I'm not sure I agree with this. I used to play Quake online lots when I was younger and be one of those people who could put hours in and stand toe to toe with the best.
As I've gotten older I can put nowhere near the time into multiplayer gaming I used to, maybe a couple of hours a week at best now, but I still find I can compete to a high degree, and find myself way above the average in online rankings.
Case in point, I was playing Medal of Honour on the 360 on the weekend and wanted to get an achievement for getting 600 points (which pretty much involves getting a kill streak of like 25+ without dying). As such I took the option to player a sniper, I stayed back away from the rest of my team to avoid being noticed and got the streak. Some guy runs over to me and starts trying to knife me in the face and shoot at me (no friendly fire so it didn't matter), so I edged towards the edge of the rock I was hiding behind and as he was doing this in my face it pushed him into view, where he then got sniped by the other team, giving me much amusement. Our team had been struggling to take the objective, but because I had my kill streak I had access to a cruise missile which let me destroy the entire enemy team's defenses on the hill, which then let us take the hill. When I died a little after I switched to rifleman and helped assault the rest of the objectives winning us the match.
At the end of the match the guy who was trying to pester me that I got sniped sent me a message saying "learn to move bellend", because apparently it annoyed him that I was sniping rather than running in like a headless chicken and getting myself killed over and over. I topped the scoreboard of the whole game by quite a large margin thanks to my points streak, and was way ahead on kills/death ratio as well as having played a valuable part in taking the objectives. Yet despite this, according to this guy I was a bad player, and he was apparently awesome.
This story isn't terribly unusual, I find the poor mannered kids that go on about how awesome they are and how they know how to play the game and you don't actually completely and utterly suck, and are quite easy to outdo and outplay.
I find this is the easiest way to deal with them too- just ignore their retardedness, and just outplay them, because you know full well that kid probably cried himself to sleep that night because he got his arse handed to him.
I think past a certain point, time put into a game is largely irrelevant, you can be fairly good at games even if you only put in a small fraction of the amount of time that some of the annoying kids do, and still be better than them. Personally I know I have nowhere near the skill I used to, but I find that defeating your average "xX Oo iDef3nderz 799 oO Xx" is quite easy, and in a way, the more mouthy they are, the more pleasing it is destroying them and silently shrugging off their trolling because bear in mind, if they're the type of person who has an ego big enough to go on about how awesome they are, it's going to make their heart sink far more each time you kill them, than it will you if you simply don't give a fuck, because you realise it's a game. In my experience the really good players seem to just shut up and get on with playing the game, talking only when it matters, it's only the kids who think they're all that but really aren't that are mouthy.
"When the Android team finishes the next version they celebrate by getting a big statue (in this case a gingerbread man) put on their front lawn."
This has to rank up there with burning effigys on a large fire (Guy Fawkes / Bonfire night in the UK) as weird celebrations from the West that must make us look fucking insane to the rest of the world.
Yet here in the West we often have the cheek to claim other culture's celebrations are strange!
I certainly agree with you, but I can somewhat understand why Microsoft took the path they did. No one else really bothered to do a unified set of game libraries, and we now have OpenAL, and OpenInput but they're not as unified as DirectX. Also, it's only really in the last few years OpenGL has seen serious effort put into it again, it was largely stagnant for the best part of this decade and for that time I can certainly imagine that the DirectX team breathed a sigh of relief that they did have their own 3D API to work on without the hindrance of politics surrounding OpenGL over the last decade.
It's a common problem with FOSS, it's great in theory but all too often a combination of politics and self-interest derail it. It's a large reason I believe Linux has not made it to the desktop on a larger scale than it has- because too many developers are only interested in solving their problem, without a thought of how well their solution will work for the average joe. It takes a lot of discipline to ensure things work well for the user and there are examples of FOSS where this discipline has been enforced to great success- Firefox is of course perhaps the most obvious example.
So yeah I agree it's annoying DirectX doesn't just work everywhere, but as above, I can also understand Microsoft's motivations, and think OpenGL itself deserves a fair share of the blame in letting Microsoft steam ahead in the first place- there's no reason OpenGL couldn't be defining the graphics marketplace nowadays rather than DirectX had it not stagnated for such a long period. I too would like one graphics API (or better, one full blown multimedia API!) to rule them all, but at the end of the day we do have fragmentation, and as with fragmentation on Android sure it exists, but it's trivially dealt with via sensible abstraction and programming practices so I figure until the day comes where we do have a grand unified multimedia API then you might as well abstract what you can and just not care too much about what you use to fill in the underlying implementations of those layers.
Of course it is if you're communicating with bespoke video hardware at driver level which is precisely the scenario you cited in this case.
"Java is dying. And I was building classes back before java was even a thought in anyone's mind. The java class library structure is awful."
Yes, just not as fast as C++, and look how prominent that is still. I think Java developers can breathe a sigh of relief that dying means they've got at least a good 20 years left in their skillset yet, and that's assuming Java doesn't start improving over that period and increasing marketshare of course again. The point is, because more developers are trained in it than any other language, even in decline it's still growing it's developer base faster than any other language.
"The original design idea - making everything a class - was too simplistic. Anyone doing c++ learns that very early on. "Classes if necessary, but not necessarily classes." I had already gone through that learning experience 20 years ago."
Ah I see so you're one of those funky old school programmers who gets thrown by things such as "object orientation" then?
That would explain your site that's dedicated entirely to not having a clue what the fuck XML is all about too I guess. Good way to keep yourself irrelevant I guess.
"I made it clear that Java can't do the video - which isn't a "systems" problem."
It is if the "doing video" in question is communicating with bespoke hardware at driver level.
"And if you're using JNI, you're by definition bypassing java, so your argument is a failure on that score as well."
Well yes, you're bypassing Java for the things it's not designed for- systems stuff, and using Java to access an exposed interface to the systems stuff for the bits it can do well. You're still using Java for what it's suited to.
"Java is a mess. Just look through the class library hierarchy. They make even perl look semi-organized. That's pretty bad. "
If you think Java's class library is problematic then you're obviously fairly poor at programming. It's not exactly difficult to work with. Even graduates deal with it okay being the most taught language in university still to this day.
"But if Java is so great, how come it hasn't taken over everywhere? It's had more than 15 years... "
Because, although you seem incapable of comprehending this point, it's not designed to take over everywhere. I'll repeat again, because you don't seem to get this point- it is NOT a systems language.
It has however taken over in many other areas where it is suited to, it's used for most business systems, it's used for a lot of scientific computing, it's used on a lot of portable and embedded devices.
It's still the most taught, and most sought after skillset, it's still the single most prominent language around today. So yeah, of course it's not taken over everywhere, but it's more succesful than any other language to date except perhaps C/C++ which are very much systems languages, and are generally used to get a Java environment running. I'm not sure what else you expect it to achieve? it's still far more prominent than the likes of Ruby, Perl, Python, the.NET languages, Lisp, and so on, and so on.
Reading through your posts, the actual problem seems to be that you just don't actually know anything about Java, so I'm not sure why you feel the need to comment on it when you clearly know nothing about it. I guess you're one of those people who just has to have an opinion, even if it's completely uninformed and hence wrong.
I'm not really sure what you're point is, there's still no point going purely down the OpenGL path when you can abstract away the platform specific stuff and keep the option of for example, XBox 360 development open. You still seem to be missing this fundamental point with your incessant insistence that OpenGL is the only thing you should ever use. GLSL is still limited to GL platforms.
OpenGL ES 2.0 isn't supported before Android 2.0, and the iPad, iPhone, and iPhone 3G and older versions of the iPod Touch which limits you to the FFP for these platforms. Similarly PSGL is a kind of half way house between ES 1.1 and 2.0 in that it better supports the programmable pipeline. I'll admit I know fuck all about development for Nintendo's platforms, but as I understand it they don't use plain OpenGL either and use a more dated OpenGL ES based paradigm (i.e. fixed function).
