As an XP loyalists on one of the tech forums said. It is XP with 3x the ram requirements with a pretty interface. Why upgrade?
Try running 16gb ram on that xp machine and see how much fun you have.
While I've been a linux user for the last fifteen years the last windows I spent some time with was xp. Using it on a modern machine is insane because it can't possibly address the memory. It is now relegated to vm's if wine can't handle something although that is rare.
Running xp on a machine with 16gb of ram is just stupid.
With iOS you don't have to either. You can jailbreak and develop right on the device.
And with android you don't have to jump through that hoop, even if it can be an easy hoop to jump through.
Why should developers support a system that purposefully makes life harder for them for no technical reason?
This notion that iOS is not for the technical is something that rabid Apple haters cling to with all thier might, ever repeating as you have the falsehoods long shattered - why is it people like you cannot learn?
Anything can be for technical people.. if they are sadistic. I mean hell some people take joy in finding flaws with systems that are locked down completely etc like the ps3/wii etc which is why you can even jailbreak ios in the first place. After the first person has broken it it's easy, but should we _have_ to go through those efforts. Should we encourage this behaviour? Your answer is yes.
I for one very much prefer tinkering when the system isn't actively fighting against me, I don't like things to be harder than they need to be for no good reason.
Non-technical people don't encounter this fight, which is why people tend to think ios is for them. If you are technically oriented and like having artificial barriers put it front of you go ahead, but if you enjoy that kind of thing you really aren't doing yourself any favours in getting work done.
My biggest gripe is how feminists seem to have completely different standards to most others as to what is acceptable behaviour.
I once had my head ripped off for having the gall to say "pleased to meet you miss" to a young lady. This is what feminism winds up at, no male can say anything even with simply the intention to be polite without being ripped into. Needless to say the young lady found the terms "miss" "lady" etc derogatory, although I failed to see how as such formality is only generaly used as a sign of respect.
If you had read the article, you would know that this is going to be a "discrete, repeatable and reproducable" measure. I mean hell they are making two of them to start with, the only reason I imagine they aren't making more to start off with is cost.
The end product will be the exact way to construct a 1kg sphere of silicon. So new ones can be made to calibrate things etc.
Well I distinctly remember surfing the internet on my then new shiny p3 450 and everything being as fast as can be (plain text pages etc). Presently I'm on a four year old eeepc with 2gb of ram and it feels the pain with javascript/flash heavy sites.
No doubts it is becoming more efficient, but the added complexity of the task is not entirely free, the improvements only mitigate it not completely rule it out.
Scripting languages (it's what I tend to call dynamic weakly typed languages like python, ruby) have become far faster through the use of just-in-time compilation techniques etc. This performance increase was only available because of their lack of efficiency to begin with, strong, hard typed things have always in general compiled to far more efficient machine code.
Back in the day people avoided interpreted languages because of these performance penalties, now it's just becoming less of an issue with the combined software/hardware improvements making performance acceptable.
A kilogram ought to be defined as N atoms of something, but atom counting isn't quite good enough yet. There's a plan to define mass through the Planck constant, which means tying the standard of mass to the standard of current.
While i agree with your general sentiment, browsers are a poor example. Five years ago we had nowhere near as much javascript abuse and other shenanigans that websites do that browsers have to handle these days, so the job really has changed and is more demanding than it was.
The funny thing is he was rather anti-science and anti-medicine. I mean the guy refused to be treated for skin cancer because of his religious beliefs... skin cancer is easy to treat compared to most other cancers, you just remove it.
I'd almost put it up for the darwin award, where people let religious beliefs kill them.
Also unlike the stereotypical peace-loving image, he was known to get in quite a few fights in his day. He was also quite rebellious. I don't see this as a bad thing, but I think it is kind of crazy how he has been romanticized as a bringer of peace after his death.
Do we really want the all-knowing google going down the "will manipulate society" route? With everything they know about us and their computational power?
My biggest problem with gay marriage advocates is not their goal, but their means of going about it. Things like "equal love" insinuate that love can somehow be 'inequal' between people. And that marriage somehow needs or implies love. It doesn't, love and marriage are two different things. Sure people who love each other marry, but in so far as the government is concerned it is basically a contract.
