The P90 situation isn't exactly comparable. The reason identical chips were sometimes marketed as 90s and others as 100s was that some of them didn't pass all of the tests that were necessary for them to claim that they successfully operated at 100 MHz, but they did pass the analogous tests for 90 MHz. Thus, the 90s could be made to run at 100, but you'd lose performance or lifespan or something else in one way or another. With MacOS X 10.1, they intentionally crippled some of their products, and marketed it differently, rather than discovered after the fact that some were crippled, due to some sort of manufacturing defect. That way, if you remove the cripple, you actually do get the same resulting product.
one of the main things i use C for is when i want to be unsafe. C lets you fuck with the system in completely arbitrary ways. i program in C because i'm smarter than the compiler, so i want it to let me do whatever i want, and assume i know what i'm doing. when you need to write code that needs to be safe, and you want the compiler to double check everything you do, use java or ML or something...
Re:Bad screenshots for showing anti-aliasing
on
KDE 3.0 Screenshots
·
· Score: 1
umm, he said the type of lossless compression used (which is in fact a type of lzw) was the patented part, not the color quantization...
this is pretty much what they did with radio, recently, and look what happened...now clearchannel owns an enormous amount of the radio stations, everywhere, which leads pretty quickly to/. getting pissed off that they might decide to censor a bunch of songs... how does the FCC think anything different will happen with cell networks?
That's because there's SO little pressure at that altitude. It's nowhere near as big with the same mass of gas at a lower altitude, but the higher you get, the more volume the gas takes up, hence the huge volume at the top of their trip.
I fully support google doing this, because I'd be very upset (with everyone else in the world, of course), if anything ever happened to them. On the other hand, we've been using google forever as the perfect example of ads. We always used to be able to say, "Look at google, they're fully supported by completely unobtrusive, targetted ads, that people actually click on when they're interested!" This change will take away our ability to say that, and, really, the claim seems less convincing when you add on, "...accept for all the money they make off some organizations for access to their specialized features." I'd also worry about them pulling a salon, and slowly making more and more of their formerly "standard" features subscription-based, until you can't do anything except perform one sample search of their choosing without paying huge sums of money. I can justify paying for salon, since I now read it instead of any newspaper, but I'm not sure the same would be true for a search engine.
For now, though, unless they do something that makes it hard for me to do what I can currently do for free, I welcome anything they do to increase their income...
Interesting that one day the government is blaming violent games for every problem the youth of today ever have, and, the next, they're paying for the most realistic killing game ever...
I wonder who'll get blamed next time there's a Columbine-like incident...
This already exists in some places. Not standard equipment, but if you get caught for enough DUIs, you're sometimes given the option of "lose your license, or have one of these contraptions installed." Generally they work by forcing you to breathe into a little tube every time you want to start the car. Too much alcohol, and it doesn't start. Of course, you can always cheat by getting a pair of surrogate lungs, or, failing that, a plastic bag, but maybe by the time you think of doing something like that you'll realize you shouldn't be driving...
I run linux full-time, and am facile with gcc and the like. For smallish apps, I stand by my CLIs, and for anything in any language other than C/++, I wouldn't consider anything else. However, when I'm dealing with enormous programs with hundreds of different classes, dependent on large numbers of even larger libraries, all of which I need to compile myself, MS Visual is really far superior to any of the CLIs available to linux users. It's faster, it's much easier to debug (since it effectively interprets the C++, allowing you to do all those cool things like executing code in arbitrary order at debugtime, and even changing code and rerunning the new version, without a recompile), and being able to look through a list of classes and all of their members instantly is invaluable. The last benefit is that if I'm designing a GUI, I'd always rather do it in a GUI. If I know what my program should look like, it's much simpler to say "The big FOO button goes here." Than fiddling with coordinates, or, even worse, packers, for 20 minutes making it look exactly right. Most of these sound like they're things that could actually be done on a command-line program, so maybe the solution isn't to develop GUI IDEs for linux, but to create more robust CLIs. On the other hand, for some things, a GUI will always be better. (Note that I have yet to develop any HTML document in anything other than windows notepad.exe or console emacs, so I still stand by the old ways for some graphical applications.)