I'm all for OpenGL, but as I said originally, in the right place, at the right time. I know why you disagree with me, it's fairly poorly veiled- you don't like Microsoft, which is fine. My point is merely that dressing up what effectively boils down to an anti-Microsoft argument as a cross platform argument, when GL isn't that brilliant cross platform, is wrong. You know, I don't even disagree with you on a lot of things, I still think OpenGL is a much cleaner API than Direct3D, I too am a big fan of Java, and was quite amused by this post of yours when I read it yesterday in a different discussion:
I'm just not keen on being too overly anti-Microsoft myself, because as with that discussion, and as with many of Steve's decisions on his platforms over the last few years, as with Google's countless invasions of privacy, and with, despite the communities claims to the contrary, Linux's inability to provide a stable desktop experience due to second rate drivers and lack of user targetted development (as opposed to developer targetted development) I'm not sure the alternatives are really any better. I'm also not really into predicting the future of the market because things change so rapidly, this is why I firmly believe in keeping code truly neutral as far as possible- I hope you can at least respect where I'm coming from even if you disagree.
"Thanks for the post. I would say however that since OpenGL 3 released in 2008, the extensions have gone away and have been incorporated into the main OpenGL API. There is no need to use specific ATI or nVidia extensions any more."
This has historically only been true until the next time OpenGL ends up behind the curve. DirectX just seems to consistently remain ahead in implementing new features directly, even with the process of managing OpenGL development being more streamlined nowadays. Still they are continually improving nowadays, so perhaps you're right, perhaps next time they wont be behind at all.
"Also, if you are on Windows, using OpenGL does not prevent you from using any of the other DirectX libraries such as DirectSound or DirectInput. These are fully compatible with OpenGL. It's just the Direct3D portion that you would not be using. If you want to be truly cross platform, there are OSS equivalents called OpenAudio and OpenInput."
Of course, but the point is it's just easier when you're sticking to a unified set of libraries. It just makes it that little bit easier that's all but I'm certainly not saying it's a make or break thing, it's fairly trivial.
Yes, but the only people who pick up on the movement and actions of this "Iranian Cyber Army" are sites like Slashdot, the mainstream public don't care, mainstream news will give a brief report of a hacked site, and really, that's it.
It's just not something that registers on the political radar other than a very brief mention unless some country is looking for an excuse, but when Iran is busy playing the nuclear game, when it's had fraudulent elections, it's not hard to find an excuse and again, a few script kiddies don't matter.
For what it's worth, even in Israel, rocket attacks happen far more frequently than on the news without Israeli response, or without affecting peace negotiations., they only become an issue when one side needs them to become an issue. Did you know there'd been at least 8 this month alone, 13 last month? -
These had no effect on the peace deals precisely because politicians recognise the nature of situations like this where individuals will try to derail processes. Individuals can only derail such processes if there is no serious political will to truly follow through with them in the first place. It is not the rocket that derails it, it is the will of politicians to not follow through, and they'll find an excuse whatever it is, if they can't find one then hell, they might even manufacture one. If they are serious, then they'll attempt talks regardless of actions like rocket attacks- which was the case with the latest attempt which, as you can see, were carried out despite constant attacks against Israel and constant Israeli responses over that period.
"What is this mythic API that works everwhere, including XBox, Windows Phone 7 etc, and how much is it per-seat?"
Really? you think abstraction layers are a kind of API?
"Personally I don't care what is used so long as it is portable, so I actually agree with your argument."
No, I don't think you do. I don't think you actually understand the concept of abstracting away your rendering calls such that the vast majority of your code is actually completely independent of the rendering API such that the only job in terms of portability is to create implementations for those abstraction layers that support the platform specific APIs. I get this impression because you're still talking about specific libraries, rather than demonstrating an understanding of the fact that good code means it's irrelevant what API you use because switching between them is a quick and easy task.
"OpenGL is just further along the portability scale than DirectX"
Really, it's not. You use OpenGL on the PC sure, but then you have to deal with platform specific implementation differences with Nintendo and Sony's platforms. You have to use ES for mobile devices, and even then you run into larger problems with hardware differences due to OpenGL often having cutting edge features implemented as vendor specific extensions whilst DirectX often has them implemented equally. You can't simply write an OpenGL app and have it compile on the Wii, the PS3, the PC, and each of the smartphone platforms without having to do a fair bit of work. It's certainly not as portable as you seem to be implying. This is just something that developers deal with though, and again, abstraction is the key tool here.
"and it is easier to suggest that DirectX-ers should try OpenGL than to suggest they try some unnamed niche library."
What niche library are you referring to? Are you still referring to your misconception that an abstraction layer is some kind of library? Why suggest anything at all? If people are developing for DirectX they probably know the existence of OpenGL, they probably either simply do not care about moving away from their current platform, of they're competent enough, like the Il2-Sturmovik guys you mentioned, to abstract away their graphics layer and offer a rendering path for DirectX and OpenGL to maximise the platforms they support with ease. You sound like the guys at the Wolfire blog who came up with the ludicrously childish and paranoid conspiracy theory that people use DirectX because of Microsoft's marketing, when in fact they often just use it because it's the best solution for the task they have at hand.
"You can add arbitrary layers of abstraction. Sometimes you can't afford the luxury of extra layers."
Bollocks. Sorry, but if you're trying to suggest you can't abstract away your graphics layer because of performance then you have to be a really sucky programmer. Even id Software have used abstraction frequently through the years to offer DirectX and OpenGL rendering paths and their stuff has always been right on the cutting edge of performance pushing hardware to it's limits whilst also providing the best graphical experience of the time- this is real world demonstrable high performance rendering that proves that abstraction layers are not a problematic performance hindrance. It would seem that if you truly believe abstraction layers like this are too much of a performance hit then you have little to no actual experience of developing high performance rendering apps and seeing what sort of things really do slow your app down and hence need optimising, these sorts of things are not your abstraction layers (well, unless you've done something truly braindead).
"ps. Who is worrying about targeting Windows Phone 7? Don't put your life savings on that horse."
I wouldn't, but are you suggesting that if it does get even a reasonable share of the smartphone market in the long run, say even as low as 5%, then it's not worth targetting had you engineered your code properly to make porting there
Glad someone posted this, I was beginning to lose faith in the ability of Slashdot to question the conclusions of articles when those conclusions do not seem correct.
As you say, we can quite easily mimic nature if all we want is a good solution (rather than the optimal solution), this is precisely what things like Ant Colony Optimisation amongst others do.
It should be simple to simulate an entity that travels about randomally, or based on some trivial heuristic (i.e. in the direction of the sun or whatever) and which is pulled towards attractors (flowers) with the strength of said attractors being presumably based on the amount of some value (pollen?) that remains tied to those attractors. I may not have a full picture of what bees do here, it's just a guess, but bees are not complex creatures, what I am pretty sure of is that we have a strong enough understanding of their behaviour to simulate pretty precisely what they do, but as you say, what they do is not solve the TSP.
I do agree with the idea that OpenGL is a much more cleanly designed API, and much nicer to write code for. I think partially though the problem with OpenGL is that sometimes you have to cater to the likes of ATI and nVidia separately for certain extensions that are standard in DirectX whatever the vendor.
There is a bigger reason though in terms of game development in general as to why DirectX lets you get things done quicker- it's much easier writing something that uses most parts of the DirectX range of APIs (DirectSound, DirectInput etc.) and tying it altogether, than it is to use OpenGL and then some disparate set of other external libraries to handle things like Audio and such. The problem is that OpenGL is just a graphics API, and doesn't explicitly integrate as well with the other components required to build a complete game quite like the full set of DirectX components does.