Why do they use phrasing such as "equal love" then? To change the framing to manipulate people to get them on their side.
Do propaganda techniques work? yes. Are they reprehensible? To those who can see them it tends to backfire, thankfully for the lgbt folks this is an extreme minority.
Like most tech people I like people to be frank and to the point. They want the same rights as legally married couples? go ahead! Just don't try to swing people to that view with questionable practices.
And then I might as well use Win98 because the amount of resources required to make it functional and still keep security patches would cost millions....
People can and do keep drivers outside of mainline and keep up with internal api changes. Some also release binary only drivers and just compile it once for each target platform.
These people are insane, and doing it the hard way, but they do it without _that_ much trouble. It just limits their target audience to specified platforms.
Now you can stick your head in the sand, pretend that Linus is smarter than the dev teams for BSD, OSX, Windows, and even OS/2 who ALL HAVE AN ABI
Oh, so how are your win98 drivers running in windows 7?
They break their abi periodically too, they just prolong it by keeping faulty interfaces for longer, a design flaw for different goals.
You seem to want a "one kernel version to rule them all" effectively by demanding a stable internal kernel abi, which will never happen as every person is free to do what they wish with it unlike windows/os x.
Mainline drivers make sense, it helps the system to "just work" when they boot it.
Will regressions occur? sure. But so long as more things are fixed than broken progress is made, and in the mean time you just revert back to the older kernel that lacks the regression.
Going to the windows/os x development model of a release every couple years as opposed to three months would slow progress immensely. There are long term 'stable' kernels for this use, where the internal kernel api's do not change (not abi since as mentioned, that requires same kernel and arch etc which you are fine to do if you wish) that you can use in that manner.
hell you get longer support with a Hackentosh than with your average distro, thanks to Linus and his fellow fiddlers.
I have a p3 733 which is still running fine for card games etc for old people, I also have a g4 mac because I like unique architectures, the latest linux runs on both, how long ago was the g4 unsupported from the mac line? I'm guessing at least 7-8 years ago.
You want linux to be a turn-key system? get someone who knows what they are doing to build it for you, get it going and support it. Same deal with a windows machine. I've seen plenty of windows machines that have had no end of trouble with drivers for peripheral cards when the windows vista/7 upgrades came, all because the users were silly enough to not check the drivers etc beforehand. Same deal with linux.
Nothing will replace knowledge of the system, ever. You want something to magically work, get someone else to make it magically work for you (whether that be the oem, or an individual) and then don't touch the internals.
Again with this "a fixed driver ABI would fix all business"
The internal kernal abi changes because it's INTERNAL. If I wrote a piece of software, then someone else proceeded to write a binary that hooked into my software without integrating it properly (getting it to mainline) then when my software changes of COURSE they should expect that some of my internal functions have changed... it's called progress.
You want a stable internal abi, then pick a kernel version, a compiler, an architecture (because even with a single version, changing the compiler WILL change the abi) and stick to it, no changes equals no changes.
Sun was doomed as soon as they started aiming strongly for specific traits. It allowed for specialization sure, but overspecialize yourself and you can walk off a cliff full well knowing the path in front of you.
Sun never had the diverse needs and developer set linux has now, or even had a decade ago.
Oracles contributions to linux are paltry, compare them to redhat (a linux company) and a few others and there is a crazy level of difference.
What does "level of advance" mean?
In this context I was referring to general usefulness for a variety of tasks, linux these days is a swiss army knife, capable of almost anything you can think of. The commercial unices never were (to this extent).
If apple kill that option, it's going to hit them hard in the dev community,
Like it hit them oh so hard with ios devices?
The locked down devices provide far more profit to them than the open ones, and apple like making money. The more time that goes on the more what they do with the locking down of things is deemed 'acceptable' and so if they are following the money it's simply a matter of time when the profit outweigh's the backlash.
Give it time, while apple's future is hard to predict the general trend seems to be going to more lock down the better, hell with the next os x having developer signing they are paving the way for the future lock down. All they'd have to do is change a setting to refuse to run things not signed by them and the transformation would be complete.
Others posts were insightful or helpful, I asked the question because I actually wanted to know what benefits there are letting bots trade so fast. Others presented me with useful information, you did not.