Actually, it turns out that pretty much ALL clothes are produced under less-than-ideal conditions. If the clothes themselves were assembled under acceptable conditions, the fabrics from which they are composed were still almost definitely not. I recently read a report (unfortunately I don't have the URL), that essentially said the only way to get clothes in a non-exploitive fashion is to buy them second-hand.
One of the weirdest facts about pi that i've ever heard is the following: the length of a sailboat, in feet, divided by its hull speed (the maximum speed a boat can go, at which point its bow and stern waves cross so that it can no longer accelerate without planing), in knots, is, you guessed it pretty damn close to pi! Now, by "pretty damn close", I don't mean by an irrational number researcher's standards...it's more like 2 or 3 decimal places...but to a sailor, that's close enough that the "pi" button on the galley's calculator works perfectly.
Eight 8's happening early enough in pi that we'd notice is extremely unlikely, as we can all imagine. This makes it, on first inspection, pretty damn cool that it happens. But then, when you think about it a little more, you realize that while eight 8's is unlikely, "something that humans find interesting" is very likely, mostly because we find so many strings of digits interesting. From that point, it's just random which particular interesting string crops up, since we know one is going to, eventually.
If there's ever a SF series that needs resurrecting, this is it. Although, it might be hard since all of the characters got killed off in the last episode, but I'd be moderately happy even with some network running repeats. "Space" kicked the collective asses of all the other popular SF TV shows that have been on since ST:TNG left the air.
Hoorah!
If by 2, you mean 5....
on
nVidia nForce
·
· Score: 4
So I assume when you say it only has support for 2 PCI slots you mean, "It supports 5 PCI slots, just like all the other AMD-supporting chipsets, but this one board only implemented two of them, which is irrelevant to us because it's merely a reference board and we'll all buy the Asus full ATX that they've already designed," right?
I must say, I'm disappointed that he took out the "vac" part of the shop vac. He didn't really need the space, since the fan and power assembly only takes up the very top part of the unit. If he'd left it on, it would be far more useful: spill your snacks, vacuum it up; spill your drink, still vacuum it up, since shop vacs are cool that way; cpu overheats, but it on blow for a few minutes (no need to spend all the time cutting out holes for the fans along the top of the case).
I used to have a fansite (which still exists, to some extent, but I will not link to, as that's in pretty poor taste...) which, at its peak, got several hundreds of hits a day on the main page, and far, far more on some pages within the site. I wouldn't blame your site's lack of an audience on the audience...
As useful as junkbuster is, it's still going to put some of our favorite websites out of business... I think this is definitely a step in the right direction. If I really enjoy a website, I want them to have enough income to stay alive, and the more options available to get them that income, the better. If I don't feel like paying them out of my own pocket, I can have ads pay them for me. This makes perfect sense. The next step, I guess, would be to combine this with micropayments. "Pay us $.50 to make ads disappear for this session|today|this week|etc."
So someone patents a piece of software, or an algorithm, or the like. The math is not patented ("Math is nothing. It's just a framework that people use for applying thought."), but the software based on that math is. So if I use the same math to write a different piece of software, is it covered by the original patent in question? If unisys's lzw decoder is written in C, can I write a legal GIF decoder in PERL, C++, or Java?
So, any word yet on the impending legal battle against 3M? It turns out they've been manufacturing (for years!) a medium which has been used for its entire lifespan (and still is) to pirate software, music, and all sorts of other illegal data.
I believe it's a list of seperate versions of the device. There are three: one with no multimedia capabilities, one with multimedia capabilities, and one specially designed for wireless connectivity. My theory is corroborated by the article...
Three models Sharp is developing three models for the worldwide market. They are a basic model that can
share data between PCs and PDAs, a multimedia model to enable users to enjoy moving images
and music, and a wireless communication device.
If I wanted to go destroy my neighbor's place, which of the following would be easier?
a) build or purchase a 13'x18'x8' robot worth more than i'll ever have in my entire life, whose stability is questionable and who weighs over 5.5 tons (not sure if my freight elevator is approved for that much...)
or...
b) go out to my local sporting goods store, buy a baseball bat, and do it the old-fashioned way
why does it being called a "robot" necessarily make it so scary? humans are quite good at messing each other up already, and i really don't think 1.1 klbs of aluminum that moves by itself (sorta) is going to make that all that much easier. remember: a shotgun will always be cheaper than a Killer Robot of Death.