All in all though, for simple to moderate, and even many high end (i.e. where extensions don't come into play much) graphics only tasks, I agree that OpenGL is a much more pleasant and quick to use choice to work with.
"I hope all you DirectX programmers take note. Those who wrote for DirectX might have been able to make money on the PC+XBox but the software doesn't move to the PS3, iPhone/iPad, Android, Linux (while still running on Windows too) like OpenGL does. You all fell for Microsoft's deliberate plan to keep you on that platform (where is the Slashdot "it's a trap" tag when you need it, lol)."
No, we're just smart enough to understand the concept of a graphics abstraction layer where it's needed, and mature enough to put childish fanboyism for some particular API aside when it comes to choosing the best tool for the job.
We also therefore get to enjoy the benefit of ensuring the best compatibility and performance for every platform we choose to develop for.
"Il-2 Sturmovik had both a DirectX and (faster) OpenGL implementation. Coupled with the fact that it is largely written in Java and it was able to be ported to the PS3 as the product Wings-of-Prey greatly increasing sales."
Yes, it also had an XBox port. Your assertion about the faster OpenGL implementation is irrelevant - this can be due to any number of things, from you simply talking out your arse, through to more time being spent on optimisation of the OpenGL layer, it tells us nothing about the relative rendering speed of each, of which there is really no difference between either, and where one draws ahead of the other depends on very specific tasks which tend to average out across a full blown game and fall into irrelevance compared to other processing tasks like preparing the data in the first place. The only thing we can really take away from this is that the developers of IL2-Sturmovik were smart enough to do as I mentioned, and use an abstraction layer, allowing them to port to every suitable platform, not just the DirectX subset, or the OpenGL subset. Guess what? professional developers get this, even if you do not.
"If you must learn a 3D library, then learn OpenGL.It has the features of DirectX 11 (geometry shaders etc) but will run on Windows XP."
But not the XBox, or Windows Phone 7, or probably any Microsoft platform outside the desktop. That's still a large potential source of revenue you're cutting out purely for the sake of immature partisan fanboyism. As with everything, use the right tool for the job. Sometimes, that is OpenGL, sometimes it is not OpenGL.
Believe it or not, some people are interested in just getting the job done, achieving the best sales possible, and ensuring best reusability of their code whatever the future holds. Tying yourself purely to OpenGL, and only OpenGL, does not achieve any of these goals to the fullest extent possible.
The point is why limit yourself to just OpenGL or just DirectX in the first place when you can, for a trivial amount of extra work, write code that is vastly more future proof in that you could trivially implement support for some as yet unimagined API even, and enjoy the best of all worlds?
Ah I see, so now you're changing the problem to suit your argument?
Effectively you're now changing from "Java isn't capable performance wise", to "Java isn't a system's language"- no shit, no one expects to be able to device driver level code in Java, it's simply not what Java is for.
Your argument simply doesn't hold weight as any negative slant on Java, it merely shows a lack of understanding on your behalf as to what Java is for, and you're trying to spin this misunderstanding of yours initially as some incapability of Java performance wise, and now as some limitation of Java where it's meant to be capable- it's not.
Then though, even here Java isn't completely out in the cold, if the drivers are written in C++ or whatever, there's no reason Java can't work with them through JNI or similar.
So there's still little about your exam that Java can't do, there's a lot it's not suited to, but ultimately all you've done is found a relatively fringe case which Java isn't really designed for (it's designed for apps and services, not drivers and operating systems) and have tried to spin this as an inherent flaw with Java - it's not, I don't think anyone in their right mind ever suggested Java was designed to solve every possible computing scenario ever. You similarly wouldn't use Python, PHP, the.NET platform and so forth for device driver or OS development, it's just not what they're there for.
The fact you later tried to throw licensing issues into the mix shows either how little you understand about Java and computing in general, or simply that you are just trying to troll. What it does not show is someone with a good understanding of the issues, arguing a reasonable and sanely thought through point.
You're comparing an applet (a plugin, necessarily limited by the browser) against a native application? really?
If a Java applet can't do it neither can a Flash app, neither can an HTML5 app and so on. In contrast, if a native app presumably written in something like C++ can, then so can Java SE as a standard desktop app.
You're simply not comparing like for like which is dishonest at best.
Besides, your example seems rather suspect anyway, to even achieve a mere 16 bit colour on those streams you're talking about ~366MBps of hard drive write speed would be needed, but even the fastest modern SSDs which would be much faster than an old P3 800mhz is going to support the throughput of cap out at about 220MBps:
So you'd need to compress down to around 0.6 of the video's original size and you'd need to do that on ~366mb of data every second in real time.
This is before you even factor in the requirements of audio storage of every single stream at which point the compression of audio must be factored in, and further compression of video would then be required to make room for audio storage, and all this is assuming the system could sustain that write constantly for the period of surveillance with no other writes to said disk causing a delay, and assuming the process can even be handled on a system with only 128mb of RAM meaning there'd quite likely need to be some paging. We've also assumed you're only using 16 bit colour too of course- it could very well be 24 bit.
Even if your example was true and I've missed something, then it's not like Java is in any way the limiting factor here.
If Java can't do it, then it's because your example is likely a fabrication and would seemingly require a breaking of the physical laws of computing to achieve.
Yes, I had a look at TFA (I know, I know) and I can't see anything quoted in the article that suggests they're doing what the article suggests they're doing. The governments stated aims can be just as well satisfied by allowing security services to basically place wiretaps on individual suspects. I see nothing there that suggests blanket logging of all communications data, nothing at all.
As I pointed out last time RIPA came up, it's much more like a search warrant.
See my post here explaining it in more detail and my followup responses which explains, and provides links to the relevant legislation straight from the horses mouth:
RIPA is an awful piece of legislation and has no place in a modern democracy, however there are many myths about it like that which you have stated which are simply just fantasy. RIPA is bad, but it's not quite that bad. It needs to be withdrawn from the books either way, but let's not over-dramatise the issue, else legitimate calls for it's removal based on legitimate concerns will just get lost amongst the madness.
He probably meant in in the same way at his last press conference he said the iPod Touch was the largest mobile gaming platform on the planet having sold double the number of mobile gaming devices as Sony and Nintendo put together. Except, there's about 300 million Nintendo DS' and PSPs out there, but only 30 million iPod touches.
Then there was the one about 275,000 iPhone activations per day on average, which would equate to 100 million a year, except even their best iPhone quarter so far they've only shifted 14 million, which if they kept up over a year would be 56 million, but that figure is roughly only the total sales of the combined set of iPhones over the last 3 and a half years.
Sometimes when Steve says things, I'm sure they're right in his little world, but it's best to always look at Steve's comments in that way- I think he gets a bit confused between fantasy and reality. There's no doubt that the iPhone is a resounding success, and the iPod touch is far from being a flop or anything like that, but the things he comes out with, just don't even make sense, and don't hold up to the cold hard numbers that his own company releases in it's quarterly reports. At best the numbers he uses in public conferences are grossly unrepresentative of the reality of the situation, at worst they're just completely and utterly made up.
I'd have a lot more respect for the man if he was content with the success of his products as is because there's no doubt they're succesful, but the fact he has to inflate the numbers to the extreme and enter into fantasy territory sometimes does actually make me question whether the guy is even sane and hasn't just completely lost the plot. Like you say, he's either ignorant of his own companies figures, or just likes to outright lie- or as I say, he's just fucking nuts.
You seem to have some insecurity complex about your country such that you feel the need to remain in denial about it's ability to ever do anything wrong. I didn't say our government is free of blame- of course they are, if not only for trusting US military intelligence more than they should. The fact our government screwed up royally doesn't change the fact the US fed false intelligence to us and hence doesn't change the fact a supposed ally - the US - manipulated us in a way that was a major factor in what turned out to be an illegal war.