Do you always respond to people asking questions to the effect of "why on earth would you want to know that, look this other way instead"? it's not very useful or productive for discussion.
FYI I was not proposing doing the five second thing, it was simply a 'what are the benefits of x vs y' where x is hft trading and y is being limited to some human managable timeframe.
First, from a technology standpoint, I'd rather those bots run on Wall Street than Las Vegas. There's more potential for really interesting developments with the money available from stock markets.
What is your opinion of the flash crash of 2010? while to my knowledge HFT trading has lessened a bit in volume since then an entirely automated system on the microseconds that is all the more pervasive has more chance of some odd condition appearing that has drastic consequences.
Do you want to trust the market to the bots in such a way that they could bollocks things so quickly no human could ever intervene?
I see benefits and detriments on both sides of the coin, but what do you think of the possible completely automated feedback cycles leading to 'interesting' results being possible? par for the course and acceptable or do you have another solution that facilitates people realizing what's happening.
I think free software ws always at its strongest when it is copying an already existing design, like the kernel itself.
I'd like to know of another completely open design (source) kernel that has anywhere near the level of advance as linux does.
Linux is often the first kernel to have quite a few things, it's the experimental testbed of choice for new ideas and thus isn't really "copying" anything in a lot of ways. Sure it's posix compliant, but that is just an interface, not a design.
Linux is too small to support 2 different environments.
I'm surprised one or the other hasn't died by now.
So obviously, it's usage is big enough to support two environments, and in actual fact, many more.
I've never bought the "choice is good" mantra.
Survival of the fittest only functions when there is choice. What constitutes fittest depends upon the fitness criteria, which changes from person to person and so it makes sense to have choice as different people need different things.
Having only one choice is an evolutionary dead end and is a rather silly thing to strive for.
Hardware support. Shopping for hardware is exhausting when you've got to spend days of research trying to figure out what hardware works, and even then you make mistakes, and/or are disappointed when it doesn't really work right. This problem is even more acute with the general trend towards laptops.
As a general rule, if you buy hardware 6 months to a year old it will work from the get go in your distro of choice, unless it's very obscure hardware. But most mainstream parts function.
When the choice is between open and better, the latter will always win.
#define "better", to me, kde is far more functional than os x, I recognize others don't think the same but they likely aren't using it in a similar fashion as to what I am. Without criteria defined there is no such thing as "better".
To some users, windows has better usability for them than os x because different is seen as unwanted. Familiarity is weighted into it. I imagine this mostly comes from people adjusting their workflow to that which their present environment allows, once you have it fine-tuned people rarely wish to change.
My usage of UI is quite simple, I want to be able to hit alt-f2 and type a program name to run it, and have a bar at the bottom for quick selection of the various windows I have open. My entire workflow never uses a double click ever even in file managing situations with konqueror. Once you run single click for all double click seems awkward and superfluous. Do others have different needs than I? of course, but I would hardly call my UI preferences "worse" than others.
Long story short, to some people, OS X has a crappy interface, to some, windows has a crappy interface. All depends on your criteria and means of working.
Out of curiosity, how would someone in practical real life terms use this millisecond liquidity, as opposed to say, being limited to five seconds or such.
I find it difficult to believe that myself as a mere human could use this sub millisecond liquidity for anything useful. I welcome an example where it's benefit is significant.
but are they really going to try to stick a 64-bit processor in a phone?
when phones start shipping with 4gb of memory.. yes. We already have phones with 2gb of memory out right now, give it a year or a bit more and I expect even arm phones will be 64-bit for address space needs.
I could be PROVEN innocent, but anyone who ever heard would always think I was guilty.
Why would you even want such people as acquintences, let alone friends?
People need to stop letting anything child related send them crazy and lose all rationality, I swear having children must make people lose part of their reasoning ability or something.
Slashdot Mirror
As an XP loyalists on one of the tech forums said. It is XP with 3x the ram requirements with a pretty interface. Why upgrade?
Try running 16gb ram on that xp machine and see how much fun you have.
While I've been a linux user for the last fifteen years the last windows I spent some time with was xp. Using it on a modern machine is insane because it can't possibly address the memory. It is now relegated to vm's if wine can't handle something although that is rare.