Slashdot Mirror
The P90 situation isn't exactly comparable. The reason identical chips were sometimes marketed as 90s and others as 100s was that some of them didn't pass all of the tests that were necessary for them to claim that they successfully operated at 100 MHz, but they did pass the analogous tests for 90 MHz. Thus, the 90s could be made to run at 100, but you'd lose performance or lifespan or something else in one way or another. With MacOS X 10.1, they intentionally crippled some of their products, and marketed it differently, rather than discovered after the fact that some were crippled, due to some sort of manufacturing defect. That way, if you remove the cripple, you actually do get the same resulting product.
Or the more important question: can I make the parent post to every duplicate article, ever?
one of the main things i use C for is when i want to be unsafe. C lets you fuck with the system in completely arbitrary ways. i program in C because i'm smarter than the compiler, so i want it to let me do whatever i want, and assume i know what i'm doing. when you need to write code that needs to be safe, and you want the compiler to double check everything you do, use java or ML or something...
umm, he said the type of lossless compression used (which is in fact a type of lzw) was the patented part, not the color quantization...
this is pretty much what they did with radio, recently, and look what happened...now clearchannel owns an enormous amount of the radio stations, everywhere, which leads pretty quickly to /. getting pissed off that they might decide to censor a bunch of songs... how does the FCC think anything different will happen with cell networks?
what about dance dance revolution?!
That's because there's SO little pressure at that altitude. It's nowhere near as big with the same mass of gas at a lower altitude, but the higher you get, the more volume the gas takes up, hence the huge volume at the top of their trip.
I fully support google doing this, because I'd be very upset (with everyone else in the world, of course), if anything ever happened to them. On the other hand, we've been using google forever as the perfect example of ads. We always used to be able to say, "Look at google, they're fully supported by completely unobtrusive, targetted ads, that people actually click on when they're interested!" This change will take away our ability to say that, and, really, the claim seems less convincing when you add on, "...accept for all the money they make off some organizations for access to their specialized features." I'd also worry about them pulling a salon, and slowly making more and more of their formerly "standard" features subscription-based, until you can't do anything except perform one sample search of their choosing without paying huge sums of money. I can justify paying for salon, since I now read it instead of any newspaper, but I'm not sure the same would be true for a search engine.
For now, though, unless they do something that makes it hard for me to do what I can currently do for free, I welcome anything they do to increase their income...
Interesting that one day the government is blaming violent games for every problem the youth of today ever have, and, the next, they're paying for the most realistic killing game ever...
I wonder who'll get blamed next time there's a Columbine-like incident...
This already exists in some places. Not standard equipment, but if you get caught for enough DUIs, you're sometimes given the option of "lose your license, or have one of these contraptions installed." Generally they work by forcing you to breathe into a little tube every time you want to start the car. Too much alcohol, and it doesn't start. Of course, you can always cheat by getting a pair of surrogate lungs, or, failing that, a plastic bag, but maybe by the time you think of doing something like that you'll realize you shouldn't be driving...
it was fabricated and discussed on national television. it's a bit of a stretch to claim it was "found in the wild".
I run linux full-time, and am facile with gcc and the like. For smallish apps, I stand by my CLIs, and for anything in any language other than C/++, I wouldn't consider anything else. However, when I'm dealing with enormous programs with hundreds of different classes, dependent on large numbers of even larger libraries, all of which I need to compile myself, MS Visual is really far superior to any of the CLIs available to linux users. It's faster, it's much easier to debug (since it effectively interprets the C++, allowing you to do all those cool things like executing code in arbitrary order at debugtime, and even changing code and rerunning the new version, without a recompile), and being able to look through a list of classes and all of their members instantly is invaluable. The last benefit is that if I'm designing a GUI, I'd always rather do it in a GUI. If I know what my program should look like, it's much simpler to say "The big FOO button goes here." Than fiddling with coordinates, or, even worse, packers, for 20 minutes making it look exactly right. Most of these sound like they're things that could actually be done on a command-line program, so maybe the solution isn't to develop GUI IDEs for linux, but to create more robust CLIs. On the other hand, for some things, a GUI will always be better. (Note that I have yet to develop any HTML document in anything other than windows notepad.exe or console emacs, so I still stand by the old ways for some graphical applications.)