You're more than welcome to blame our government too, I do, but the blame isn't mutually exclusive, it's not one or the other, the US is still very much to blame as well, very much in the wrong, and most certainly did influence our decision to go to war based on false evidence. It's sad that you're only capable of seeing things in such a binary manner by assuming that if someone blames the US for something then they're inherently inable to see fault in their own country, that's a rediculous viewpoint, but it's apparently one you have all the same.
Just because our government deserves some blame, doesn't mean your government deserves none.
"Not necessarily. If Assanage wanted to release the exact details of his rejection he's more than free too - but, like with pretty much every government out there, it is against the law for official bodies to discuss the private details of individuals' interactions with the state."
You seem to be missing the point, Swedish officials aren't saying that he has been given a reason, Assange is saying he hasn't. As they haven't contradicted this- something they could do, because to simply say that he has been given a reason without going into detail as to what that reason is would not breach European data protection laws it seems unlikely that he's lying which you appear to be implying.
The rest of your post focuses on work permits, however this is not what Assange was denied, he was denied a residency permit, which is required for a stay of longer than 3 months. These are two completely separate documents. Your link about good conduct is about citizenship, which is again different to residency which you apparently understand. You can gain residency without being a citizen, and without also applying for a work permit. You seem to have falsely asserted that conduct to become a citizen is the same as conduct to apply for residency which is not necessarily the case, citizenship brings with it a lot of benefits from the right to vote, to the right to consular protection if you get yourself in trouble abroad- as such there are much greater restrictions on who can become a citizen than who can become a resident, because a resident is basically just someone granted permission to have an extended stay. Neither of these documents you have brought up are relevant in this case.
In denying an application for a residency permit the Swedish government hasn't refused him permission to work, nor have they refused him permission to become a citizen. They have refused him the opportunity to stay in Sweden past the standard 90 days meaning that he must leave the country and attempt re-entry if he wishes to return there. They have effectively said that he is not welcome as a long term visitor to the country. The real test will be whether he is denied entry if he attempts to re-enter Sweden.
"I mean if the US really could control every other nation on the planet like people on slashdot think then he would have had a tragic car accident long ago."
So you're saying they can't influence other countries? you're saying the claims in this document are completely false, and that the Swedish authorities actually decided to raid The Pirate Bay off their own back, despite it being unconstitutional in Sweden to do so?
If the US can get Sweden to raid their own citizens web servers over mere IP infringement, then why would you think getting them to refuse residency to someone who they view as a national security risk is such a far stretch?
Your viewpoint is rather naive in the face of the evidence which reasonably demonstrates the US absolutely does seem capable of influencing the actions of foreign governments.
Christ, I live in the UK and the US hoodwinked us into partaking in a possibly illegal war with them using fake intelligence about WMDs and selling it to our security services as authentic, costing us many soldier's lives, and billions in costs as well as a massive dent to our reputation politically across the globe. You really think pressuring a country to refuse citizenship is that unlikely? seriously?
I wish I lived in your world, where the US government is a harmless puppy incapable of action outside it's borders. Hell, Che Guevara might even have been enjoying his 83rd birthday next June, and Osama Bin Laden might have decided to just go back home to enjoy a peaceful life with his family in Saudi Arabia. I'm sure there's a good few million Iraqis that would appreciate living in that world moreso than the real one too.
Yes, and the flip side of it is that Wikileaks has had it's profile raised by several orders of magnitude amongst the general public, even older folks like my Dad known who they are now.
Didn't work? hardly, mission accomplished I'd say. Assange has been succesful in massively raising the profile of Wikileaks across the globe. The original leak of the Afghan war documents was a far bigger news story than the "Assange has been accused of rape, no he hasn't, yes he has" stories which didn't really make it past local media in Sweden as larger stories, and were footnotes if even mentioned at all in the news in the rest of the world. Whilst my Dad has heard of Wikileaks and what they have done, I can guarantee if I went upto him and said "Do you know who Julian Assange is and what he's been accused of?" he'd look at me blankly.
Julian's story is one that keeps the tech media busy, but that no one outside of that really gives a flying fuck about- the general public simply don't care.
Now if Britney Spears had been accused of rape, well, they'd be all over it.
It's not just cases, my colleague got an iPhone 4 on release, placed it in her bag coming to work the next morning and found the front screen scratched when she took it out. She was absolutely gutted to have managed to scratch it within 24 hours of getting it. She thinks it was probably her keys as she didn't really have anything else that could scratch it in her bag.
I was under the impression the material used for phone screens now was tough enough that short of using something really hard like diamond, even things like steel wouldn't tend to scratch them but in the case of the iPhone 4 this doesn't seem to be true- the question is is this because Apple have used a less strong (cheaper?) material, or if there is some other reason.
Different bees have different needs so you'd really need to see what bees are native to your region and plant out accordingly. I'm sure Google will happily oblige in providing you information as to the types of bees that live where you do and what they like.
Generally you want to find out their colonial habits- some like to build full blown colonies, others are solitary bees, then you need to try and provide for their needs which in the case of solitary bees can be as simple as providing a block of wood with a bunch of holes drilled into it that are maybe a centimetre or two thick. Colonial bees will wants a hive, or a natural area that can provide the conditions and resources they need to build a nest. Then you really just need to find out what plants are favoured by the species of bee you have near you. The problem is that bees like pollen an nectar, but the amount of nectar plants produce can be dependant on climate, so it's hard to give you a blanket species of plant because what may be good in Arizona, may be useless in North Dakota. The way you plant can have an effect too- they'll appreciate large clusters of flowers so that they can fly and sit in between them.
One important point is to avoid using pesticides, systemic pesticides used on ornamental plants seep into the pollen and nectar which bees consume, which makes bees sick. Generally the best way to deal with pests is using organic methods. I grow succulent plants (mostly cacti) in a large greenhouse and maintain within the greenhouse conditions ideal for ladybirds and lacewing- providing homes for them and bring in an artificial stock of prey that isn't a threat to my plants when the pests that cause me problems are temporarily eliminated because these two species of insect eliminate red spider mite and mealy bugs for me without the need for pesticide. The problem with pescticides is that many pests they're designed to control become resistant to them anyway, and some of the stronger ones have been banned because they're dangerous to humans, so they effectively cause a lot of harm to things like bees, whilst failing to offer any worthwhile long term control.
I agree, I'm what would I suppose be categorised as a hard core gamer, so personally for me Kinect's launch titles provide nothing compelling enough for me to be interested in buying it either.
Despite that, the GP's comments are complete FUD, the tech itself seems fine. As I mentioned in another post in reply to Pojut's original comment, I'm a little dismayed that they dropped the quality of the camera so that it can no longer handle hand/finger gestures, which would've been great for FPS games being able to issue commands to AI team mates and such, but other than that it still works pretty much as advertised, you don't need to be stood up (well, unless the game requires it of course- i.e. dance games!), it can easily cope with more than 2 players etc.
It does provide a dimension that Move and the Wii can't at least which is where it may shine- because it's controllerless you can use a controller with it, this means that in games like Guitar Hero it'd now be possible to have players actually move around whilst playing the Guitar, or in games like Lips have people sing into the Microphone and dance as well- not my sort of thing really but I can see how it adds potential we don't yet have in gaming. Whether the potential will ever be reached is a different story of course- for me despite being an early adopter of the Wii, I got it on releaese day, that never ever actually reached it's potential either. I found nearly all the games dull and boring. I'm concerned that Kinect will suffer the same fate- no real innovation to really draw the new control scheme into games with deep mature storylines.
As with everything, all we can really do is wait and see I suppose!
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure I agree with this. I used to play Quake online lots when I was younger and be one of those people who could put hours in and stand toe to toe with the best.
As I've gotten older I can put nowhere near the time into multiplayer gaming I used to, maybe a couple of hours a week at best now, but I still find I can compete to a high degree, and find myself way above the average in online rankings.
