I might just be missing the point, but it seems that if the kernel or any other opensource project forks, it will be up to the users to decide which ones keep being developed. If no one uses the new fork when it becomes stable, the developers of that fork will most likely stop the development on it.
As well, while reading over that article, it seems that alot of things used by Linux users is a fork, so forking might not be the worst thing in the world.
Ok, I might be mentioning some things that people already said but here are a few things that popped into my mind upon reading the article in The Times:
1) Most of the comments I have read all talk about the fact that quantum is bulky and too big to fit into a handheld device, while I am not disputing this, because I don't know to much about quantum computing, the article never mentions anything about the handheld device being quantum. It says: "mixture of quantum computing and special optical technology" which to me reads like it could be a ton of different machines, and not all the proccessing was done inside the handheld device.
2) "As one member of EIQC, who wished to remain anonymous, predicts: "While quantum computers may be some time off" This quote right here is very misleading to me. A member of EIQC said this, but the EIQC had nothing to do with this device. This device was developed by the Israelis, not the EIQC, and I am not even sure if Israel is even a member of the EIQC.
See, change the situation a bit though. You own a grocery store, one of several in town, and the more people you can get to go to your store, the more money you get through ads. Now you would have one of two reactions:
1) You could be happy that there will be more people using your store (these won't count as customers for ads, because they don't see it)
2) Or you could view it as someone using the infrastructure you already built and profiting on it himself, because he gets money for ads as well. and you don't.
I agree with you, but their reasoning is 100% fiscal, they don't care about how often someone bids, or how often a sale gets made, they just care if they get their cash through marketing. Just another perspective...
For me, I care more about being able to get 384kbps while walking through the mall.
It would also be a big risk to hand these devices to most people. I already get freaked out when I am driving and I see a minivan with mom driving while talking on her phone and telling the kids in the back to be quiet. Does she or any other driver really need another visual thing to worry about?
Give me that 384kbps connection while I am walking through the mall, I would love that.
Slashdot Mirror
I might just be missing the point, but it seems that if the kernel or any other opensource project forks, it will be up to the users to decide which ones keep being developed. If no one uses the new fork when it becomes stable, the developers of that fork will most likely stop the development on it.
As well, while reading over that article, it seems that alot of things used by Linux users is a fork, so forking might not be the worst thing in the world.
Patryn
Ok, I might be mentioning some things that people already said but here are a few things that popped into my mind upon reading the article in The Times:
1) Most of the comments I have read all talk about the fact that quantum is bulky and too big to fit into a handheld device, while I am not disputing this, because I don't know to much about quantum computing, the article never mentions anything about the handheld device being quantum. It says: "mixture of quantum computing and special optical technology" which to me reads like it could be a ton of different machines, and not all the proccessing was done inside the handheld device.
2) "As one member of EIQC, who wished to remain anonymous, predicts: "While quantum computers may be some time off" This quote right here is very misleading to me. A member of EIQC said this, but the EIQC had nothing to do with this device. This device was developed by the Israelis, not the EIQC, and I am not even sure if Israel is even a member of the EIQC.
Any help with this would be much appreciated.
--Patryn
See, change the situation a bit though.
You own a grocery store, one of several in town, and the more people you can get to go to your store, the more money you get through ads. Now you would have one of two reactions:
1) You could be happy that there will be more people using your store (these won't count as customers for ads, because they don't see it)
2) Or you could view it as someone using the infrastructure you already built and profiting on it himself, because he gets money for ads as well. and you don't.
I agree with you, but their reasoning is 100% fiscal, they don't care about how often someone bids, or how often a sale gets made, they just care if they get their cash through marketing.
Just another perspective...
--[Patryn]
For me, I care more about being able to get 384kbps while walking through the mall.
It would also be a big risk to hand these devices to most people. I already get freaked out when I am driving and I see a minivan with mom driving while talking on her phone and telling the kids in the back to be quiet. Does she or any other driver really need another visual thing to worry about?
Give me that 384kbps connection while I am walking through the mall, I would love that.
--[Patryn]