Actually, it turns out that pretty much ALL clothes are produced under less-than-ideal conditions. If the clothes themselves were assembled under acceptable conditions, the fabrics from which they are composed were still almost definitely not. I recently read a report (unfortunately I don't have the URL), that essentially said the only way to get clothes in a non-exploitive fashion is to buy them second-hand.
One of the weirdest facts about pi that i've ever heard is the following: the length of a sailboat, in feet, divided by its hull speed (the maximum speed a boat can go, at which point its bow and stern waves cross so that it can no longer accelerate without planing), in knots, is, you guessed it pretty damn close to pi! Now, by "pretty damn close", I don't mean by an irrational number researcher's standards...it's more like 2 or 3 decimal places...but to a sailor, that's close enough that the "pi" button on the galley's calculator works perfectly.
Eight 8's happening early enough in pi that we'd notice is extremely unlikely, as we can all imagine. This makes it, on first inspection, pretty damn cool that it happens. But then, when you think about it a little more, you realize that while eight 8's is unlikely, "something that humans find interesting" is very likely, mostly because we find so many strings of digits interesting. From that point, it's just random which particular interesting string crops up, since we know one is going to, eventually.
Hoorah!
So I assume when you say it only has support for 2 PCI slots you mean, "It supports 5 PCI slots, just like all the other AMD-supporting chipsets, but this one board only implemented two of them, which is irrelevant to us because it's merely a reference board and we'll all buy the Asus full ATX that they've already designed," right?
I must say, I'm disappointed that he took out the "vac" part of the shop vac. He didn't really need the space, since the fan and power assembly only takes up the very top part of the unit. If he'd left it on, it would be far more useful: spill your snacks, vacuum it up; spill your drink, still vacuum it up, since shop vacs are cool that way; cpu overheats, but it on blow for a few minutes (no need to spend all the time cutting out holes for the fans along the top of the case).
I told you we weren't descended from monkeys! We're really descended from kenyanthropi platyops! Sucks for your "evolution", don't it?!
I used to have a fansite (which still exists, to some extent, but I will not link to, as that's in pretty poor taste...) which, at its peak, got several hundreds of hits a day on the main page, and far, far more on some pages within the site. I wouldn't blame your site's lack of an audience on the audience...
As useful as junkbuster is, it's still going to put some of our favorite websites out of business... I think this is definitely a step in the right direction. If I really enjoy a website, I want them to have enough income to stay alive, and the more options available to get them that income, the better. If I don't feel like paying them out of my own pocket, I can have ads pay them for me. This makes perfect sense. The next step, I guess, would be to combine this with micropayments. "Pay us $.50 to make ads disappear for this session|today|this week|etc."
So someone patents a piece of software, or an algorithm, or the like. The math is not patented ("Math is nothing. It's just a framework that people use for applying thought."), but the software based on that math is. So if I use the same math to write a different piece of software, is it covered by the original patent in question? If unisys's lzw decoder is written in C, can I write a legal GIF decoder in PERL, C++, or Java?
So, any word yet on the impending legal battle against 3M? It turns out they've been manufacturing (for years!) a medium which has been used for its entire lifespan (and still is) to pirate software, music, and all sorts of other illegal data.
Three models
Sharp is developing three models for the worldwide market. They are a basic model that can share data between PCs and PDAs, a multimedia model to enable users to enjoy moving images and music, and a wireless communication device.
a) build or purchase a 13'x18'x8' robot worth more than i'll ever have in my entire life, whose stability is questionable and who weighs over 5.5 tons (not sure if my freight elevator is approved for that much...)
or...
b) go out to my local sporting goods store, buy a baseball bat, and do it the old-fashioned way
why does it being called a "robot" necessarily make it so scary? humans are quite good at messing each other up already, and i really don't think 1.1 klbs of aluminum that moves by itself (sorta) is going to make that all that much easier. remember: a shotgun will always be cheaper than a Killer Robot of Death.