Case in point, I was playing Medal of Honour on the 360 on the weekend and wanted to get an achievement for getting 600 points (which pretty much involves getting a kill streak of like 25+ without dying). As such I took the option to player a sniper, I stayed back away from the rest of my team to avoid being noticed and got the streak. Some guy runs over to me and starts trying to knife me in the face and shoot at me (no friendly fire so it didn't matter), so I edged towards the edge of the rock I was hiding behind and as he was doing this in my face it pushed him into view, where he then got sniped by the other team, giving me much amusement. Our team had been struggling to take the objective, but because I had my kill streak I had access to a cruise missile which let me destroy the entire enemy team's defenses on the hill, which then let us take the hill. When I died a little after I switched to rifleman and helped assault the rest of the objectives winning us the match.
At the end of the match the guy who was trying to pester me that I got sniped sent me a message saying "learn to move bellend", because apparently it annoyed him that I was sniping rather than running in like a headless chicken and getting myself killed over and over. I topped the scoreboard of the whole game by quite a large margin thanks to my points streak, and was way ahead on kills/death ratio as well as having played a valuable part in taking the objectives. Yet despite this, according to this guy I was a bad player, and he was apparently awesome.
This story isn't terribly unusual, I find the poor mannered kids that go on about how awesome they are and how they know how to play the game and you don't actually completely and utterly suck, and are quite easy to outdo and outplay.
I find this is the easiest way to deal with them too- just ignore their retardedness, and just outplay them, because you know full well that kid probably cried himself to sleep that night because he got his arse handed to him.
I think past a certain point, time put into a game is largely irrelevant, you can be fairly good at games even if you only put in a small fraction of the amount of time that some of the annoying kids do, and still be better than them. Personally I know I have nowhere near the skill I used to, but I find that defeating your average "xX Oo iDef3nderz 799 oO Xx" is quite easy, and in a way, the more mouthy they are, the more pleasing it is destroying them and silently shrugging off their trolling because bear in mind, if they're the type of person who has an ego big enough to go on about how awesome they are, it's going to make their heart sink far more each time you kill them, than it will you if you simply don't give a fuck, because you realise it's a game. In my experience the really good players seem to just shut up and get on with playing the game, talking only when it matters, it's only the kids who think they're all that but really aren't that are mouthy.
"When the Android team finishes the next version they celebrate by getting a big statue (in this case a gingerbread man) put on their front lawn."
This has to rank up there with burning effigys on a large fire (Guy Fawkes / Bonfire night in the UK) as weird celebrations from the West that must make us look fucking insane to the rest of the world.
Yet here in the West we often have the cheek to claim other culture's celebrations are strange!
I certainly agree with you, but I can somewhat understand why Microsoft took the path they did. No one else really bothered to do a unified set of game libraries, and we now have OpenAL, and OpenInput but they're not as unified as DirectX. Also, it's only really in the last few years OpenGL has seen serious effort put into it again, it was largely stagnant for the best part of this decade and for that time I can certainly imagine that the DirectX team breathed a sigh of relief that they did have their own 3D API to work on without the hindrance of politics surrounding OpenGL over the last decade.
It's a common problem with FOSS, it's great in theory but all too often a combination of politics and self-interest derail it. It's a large reason I believe Linux has not made it to the desktop on a larger scale than it has- because too many developers are only interested in solving their problem, without a thought of how well their solution will work for the average joe. It takes a lot of discipline to ensure things work well for the user and there are examples of FOSS where this discipline has been enforced to great success- Firefox is of course perhaps the most obvious example.
So yeah I agree it's annoying DirectX doesn't just work everywhere, but as above, I can also understand Microsoft's motivations, and think OpenGL itself deserves a fair share of the blame in letting Microsoft steam ahead in the first place- there's no reason OpenGL couldn't be defining the graphics marketplace nowadays rather than DirectX had it not stagnated for such a long period. I too would like one graphics API (or better, one full blown multimedia API!) to rule them all, but at the end of the day we do have fragmentation, and as with fragmentation on Android sure it exists, but it's trivially dealt with via sensible abstraction and programming practices so I figure until the day comes where we do have a grand unified multimedia API then you might as well abstract what you can and just not care too much about what you use to fill in the underlying implementations of those layers.
"Showing video is not "systems stuff.""
Of course it is if you're communicating with bespoke video hardware at driver level which is precisely the scenario you cited in this case.
"Java is dying. And I was building classes back before java was even a thought in anyone's mind. The java class library structure is awful."
Yes, just not as fast as C++, and look how prominent that is still. I think Java developers can breathe a sigh of relief that dying means they've got at least a good 20 years left in their skillset yet, and that's assuming Java doesn't start improving over that period and increasing marketshare of course again. The point is, because more developers are trained in it than any other language, even in decline it's still growing it's developer base faster than any other language.
"The original design idea - making everything a class - was too simplistic. Anyone doing c++ learns that very early on. "Classes if necessary, but not necessarily classes." I had already gone through that learning experience 20 years ago."
Ah I see so you're one of those funky old school programmers who gets thrown by things such as "object orientation" then?
That would explain your site that's dedicated entirely to not having a clue what the fuck XML is all about too I guess. Good way to keep yourself irrelevant I guess.
"I made it clear that Java can't do the video - which isn't a "systems" problem."
It is if the "doing video" in question is communicating with bespoke hardware at driver level.
"And if you're using JNI, you're by definition bypassing java, so your argument is a failure on that score as well."
Well yes, you're bypassing Java for the things it's not designed for- systems stuff, and using Java to access an exposed interface to the systems stuff for the bits it can do well. You're still using Java for what it's suited to.
"Java is a mess. Just look through the class library hierarchy. They make even perl look semi-organized. That's pretty bad. "
If you think Java's class library is problematic then you're obviously fairly poor at programming. It's not exactly difficult to work with. Even graduates deal with it okay being the most taught language in university still to this day.
"But if Java is so great, how come it hasn't taken over everywhere? It's had more than 15 years ... "
Because, although you seem incapable of comprehending this point, it's not designed to take over everywhere. I'll repeat again, because you don't seem to get this point- it is NOT a systems language.
It has however taken over in many other areas where it is suited to, it's used for most business systems, it's used for a lot of scientific computing, it's used on a lot of portable and embedded devices.
It's still the most taught, and most sought after skillset, it's still the single most prominent language around today. So yeah, of course it's not taken over everywhere, but it's more succesful than any other language to date except perhaps C/C++ which are very much systems languages, and are generally used to get a Java environment running. I'm not sure what else you expect it to achieve? it's still far more prominent than the likes of Ruby, Perl, Python, the .NET languages, Lisp, and so on, and so on.
Reading through your posts, the actual problem seems to be that you just don't actually know anything about Java, so I'm not sure why you feel the need to comment on it when you clearly know nothing about it. I guess you're one of those people who just has to have an opinion, even if it's completely uninformed and hence wrong.
I'm not really sure what you're point is, there's still no point going purely down the OpenGL path when you can abstract away the platform specific stuff and keep the option of for example, XBox 360 development open. You still seem to be missing this fundamental point with your incessant insistence that OpenGL is the only thing you should ever use. GLSL is still limited to GL platforms.
OpenGL ES 2.0 isn't supported before Android 2.0, and the iPad, iPhone, and iPhone 3G and older versions of the iPod Touch which limits you to the FFP for these platforms. Similarly PSGL is a kind of half way house between ES 1.1 and 2.0 in that it better supports the programmable pipeline. I'll admit I know fuck all about development for Nintendo's platforms, but as I understand it they don't use plain OpenGL either and use a more dated OpenGL ES based paradigm (i.e. fixed function).
