4 of the CPU for 5 minutes. My workstation (which is SCSI) does stuff like that in maybe 30 seconds, with no noticable slowdown in my other programs.
What about "Firewire" (IEEE 1394)? I'm not that much of an expert, does it fit the bill? Is it still too expensive?
It's definitly fast enough, 200 Mbits/sec IIRC. The main problem is driver support (at least on Linux, I think Win98/2K is doing alright with it). I'm working on supporting IEEE 1394 cameras into a vision program this summer, and it requires a kernel patch and a couple of alpha-quality user space libraries to do _anything_. People are working on disk support, and IPv4 over 1394, but, again, very alpha.
It's also pretty expensive, I think. More so thank SCSI, even.
75 Gig hard drives! (I feel really old, sometimes.)
Yeah, I remember reading (not that long ago, I thought) about how 1 gig drives were coming out soon (at the time I think I had 200 megs). At the time, I though "In a few years, that'll seem tiny". I guess I was right, though 80 gigs really does seem excessive, at least for right now.
CSS is immoral. The engineers who designed CSS should have understood the consequences of what they where told to make, and should not have made them.
Hell, maybe they did. In case you weren't aware, CSS is pretty fscking weak. 40 bit keys (and it's not for export reasons; after all, how can someone use it to send a message?), and the algorithm isn't that great either. Xing's fuckup is what gave us the first key, but it was the small keyspace and weaknesses in the algorithm that let people grab the decoder keys for every vendor within a few months.
It's entirely possible that a couple of guys got hired to do this, and decided that, instead of not taking the job (wherupon the DVD consortium would hire somebody else), they would intentionally screw it up.
Of course, maybe they were just stupid, I don't know. Anyway, the sitiuation with CSS could be worse.
That's not to say that Kaplan is in any way correct. Hopefully the appeals court judge has some semblence of sanity. <sigh>
other than the fairly obvuous fact that "speech" does not necessarily have to be speech, or even text.
:(
Well, despite the fact that it's obvious, quite a few people, include the govt, don't seem to get it. So the more people we get tell them that it _is_ obvious, maybe eventually they'll actually believe it.
But more to the point: Is it really only a few percent of the market? I've just ordered a dual PIII and I selected the chip specifically because I could get SMP support. Does anybody have any statistics on single-versus multiple CPU PIII systems shipped? Is it really only "a few percent"?
Probably. I mean, in the geek world / university lab environment where I live, SMP is the thing to have (most of our machines are dual P-IIIs, or else smaller machines (mostly Pentiums) built into robots), and I know a lot of people doing dual Celerons or P-II/III. But in the general case, it's not that common, mostly because you have to run a real OS to be able to actually use it.
Though it seems like this, coupled with the AMD 770 chipset, coming out RSN, is basically handing the high-end market to AMD. I mean, Merced isn't going to cut it (assuming it's ever released, that is), and if Thunderbird and Sledgehammer can do SMP but you can't do SMP on Intel unless you use (what will be) outdated P-IIIs, few are going to choose Intel.
I suppose their logic is that they don't want the P4 to compete with IA64 in the high end space, but it seems likely that the P4 will be _faster_ than Merced anyway. Intel is on crack.
you have to have GNOME+KDE(both so you have full compatibility)+Mozilla+X+kernel. Not to mention the multiple versions of glibc and all the additional (often redundant) libraries all the apps use.
I've never, ever had to have multiple glibc versions running on a machine. Also, you only need the base libraries for GNOME and KDE to actually run the apps - most of the stuff is only useful if you're using the full desktop.
In terms of memory usage, Linux blows NT4 out of the water (a bad thing) and is quite close to Windows 2000's bloat.
Not in my experience. Obviously, this kind of article is just going to lead to a flame fest all around, but I've run RH 6.1 on a 25 Mhz 486 with 16 megs of RAM - WITH X+KDE. And it wasn't noticalbly slower than the Win 3.1 it replaced. Try running NT4 on something like that - it ran poorly enough on my 350 Mhz P-II with 64 megs.
Linux DOESN'T take full advantage of hardware.
Linux doesn't support DirectX, and thus automatically lacks support for a lot of hardware features that are in DirectX complient hardware. The main reason was because transparant usage of hardware was a major design consideration for DirectX. It is based on the concept to support many different hardware features, have all applications use them, and then emultate those not supported by hardware. When the hardware supports new features, all apps and the OS automatically take advantage of them. Also, X doesn't have as compelete a support for many graphics operations that are possible in DirectX.
What the HELL are you talking about? DirectX is a development API. Vendors can also write drivers which allow DirectX to use the full abilities of their hardware - just as is done with every other graphics API, such as OpenGL or Glide, both of which run on Linux fine. My games run much faster when I use Glide than DirectX - if DirectX somehow magically makes hardware faster, how do you explain that?
Itanium is in fact yielding ok, but the extraordinarily complex compilers needed for EPIC are currently producing such slow code that Intel needs to pretend they can't make the chips to save face.
Actually, Intel recently bought the vendor of a very nice compiler set, KAI. I'm wondering if part of their purchuse desision was based on the fact that they might be able to write a compiler for it that actually worked. (Obviously I have no way of knowing, just some off-topic speculation).