Running xp on a machine with 16gb of ram is just stupid.
With iOS you don't have to either. You can jailbreak and develop right on the device.
And with android you don't have to jump through that hoop, even if it can be an easy hoop to jump through.
Why should developers support a system that purposefully makes life harder for them for no technical reason?
This notion that iOS is not for the technical is something that rabid Apple haters cling to with all thier might, ever repeating as you have the falsehoods long shattered - why is it people like you cannot learn?
Anything can be for technical people.. if they are sadistic. I mean hell some people take joy in finding flaws with systems that are locked down completely etc like the ps3/wii etc which is why you can even jailbreak ios in the first place. After the first person has broken it it's easy, but should we _have_ to go through those efforts. Should we encourage this behaviour? Your answer is yes.
I for one very much prefer tinkering when the system isn't actively fighting against me, I don't like things to be harder than they need to be for no good reason.
Non-technical people don't encounter this fight, which is why people tend to think ios is for them. If you are technically oriented and like having artificial barriers put it front of you go ahead, but if you enjoy that kind of thing you really aren't doing yourself any favours in getting work done.
The reaction depends on what circles you travel.
My biggest gripe is how feminists seem to have completely different standards to most others as to what is acceptable behaviour.
I once had my head ripped off for having the gall to say "pleased to meet you miss" to a young lady. This is what feminism winds up at, no male can say anything even with simply the intention to be polite without being ripped into. Needless to say the young lady found the terms "miss" "lady" etc derogatory, although I failed to see how as such formality is only generaly used as a sign of respect.
Why should males have to put up with that crap?
If you had read the article, you would know that this is going to be a "discrete, repeatable and reproducable" measure. I mean hell they are making two of them to start with, the only reason I imagine they aren't making more to start off with is cost.
The end product will be the exact way to construct a 1kg sphere of silicon. So new ones can be made to calibrate things etc.
Well I distinctly remember surfing the internet on my then new shiny p3 450 and everything being as fast as can be (plain text pages etc). Presently I'm on a four year old eeepc with 2gb of ram and it feels the pain with javascript/flash heavy sites.
No doubts it is becoming more efficient, but the added complexity of the task is not entirely free, the improvements only mitigate it not completely rule it out.
Scripting languages (it's what I tend to call dynamic weakly typed languages like python, ruby) have become far faster through the use of just-in-time compilation techniques etc. This performance increase was only available because of their lack of efficiency to begin with, strong, hard typed things have always in general compiled to far more efficient machine code.
Back in the day people avoided interpreted languages because of these performance penalties, now it's just becoming less of an issue with the combined software/hardware improvements making performance acceptable.
A kilogram ought to be defined as N atoms of something, but atom counting isn't quite good enough yet. There's a plan to define mass through the Planck constant, which means tying the standard of mass to the standard of current.
This has been done, with a specific sized sphere (in atoms) of silicon
While i agree with your general sentiment, browsers are a poor example. Five years ago we had nowhere near as much javascript abuse and other shenanigans that websites do that browsers have to handle these days, so the job really has changed and is more demanding than it was.
The funny thing is he was rather anti-science and anti-medicine. I mean the guy refused to be treated for skin cancer because of his religious beliefs... skin cancer is easy to treat compared to most other cancers, you just remove it.
I'd almost put it up for the darwin award, where people let religious beliefs kill them.
Also unlike the stereotypical peace-loving image, he was known to get in quite a few fights in his day. He was also quite rebellious. I don't see this as a bad thing, but I think it is kind of crazy how he has been romanticized as a bringer of peace after his death.
Do we really want the all-knowing google going down the "will manipulate society" route? With everything they know about us and their computational power?
My biggest problem with gay marriage advocates is not their goal, but their means of going about it. Things like "equal love" insinuate that love can somehow be 'inequal' between people. And that marriage somehow needs or implies love. It doesn't, love and marriage are two different things. Sure people who love each other marry, but in so far as the government is concerned it is basically a contract.
Why do they use phrasing such as "equal love" then? To change the framing to manipulate people to get them on their side.
Do propaganda techniques work? yes. Are they reprehensible? To those who can see them it tends to backfire, thankfully for the lgbt folks this is an extreme minority.