I'm all for OpenGL, but as I said originally, in the right place, at the right time. I know why you disagree with me, it's fairly poorly veiled- you don't like Microsoft, which is fine. My point is merely that dressing up what effectively boils down to an anti-Microsoft argument as a cross platform argument, when GL isn't that brilliant cross platform, is wrong. You know, I don't even disagree with you on a lot of things, I still think OpenGL is a much cleaner API than Direct3D, I too am a big fan of Java, and was quite amused by this post of yours when I read it yesterday in a different discussion:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1835964&cid=33997836
I'm just not keen on being too overly anti-Microsoft myself, because as with that discussion, and as with many of Steve's decisions on his platforms over the last few years, as with Google's countless invasions of privacy, and with, despite the communities claims to the contrary, Linux's inability to provide a stable desktop experience due to second rate drivers and lack of user targetted development (as opposed to developer targetted development) I'm not sure the alternatives are really any better. I'm also not really into predicting the future of the market because things change so rapidly, this is why I firmly believe in keeping code truly neutral as far as possible- I hope you can at least respect where I'm coming from even if you disagree.
"Thanks for the post. I would say however that since OpenGL 3 released in 2008, the extensions have gone away and have been incorporated into the main OpenGL API. There is no need to use specific ATI or nVidia extensions any more."
This has historically only been true until the next time OpenGL ends up behind the curve. DirectX just seems to consistently remain ahead in implementing new features directly, even with the process of managing OpenGL development being more streamlined nowadays. Still they are continually improving nowadays, so perhaps you're right, perhaps next time they wont be behind at all.
"Also, if you are on Windows, using OpenGL does not prevent you from using any of the other DirectX libraries such as DirectSound or DirectInput. These are fully compatible with OpenGL. It's just the Direct3D portion that you would not be using. If you want to be truly cross platform, there are OSS equivalents called OpenAudio and OpenInput."
Of course, but the point is it's just easier when you're sticking to a unified set of libraries. It just makes it that little bit easier that's all but I'm certainly not saying it's a make or break thing, it's fairly trivial.
Yes, but the only people who pick up on the movement and actions of this "Iranian Cyber Army" are sites like Slashdot, the mainstream public don't care, mainstream news will give a brief report of a hacked site, and really, that's it.
It's just not something that registers on the political radar other than a very brief mention unless some country is looking for an excuse, but when Iran is busy playing the nuclear game, when it's had fraudulent elections, it's not hard to find an excuse and again, a few script kiddies don't matter.
For what it's worth, even in Israel, rocket attacks happen far more frequently than on the news without Israeli response, or without affecting peace negotiations., they only become an issue when one side needs them to become an issue. Did you know there'd been at least 8 this month alone, 13 last month? -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2010
These had no effect on the peace deals precisely because politicians recognise the nature of situations like this where individuals will try to derail processes. Individuals can only derail such processes if there is no serious political will to truly follow through with them in the first place. It is not the rocket that derails it, it is the will of politicians to not follow through, and they'll find an excuse whatever it is, if they can't find one then hell, they might even manufacture one. If they are serious, then they'll attempt talks regardless of actions like rocket attacks- which was the case with the latest attempt which, as you can see, were carried out despite constant attacks against Israel and constant Israeli responses over that period.
"It's just a further reminder of how small groups and individuals can inflame international imbroglios, leaving state actors in a bind."
No I'm pretty sure the whole nuclear issue is what's got the state actors in a bind in this case.
Obama and Ahmadinejad could likely not give a flying fuck what a bunch of script kiddies are upto.
"What is this mythic API that works everwhere, including XBox, Windows Phone 7 etc, and how much is it per-seat?"
Really? you think abstraction layers are a kind of API?
"Personally I don't care what is used so long as it is portable, so I actually agree with your argument."
No, I don't think you do. I don't think you actually understand the concept of abstracting away your rendering calls such that the vast majority of your code is actually completely independent of the rendering API such that the only job in terms of portability is to create implementations for those abstraction layers that support the platform specific APIs. I get this impression because you're still talking about specific libraries, rather than demonstrating an understanding of the fact that good code means it's irrelevant what API you use because switching between them is a quick and easy task.
"OpenGL is just further along the portability scale than DirectX"
Really, it's not. You use OpenGL on the PC sure, but then you have to deal with platform specific implementation differences with Nintendo and Sony's platforms. You have to use ES for mobile devices, and even then you run into larger problems with hardware differences due to OpenGL often having cutting edge features implemented as vendor specific extensions whilst DirectX often has them implemented equally. You can't simply write an OpenGL app and have it compile on the Wii, the PS3, the PC, and each of the smartphone platforms without having to do a fair bit of work. It's certainly not as portable as you seem to be implying. This is just something that developers deal with though, and again, abstraction is the key tool here.
"and it is easier to suggest that DirectX-ers should try OpenGL than to suggest they try some unnamed niche library."
What niche library are you referring to? Are you still referring to your misconception that an abstraction layer is some kind of library? Why suggest anything at all? If people are developing for DirectX they probably know the existence of OpenGL, they probably either simply do not care about moving away from their current platform, of they're competent enough, like the Il2-Sturmovik guys you mentioned, to abstract away their graphics layer and offer a rendering path for DirectX and OpenGL to maximise the platforms they support with ease. You sound like the guys at the Wolfire blog who came up with the ludicrously childish and paranoid conspiracy theory that people use DirectX because of Microsoft's marketing, when in fact they often just use it because it's the best solution for the task they have at hand.
"You can add arbitrary layers of abstraction. Sometimes you can't afford the luxury of extra layers."
Bollocks. Sorry, but if you're trying to suggest you can't abstract away your graphics layer because of performance then you have to be a really sucky programmer. Even id Software have used abstraction frequently through the years to offer DirectX and OpenGL rendering paths and their stuff has always been right on the cutting edge of performance pushing hardware to it's limits whilst also providing the best graphical experience of the time- this is real world demonstrable high performance rendering that proves that abstraction layers are not a problematic performance hindrance. It would seem that if you truly believe abstraction layers like this are too much of a performance hit then you have little to no actual experience of developing high performance rendering apps and seeing what sort of things really do slow your app down and hence need optimising, these sorts of things are not your abstraction layers (well, unless you've done something truly braindead).
"ps. Who is worrying about targeting Windows Phone 7? Don't put your life savings on that horse."
I wouldn't, but are you suggesting that if it does get even a reasonable share of the smartphone market in the long run, say even as low as 5%, then it's not worth targetting had you engineered your code properly to make porting there
Glad someone posted this, I was beginning to lose faith in the ability of Slashdot to question the conclusions of articles when those conclusions do not seem correct.
As you say, we can quite easily mimic nature if all we want is a good solution (rather than the optimal solution), this is precisely what things like Ant Colony Optimisation amongst others do.
It should be simple to simulate an entity that travels about randomally, or based on some trivial heuristic (i.e. in the direction of the sun or whatever) and which is pulled towards attractors (flowers) with the strength of said attractors being presumably based on the amount of some value (pollen?) that remains tied to those attractors. I may not have a full picture of what bees do here, it's just a guess, but bees are not complex creatures, what I am pretty sure of is that we have a strong enough understanding of their behaviour to simulate pretty precisely what they do, but as you say, what they do is not solve the TSP.
I do agree with the idea that OpenGL is a much more cleanly designed API, and much nicer to write code for. I think partially though the problem with OpenGL is that sometimes you have to cater to the likes of ATI and nVidia separately for certain extensions that are standard in DirectX whatever the vendor.
There is a bigger reason though in terms of game development in general as to why DirectX lets you get things done quicker- it's much easier writing something that uses most parts of the DirectX range of APIs (DirectSound, DirectInput etc.) and tying it altogether, than it is to use OpenGL and then some disparate set of other external libraries to handle things like Audio and such. The problem is that OpenGL is just a graphics API, and doesn't explicitly integrate as well with the other components required to build a complete game quite like the full set of DirectX components does.