McKinley will probably be able to compete on a performance basis with Sun's US3, and maybe even IBM's Power4. (The Alpha 21364 will cream it, but what else is new?)
I wonder how Sledgehammer will compare? I doubt it could match performance, but OTOH, if it can do (for example) 1/2 as fast as a Power4 at 1/4 of the cost, it's still pretty good. (BTW, you know anything about release dates for the 364? Haven't heard anything about that for a long time.)
My point is online gaming on Quake/UT/TFC/CS sucks when it fluctuates like that.
50 kbytes / sec is too slow? What kind of games are you playing?!?! I can see that if it dropped below 150 kbits/sec, but 400?!?! Maybe if the latency got too high, you'd be having problems, but bandwidth doesn't seem to be an issue there.
The difference between bits and bytes is probably what causes the confusion, which is why ISP's resorted to using megabits and kilobits in their ads instead: the numbers look bigger to customers, who think they're getting a better deal.
True, but personally, even if I could get a cable modem (the lines are too old in Baltimore for it to work), I wouldn't. First, @Home (which is selling cable modems in the surrounding counties), is supposed to be a particularly crappy ISP, especially for people who want to run servers (aka, me). Also, DSL offers nicities like multiple IPs (8 for $25 / month, in my case), reverse DNS, etc.
For the average Win9x home user, cable modem may well be the best choice. But for the geek, DSL kicks ass, even if it is slower.
it must open up those lines (by law) to competitors, at some reasonable prices (I don't know how they determine this!).
:)
Though they don't neccesarily do so. For instance, here in Baltimore, there are a good half dozen DSL providers, but you can only have voice + data on the same line if you go through Bell Atlantic - and BA will try to screw you for all you're worth if you want to get a second line installed - one guy I know got an estimate of $1000 for getting a new line installed so he could get DSL. And if you go with BA, you have to deal with the outages, bad service, slow speeds, and atrocious network administration associated with them.
So I guess I'll be getting a cell phone or something.
I was excited about Freespace because of the multiplayer aspect, but unfortunately my system couldn't hack it at the time
:)
Fortunatly, I was lucky enough to win a new video card when I bought Freespace2 so my system can handle it pretty well (though I think I need to upgrade my CPU - the framerate gets slow when there's > ~30 ships in the mission at once). And once I get my 1.5 Mbit DSL line installed, oh, baby, let the explosions begin.
From A10 Tankkiller to Wing Commander to (gulp) MS Flight, there's only so much you can do. Shoot, turn, shoot, loop, turn, crash into a mountain.
The Freespace series has actually managed to make it more than that. There's at least some element of strategy (what ships and loadout do I choose for myself and my wingmates, what ship should I order my wing to attack, so on).I've played through both games, plus innumerable user-created missions, and will readily buy Freespace 3, assuming it comes out.
Only games that give us more to explore and kill actually make it.
True, which is why I'm starting to like console gaming more and more. Really enourmous games, that take you months and months to win, and even then you know you haven't found everything (I'm still missing some big ones in The Ocarina of Time, I think).
The great days of Sierra's Space and Kings and Hero quests had some great games, and you don't see anything like those coming out today.
The early Might & Magic Series were great. I still think M&M II may be my favorite game ever.
Not really -- I wouldn't mind IE for Linux. I've become quite the IE convert here recently. I wouldn't mind using it on Linux as well.
:P
If you really want it, you can probably do it. IE for Solaris (and HP-UX) exists, and I'm pretty sure that with the right libraries and tools you can run a Solaris binary on Linux. I've also heard IE for Solaris is about the most horrible monstrosity ever created, but hey, that's your concern, not mine.
Though personally I've been doing ok with Netscape. (Of course, the first GUI browser I ever used was Mosaic, so I'm used to the way Netscape does stuff).
They can create their own Win32GNU layer, obfuscated or whatever, they can change it as often as they wish, and they can muck with Linux *all* the time.
:P
Who cares? Exactly who is going to buy MS Linux?
A) Regular Linux/*BSD/etc users wouldn't touch it with a 30 foot pole.
B) MS users would hate even more. 'cmon, there is no way MS could port the entire Windows UI/libs/etc to Linux in less than, say 3 years (I'm being optimistic here: I doubt it could be done at all). Not to mention the fact that non-MS windows apps would take quite a while to get ported (hell, most Windows stuff doesn't even run on NT, much less a 'MS-Linux').
In short, very little threat. Of course, I could be wrong.
So, this is probably a work-around. Well, that wouldn't matter if it's illegal bits'n'bytes.
:)
Not neccessarily. Crypto export was only prohibited for machine readable code. The books weren't considered to be machine readable (though of course they were with OCR software). In this case (thanks to that modern marvel the DMCA), any kind of possesion or transfer may well be illegal (those as IANAL, I'm not sure).
Ah, well, there's always good 'ol civil disobedience.
Laser broom seems like a bad name. Where's the 'laser dustpan'?
:)
I propose that NASA rename the project the 'Giga-canon'.
Until I followed this link I wasn't even aware that there was an IBM Open Source License.
;)
They've released stuff under it before, including the jikes compiler. Though they have released stuff under the GPL when neccessary (like the Haifa optimizations to gcc).
Personally, I agree with you, I think that BSD, GPL, and LGPL cover at least 95% of all code released under these other random licenses. But, hey, as long as it's free, right?