Like most tech people I like people to be frank and to the point. They want the same rights as legally married couples? go ahead! Just don't try to swing people to that view with questionable practices.
And then I might as well use Win98 because the amount of resources required to make it functional and still keep security patches would cost millions....
People can and do keep drivers outside of mainline and keep up with internal api changes. Some also release binary only drivers and just compile it once for each target platform.
These people are insane, and doing it the hard way, but they do it without _that_ much trouble. It just limits their target audience to specified platforms.
Now you can stick your head in the sand, pretend that Linus is smarter than the dev teams for BSD, OSX, Windows, and even OS/2 who ALL HAVE AN ABI
Oh, so how are your win98 drivers running in windows 7?
They break their abi periodically too, they just prolong it by keeping faulty interfaces for longer, a design flaw for different goals.
You seem to want a "one kernel version to rule them all" effectively by demanding a stable internal kernel abi, which will never happen as every person is free to do what they wish with it unlike windows/os x.
Mainline drivers make sense, it helps the system to "just work" when they boot it.
Will regressions occur? sure. But so long as more things are fixed than broken progress is made, and in the mean time you just revert back to the older kernel that lacks the regression.
Going to the windows/os x development model of a release every couple years as opposed to three months would slow progress immensely. There are long term 'stable' kernels for this use, where the internal kernel api's do not change (not abi since as mentioned, that requires same kernel and arch etc which you are fine to do if you wish) that you can use in that manner.
hell you get longer support with a Hackentosh than with your average distro, thanks to Linus and his fellow fiddlers.
I have a p3 733 which is still running fine for card games etc for old people, I also have a g4 mac because I like unique architectures, the latest linux runs on both, how long ago was the g4 unsupported from the mac line? I'm guessing at least 7-8 years ago.
You want linux to be a turn-key system? get someone who knows what they are doing to build it for you, get it going and support it. Same deal with a windows machine. I've seen plenty of windows machines that have had no end of trouble with drivers for peripheral cards when the windows vista/7 upgrades came, all because the users were silly enough to not check the drivers etc beforehand. Same deal with linux.
Nothing will replace knowledge of the system, ever. You want something to magically work, get someone else to make it magically work for you (whether that be the oem, or an individual) and then don't touch the internals.
Seriously, though - nobody but geeks cares if a tech company is abusive.
They do, but only after they've been directly abusive to them. So the more it happens to individuals, the more they lose.
Again with this "a fixed driver ABI would fix all business"
The internal kernal abi changes because it's INTERNAL. If I wrote a piece of software, then someone else proceeded to write a binary that hooked into my software without integrating it properly (getting it to mainline) then when my software changes of COURSE they should expect that some of my internal functions have changed... it's called progress.
You want a stable internal abi, then pick a kernel version, a compiler, an architecture (because even with a single version, changing the compiler WILL change the abi) and stick to it, no changes equals no changes.
Otherwise any change at all would break it.
For further reference, see here
argh, link failed, here is the missing link from the top of that prior post
I'll just leave this here
Sun was doomed as soon as they started aiming strongly for specific traits. It allowed for specialization sure, but overspecialize yourself and you can walk off a cliff full well knowing the path in front of you.
Sun never had the diverse needs and developer set linux has now, or even had a decade ago.
Oracles contributions to linux are paltry, compare them to redhat (a linux company) and a few others and there is a crazy level of difference.
What does "level of advance" mean?
In this context I was referring to general usefulness for a variety of tasks, linux these days is a swiss army knife, capable of almost anything you can think of. The commercial unices never were (to this extent).
If apple kill that option, it's going to hit them hard in the dev community,
Like it hit them oh so hard with ios devices?
The locked down devices provide far more profit to them than the open ones, and apple like making money. The more time that goes on the more what they do with the locking down of things is deemed 'acceptable' and so if they are following the money it's simply a matter of time when the profit outweigh's the backlash.
Give it time, while apple's future is hard to predict the general trend seems to be going to more lock down the better, hell with the next os x having developer signing they are paving the way for the future lock down. All they'd have to do is change a setting to refuse to run things not signed by them and the transformation would be complete.