All in all though, for simple to moderate, and even many high end (i.e. where extensions don't come into play much) graphics only tasks, I agree that OpenGL is a much more pleasant and quick to use choice to work with.
"I hope all you DirectX programmers take note. Those who wrote for DirectX might have been able to make money on the PC+XBox but the software doesn't move to the PS3, iPhone/iPad, Android, Linux (while still running on Windows too) like OpenGL does. You all fell for Microsoft's deliberate plan to keep you on that platform (where is the Slashdot "it's a trap" tag when you need it, lol)."
No, we're just smart enough to understand the concept of a graphics abstraction layer where it's needed, and mature enough to put childish fanboyism for some particular API aside when it comes to choosing the best tool for the job.
We also therefore get to enjoy the benefit of ensuring the best compatibility and performance for every platform we choose to develop for.
"Il-2 Sturmovik had both a DirectX and (faster) OpenGL implementation. Coupled with the fact that it is largely written in Java and it was able to be ported to the PS3 as the product Wings-of-Prey greatly increasing sales."
Yes, it also had an XBox port. Your assertion about the faster OpenGL implementation is irrelevant - this can be due to any number of things, from you simply talking out your arse, through to more time being spent on optimisation of the OpenGL layer, it tells us nothing about the relative rendering speed of each, of which there is really no difference between either, and where one draws ahead of the other depends on very specific tasks which tend to average out across a full blown game and fall into irrelevance compared to other processing tasks like preparing the data in the first place. The only thing we can really take away from this is that the developers of IL2-Sturmovik were smart enough to do as I mentioned, and use an abstraction layer, allowing them to port to every suitable platform, not just the DirectX subset, or the OpenGL subset. Guess what? professional developers get this, even if you do not.
"If you must learn a 3D library, then learn OpenGL.It has the features of DirectX 11 (geometry shaders etc) but will run on Windows XP."
But not the XBox, or Windows Phone 7, or probably any Microsoft platform outside the desktop. That's still a large potential source of revenue you're cutting out purely for the sake of immature partisan fanboyism. As with everything, use the right tool for the job. Sometimes, that is OpenGL, sometimes it is not OpenGL.
Believe it or not, some people are interested in just getting the job done, achieving the best sales possible, and ensuring best reusability of their code whatever the future holds. Tying yourself purely to OpenGL, and only OpenGL, does not achieve any of these goals to the fullest extent possible.
The point is why limit yourself to just OpenGL or just DirectX in the first place when you can, for a trivial amount of extra work, write code that is vastly more future proof in that you could trivially implement support for some as yet unimagined API even, and enjoy the best of all worlds?
Ah I see, so now you're changing the problem to suit your argument?
Effectively you're now changing from "Java isn't capable performance wise", to "Java isn't a system's language"- no shit, no one expects to be able to device driver level code in Java, it's simply not what Java is for.
Your argument simply doesn't hold weight as any negative slant on Java, it merely shows a lack of understanding on your behalf as to what Java is for, and you're trying to spin this misunderstanding of yours initially as some incapability of Java performance wise, and now as some limitation of Java where it's meant to be capable- it's not.
Then though, even here Java isn't completely out in the cold, if the drivers are written in C++ or whatever, there's no reason Java can't work with them through JNI or similar.
So there's still little about your exam that Java can't do, there's a lot it's not suited to, but ultimately all you've done is found a relatively fringe case which Java isn't really designed for (it's designed for apps and services, not drivers and operating systems) and have tried to spin this as an inherent flaw with Java - it's not, I don't think anyone in their right mind ever suggested Java was designed to solve every possible computing scenario ever. You similarly wouldn't use Python, PHP, the .NET platform and so forth for device driver or OS development, it's just not what they're there for.
The fact you later tried to throw licensing issues into the mix shows either how little you understand about Java and computing in general, or simply that you are just trying to troll. What it does not show is someone with a good understanding of the issues, arguing a reasonable and sanely thought through point.
You're comparing an applet (a plugin, necessarily limited by the browser) against a native application? really?
If a Java applet can't do it neither can a Flash app, neither can an HTML5 app and so on. In contrast, if a native app presumably written in something like C++ can, then so can Java SE as a standard desktop app.
You're simply not comparing like for like which is dishonest at best.
Besides, your example seems rather suspect anyway, to even achieve a mere 16 bit colour on those streams you're talking about ~366MBps of hard drive write speed would be needed, but even the fastest modern SSDs which would be much faster than an old P3 800mhz is going to support the throughput of cap out at about 220MBps:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/ssd-charts-2010/Streaming-Write-Throughput,2360.html
So you'd need to compress down to around 0.6 of the video's original size and you'd need to do that on ~366mb of data every second in real time.
This is before you even factor in the requirements of audio storage of every single stream at which point the compression of audio must be factored in, and further compression of video would then be required to make room for audio storage, and all this is assuming the system could sustain that write constantly for the period of surveillance with no other writes to said disk causing a delay, and assuming the process can even be handled on a system with only 128mb of RAM meaning there'd quite likely need to be some paging. We've also assumed you're only using 16 bit colour too of course- it could very well be 24 bit.
Even if your example was true and I've missed something, then it's not like Java is in any way the limiting factor here.
If Java can't do it, then it's because your example is likely a fabrication and would seemingly require a breaking of the physical laws of computing to achieve.
Yes, I had a look at TFA (I know, I know) and I can't see anything quoted in the article that suggests they're doing what the article suggests they're doing. The governments stated aims can be just as well satisfied by allowing security services to basically place wiretaps on individual suspects. I see nothing there that suggests blanket logging of all communications data, nothing at all.
No they can't.
As I pointed out last time RIPA came up, it's much more like a search warrant.
See my post here explaining it in more detail and my followup responses which explains, and provides links to the relevant legislation straight from the horses mouth:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1809504&cid=33806568
RIPA is an awful piece of legislation and has no place in a modern democracy, however there are many myths about it like that which you have stated which are simply just fantasy. RIPA is bad, but it's not quite that bad. It needs to be withdrawn from the books either way, but let's not over-dramatise the issue, else legitimate calls for it's removal based on legitimate concerns will just get lost amongst the madness.
He probably meant in in the same way at his last press conference he said the iPod Touch was the largest mobile gaming platform on the planet having sold double the number of mobile gaming devices as Sony and Nintendo put together. Except, there's about 300 million Nintendo DS' and PSPs out there, but only 30 million iPod touches.
Then there was the one about 275,000 iPhone activations per day on average, which would equate to 100 million a year, except even their best iPhone quarter so far they've only shifted 14 million, which if they kept up over a year would be 56 million, but that figure is roughly only the total sales of the combined set of iPhones over the last 3 and a half years.
Sometimes when Steve says things, I'm sure they're right in his little world, but it's best to always look at Steve's comments in that way- I think he gets a bit confused between fantasy and reality. There's no doubt that the iPhone is a resounding success, and the iPod touch is far from being a flop or anything like that, but the things he comes out with, just don't even make sense, and don't hold up to the cold hard numbers that his own company releases in it's quarterly reports. At best the numbers he uses in public conferences are grossly unrepresentative of the reality of the situation, at worst they're just completely and utterly made up.
I'd have a lot more respect for the man if he was content with the success of his products as is because there's no doubt they're succesful, but the fact he has to inflate the numbers to the extreme and enter into fantasy territory sometimes does actually make me question whether the guy is even sane and hasn't just completely lost the plot. Like you say, he's either ignorant of his own companies figures, or just likes to outright lie- or as I say, he's just fucking nuts.
You seem to have some insecurity complex about your country such that you feel the need to remain in denial about it's ability to ever do anything wrong. I didn't say our government is free of blame- of course they are, if not only for trusting US military intelligence more than they should. The fact our government screwed up royally doesn't change the fact the US fed false intelligence to us and hence doesn't change the fact a supposed ally - the US - manipulated us in a way that was a major factor in what turned out to be an illegal war.
You're more than welcome to blame our government too, I do, but the blame isn't mutually exclusive, it's not one or the other, the US is still very much to blame as well, very much in the wrong, and most certainly did influence our decision to go to war based on false evidence. It's sad that you're only capable of seeing things in such a binary manner by assuming that if someone blames the US for something then they're inherently inable to see fault in their own country, that's a rediculous viewpoint, but it's apparently one you have all the same.
Just because our government deserves some blame, doesn't mean your government deserves none.
"Not necessarily. If Assanage wanted to release the exact details of his rejection he's more than free too - but, like with pretty much every government out there, it is against the law for official bodies to discuss the private details of individuals' interactions with the state."
You seem to be missing the point, Swedish officials aren't saying that he has been given a reason, Assange is saying he hasn't. As they haven't contradicted this- something they could do, because to simply say that he has been given a reason without going into detail as to what that reason is would not breach European data protection laws it seems unlikely that he's lying which you appear to be implying.
The rest of your post focuses on work permits, however this is not what Assange was denied, he was denied a residency permit, which is required for a stay of longer than 3 months. These are two completely separate documents. Your link about good conduct is about citizenship, which is again different to residency which you apparently understand. You can gain residency without being a citizen, and without also applying for a work permit. You seem to have falsely asserted that conduct to become a citizen is the same as conduct to apply for residency which is not necessarily the case, citizenship brings with it a lot of benefits from the right to vote, to the right to consular protection if you get yourself in trouble abroad- as such there are much greater restrictions on who can become a citizen than who can become a resident, because a resident is basically just someone granted permission to have an extended stay. Neither of these documents you have brought up are relevant in this case.
In denying an application for a residency permit the Swedish government hasn't refused him permission to work, nor have they refused him permission to become a citizen. They have refused him the opportunity to stay in Sweden past the standard 90 days meaning that he must leave the country and attempt re-entry if he wishes to return there. They have effectively said that he is not welcome as a long term visitor to the country. The real test will be whether he is denied entry if he attempts to re-enter Sweden.
"I mean if the US really could control every other nation on the planet like people on slashdot think then he would have had a tragic car accident long ago."
So you're saying they can't influence other countries? you're saying the claims in this document are completely false, and that the Swedish authorities actually decided to raid The Pirate Bay off their own back, despite it being unconstitutional in Sweden to do so?
http://torrentfreak.com//images/pirate_mpa.pdf
If the US can get Sweden to raid their own citizens web servers over mere IP infringement, then why would you think getting them to refuse residency to someone who they view as a national security risk is such a far stretch?
Your viewpoint is rather naive in the face of the evidence which reasonably demonstrates the US absolutely does seem capable of influencing the actions of foreign governments.
Christ, I live in the UK and the US hoodwinked us into partaking in a possibly illegal war with them using fake intelligence about WMDs and selling it to our security services as authentic, costing us many soldier's lives, and billions in costs as well as a massive dent to our reputation politically across the globe. You really think pressuring a country to refuse citizenship is that unlikely? seriously?
I wish I lived in your world, where the US government is a harmless puppy incapable of action outside it's borders. Hell, Che Guevara might even have been enjoying his 83rd birthday next June, and Osama Bin Laden might have decided to just go back home to enjoy a peaceful life with his family in Saudi Arabia. I'm sure there's a good few million Iraqis that would appreciate living in that world moreso than the real one too.
Yes, and the flip side of it is that Wikileaks has had it's profile raised by several orders of magnitude amongst the general public, even older folks like my Dad known who they are now.
Didn't work? hardly, mission accomplished I'd say. Assange has been succesful in massively raising the profile of Wikileaks across the globe. The original leak of the Afghan war documents was a far bigger news story than the "Assange has been accused of rape, no he hasn't, yes he has" stories which didn't really make it past local media in Sweden as larger stories, and were footnotes if even mentioned at all in the news in the rest of the world. Whilst my Dad has heard of Wikileaks and what they have done, I can guarantee if I went upto him and said "Do you know who Julian Assange is and what he's been accused of?" he'd look at me blankly.
Julian's story is one that keeps the tech media busy, but that no one outside of that really gives a flying fuck about- the general public simply don't care.
Now if Britney Spears had been accused of rape, well, they'd be all over it.
It's not just cases, my colleague got an iPhone 4 on release, placed it in her bag coming to work the next morning and found the front screen scratched when she took it out. She was absolutely gutted to have managed to scratch it within 24 hours of getting it. She thinks it was probably her keys as she didn't really have anything else that could scratch it in her bag.
I was under the impression the material used for phone screens now was tough enough that short of using something really hard like diamond, even things like steel wouldn't tend to scratch them but in the case of the iPhone 4 this doesn't seem to be true- the question is is this because Apple have used a less strong (cheaper?) material, or if there is some other reason.
Different bees have different needs so you'd really need to see what bees are native to your region and plant out accordingly. I'm sure Google will happily oblige in providing you information as to the types of bees that live where you do and what they like.
Generally you want to find out their colonial habits- some like to build full blown colonies, others are solitary bees, then you need to try and provide for their needs which in the case of solitary bees can be as simple as providing a block of wood with a bunch of holes drilled into it that are maybe a centimetre or two thick. Colonial bees will wants a hive, or a natural area that can provide the conditions and resources they need to build a nest. Then you really just need to find out what plants are favoured by the species of bee you have near you. The problem is that bees like pollen an nectar, but the amount of nectar plants produce can be dependant on climate, so it's hard to give you a blanket species of plant because what may be good in Arizona, may be useless in North Dakota. The way you plant can have an effect too- they'll appreciate large clusters of flowers so that they can fly and sit in between them.
One important point is to avoid using pesticides, systemic pesticides used on ornamental plants seep into the pollen and nectar which bees consume, which makes bees sick. Generally the best way to deal with pests is using organic methods. I grow succulent plants (mostly cacti) in a large greenhouse and maintain within the greenhouse conditions ideal for ladybirds and lacewing- providing homes for them and bring in an artificial stock of prey that isn't a threat to my plants when the pests that cause me problems are temporarily eliminated because these two species of insect eliminate red spider mite and mealy bugs for me without the need for pesticide. The problem with pescticides is that many pests they're designed to control become resistant to them anyway, and some of the stronger ones have been banned because they're dangerous to humans, so they effectively cause a lot of harm to things like bees, whilst failing to offer any worthwhile long term control.
I agree, I'm what would I suppose be categorised as a hard core gamer, so personally for me Kinect's launch titles provide nothing compelling enough for me to be interested in buying it either.
Despite that, the GP's comments are complete FUD, the tech itself seems fine. As I mentioned in another post in reply to Pojut's original comment, I'm a little dismayed that they dropped the quality of the camera so that it can no longer handle hand/finger gestures, which would've been great for FPS games being able to issue commands to AI team mates and such, but other than that it still works pretty much as advertised, you don't need to be stood up (well, unless the game requires it of course- i.e. dance games!), it can easily cope with more than 2 players etc.
It does provide a dimension that Move and the Wii can't at least which is where it may shine- because it's controllerless you can use a controller with it, this means that in games like Guitar Hero it'd now be possible to have players actually move around whilst playing the Guitar, or in games like Lips have people sing into the Microphone and dance as well- not my sort of thing really but I can see how it adds potential we don't yet have in gaming. Whether the potential will ever be reached is a different story of course- for me despite being an early adopter of the Wii, I got it on releaese day, that never ever actually reached it's potential either. I found nearly all the games dull and boring. I'm concerned that Kinect will suffer the same fate- no real innovation to really draw the new control scheme into games with deep mature storylines.
As with everything, all we can really do is wait and see I suppose!