Others posts were insightful or helpful, I asked the question because I actually wanted to know what benefits there are letting bots trade so fast. Others presented me with useful information, you did not.
Do you always respond to people asking questions to the effect of "why on earth would you want to know that, look this other way instead"? it's not very useful or productive for discussion.
FYI I was not proposing doing the five second thing, it was simply a 'what are the benefits of x vs y' where x is hft trading and y is being limited to some human managable timeframe.
First, from a technology standpoint, I'd rather those bots run on Wall Street than Las Vegas. There's more potential for really interesting developments with the money available from stock markets.
What is your opinion of the flash crash of 2010? while to my knowledge HFT trading has lessened a bit in volume since then an entirely automated system on the microseconds that is all the more pervasive has more chance of some odd condition appearing that has drastic consequences.
Do you want to trust the market to the bots in such a way that they could bollocks things so quickly no human could ever intervene?
I see benefits and detriments on both sides of the coin, but what do you think of the possible completely automated feedback cycles leading to 'interesting' results being possible? par for the course and acceptable or do you have another solution that facilitates people realizing what's happening.
I think free software ws always at its strongest when it is copying an already existing design, like the kernel itself.
I'd like to know of another completely open design (source) kernel that has anywhere near the level of advance as linux does.
Linux is often the first kernel to have quite a few things, it's the experimental testbed of choice for new ideas and thus isn't really "copying" anything in a lot of ways. Sure it's posix compliant, but that is just an interface, not a design.
Linux is too small to support 2 different environments.
I'm surprised one or the other hasn't died by now.
So obviously, it's usage is big enough to support two environments, and in actual fact, many more.
I've never bought the "choice is good" mantra.
Survival of the fittest only functions when there is choice. What constitutes fittest depends upon the fitness criteria, which changes from person to person and so it makes sense to have choice as different people need different things.
Having only one choice is an evolutionary dead end and is a rather silly thing to strive for.
Hardware support. Shopping for hardware is exhausting when you've got to spend days of research trying to figure out what hardware works, and even then you make mistakes, and/or are disappointed when it doesn't really work right. This problem is even more acute with the general trend towards laptops.
As a general rule, if you buy hardware 6 months to a year old it will work from the get go in your distro of choice, unless it's very obscure hardware. But most mainstream parts function.
When the choice is between open and better, the latter will always win.
#define "better", to me, kde is far more functional than os x, I recognize others don't think the same but they likely aren't using it in a similar fashion as to what I am. Without criteria defined there is no such thing as "better".
To some users, windows has better usability for them than os x because different is seen as unwanted. Familiarity is weighted into it. I imagine this mostly comes from people adjusting their workflow to that which their present environment allows, once you have it fine-tuned people rarely wish to change.
My usage of UI is quite simple, I want to be able to hit alt-f2 and type a program name to run it, and have a bar at the bottom for quick selection of the various windows I have open. My entire workflow never uses a double click ever even in file managing situations with konqueror. Once you run single click for all double click seems awkward and superfluous. Do others have different needs than I? of course, but I would hardly call my UI preferences "worse" than others.
Long story short, to some people, OS X has a crappy interface, to some, windows has a crappy interface. All depends on your criteria and means of working.
Nonsense. They provide liquidity.
Out of curiosity, how would someone in practical real life terms use this millisecond liquidity, as opposed to say, being limited to five seconds or such.
I find it difficult to believe that myself as a mere human could use this sub millisecond liquidity for anything useful. I welcome an example where it's benefit is significant.
It was sluggish on a brand new Lenovo desktop machine with 8GB of ram, an SSD and a NVidia display card.
If my eeepc 1000H can run it at an acceptable speed, your machine can too.
^ - THIS, many feminists don't realize that difference in the amount of people in a profession can come down to.. them not being interested in it.
but are they really going to try to stick a 64-bit processor in a phone?
when phones start shipping with 4gb of memory.. yes. We already have phones with 2gb of memory out right now, give it a year or a bit more and I expect even arm phones will be 64-bit for address space needs.
I could be PROVEN innocent, but anyone who ever heard would always think I was guilty.
Why would you even want such people as acquintences, let alone friends?
People need to stop letting anything child related send them crazy and lose all rationality, I swear having children must make people lose part of their reasoning ability or something.