Here's another point to support your argument - I use my TiVo quite a bit to record shows from pay channels (Sopranos just isn't in a convenient time slot for me). There's no commercials to skip, and I'm most definitely paying for the content.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
I should point out that there is no movie of Catcher in the Rye, and probably won't be one until J.D. Salinger kicks it. (And that's only if his estate doesn't honor his wishes.) The dude seems to really hate the movie industry, as evidenced by certain excerpts from the book itself.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
Some of that sounds a little like the labs I did back in Embedded Systems class - learning to program with the peek-and-poke equivalents in BUFFALO on an HC11 (with two data and two index "accumulators"). Our prof actually told us that that was how students in the 70's used to program the school's old PDP-10. It was actually a very entertaining challenge to work with those kinds of limitations.
I like this hands-on idea. For the full experience, though, don't forget to give them an allotment of computer time, then charge them for more when they use it all up the first time they create an accidental infinite loop.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
Sorry if this seems off-topic, but I have a criticism of Katz's choice of review topic.
Am I the only one here that thinks that the premiere of "Lone Gunmen" tonight is a TV review much more suited for Slashdot? I dunno, maybe Katz couldn't get an advance copy of that.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
My mistake - I was still living in the past, I guess. You're right - I just read the kde.org architecture page, and my information was greatly out of date. I apologize. The point I was trying to make, though, is still valid, I think.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
I would disagree that Gnome and KDE need to merge.
Gnome and KDE have different design philosophies on a number of levels. For an example, witness Gnome's full-fledged CORBA approach, and KDE's lightweight CORBA subset approach. Which one is better? I can't say. They both have advantages and disadvantages. The best way to find out is put them both in the field and let the users decide. The beauty of it is, since both are open-source, the best approach is almost sure to win out, while the other will still be supported for compatibility.
In the end, I expect that both will still be around, but the differences will be inconsequential and both's programs will be compatible with the other.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
Sure, it'll teach you how to do math in base three, but practical implementation is another matter. It's not like base-3 isn't used because it would work the engineers too hard. It's just that the benefits (potential compacting of the circuit) don't outweigh the cost of the added complication (and the increase in errors that go along with that).
I dunno - maybe the use of computer aided design tools could make up for this. It might just be waiting for some outside thinker to bring it back and improve computing for all of us. I'm just not betting on it.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
First of all, tristate logic is not base 3 - the three states are high, low, and high-impedance. High impedance differs from low because it can not be used to sink current. Second, error resistance is (theoretically) just as possible with base >2 as with binary.
The Russians developed base 3 logic a long time ago, but it was abandoned and has never been given a second look. Why? It was too difficult to work with. Base 2 logic has a well developed language to describe it in Boolean algebra - well developed for more than a hundred years and so simple it's taught in most high schools. Base 3 or more has no such simple language; think about it - what is 1 AND 2? You'd need a whole new set of mathmatical language to just to lay out the simplest circuits, let alone reduce and optimize them. The more complicated it is to design something, the more likely there'll be errors in the design. Interfacing circuitry is also a bitch - how do you make a button that has three positions?
Of course, this doesn't really apply to storage media - you'd just need a translation layer to go from base-whatever to binary. If anyone knows of any newer developments in base >2, please reply - personally, I find it really interesting.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
Every measurement has an element of error in it, and, in a sufficiently large/complex system, it can never be totally eliminated. However, it can be measured.
What I'm suggesting is that we institute statistical methods in elections that not only let us measure the result, but the error as well. If the results are within each others' margin of error, allow a run-off between the top two. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about demographics to make any specific suggestions, but I'm sure it's possible. If it's not, let me know.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
...Similar to that scheme where they make the size of a file bigger than it is in the file system header. Course, that's easy to get around, just use readcd and rip the iso straight from the disk instead of going through the file system layer and making a new one. It even comes with cdrecord, fer Chrissakes. Works for Win2000:)
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
Course, it doesn't hurt that those are both good, complex, pieces of art that stand up to years of repeated listening. I've got a copy of Abbey Road in my car that's a dub onto normal tape from another tape made from a well worn vinyl record. It's been there for about 7 years now, and I still listen to it every so often. Your argument is interesting, but I really believe that content is the most important thing.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
OK, so far as I've seen, nobody's mentioned this, so maybe I should.
Bit-depth - what does it gain you? The answer is, less quantization noise. Whenever you sample something, the accuracy of each sample is a function of how many bits you're using. The difference between the real and the sampled signals, although not truly random, looks a lot like white noise. This is quantization noise. White noise has a frequency spectrum that's flat across the board, and is therefore impossible to filter out, and a Bad Thing. 16 bits gets you a signal to noise ratio of like 96 db. Not bad at all for home audio, but for the master tapes, you'll probably want something better. Less quantization noise is all, repeat, all, that more bit depth gains you.
Frequency response, on the other hand, is determined only by sampling rate. If you sample a signal with frequencies higher than half your sampling rate, they get aliased. That means they will be reproduced as frequencies different from what they started out as - generally a bad thing. Reconstruction (in a practical way) will also add artifacts. Filtering can fix this (theoretically) perfectly, but again practicality stops perfection. Higher sampling rates have the advantage of moving these artifacts higher, where they are more easily filtered, as well as less likely to be heard in the first place.
The thing that worries me about this system (SACD)is that it sacrifices bit depth for sampling rate. The sampling rate related artifacts can be filtered. Quantization noise, however, can't be.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
You've definitely made a good point - I'd like to expand upon it if I could.
It's not just a matter of documenting the code itself, it should also extend to the program requirements. There should be a clear list and description of everything the program should do. This doesn't necessarily include nit-picking details like, "the program shall have a pull-down list enumerating options for blah located 50 pixels to the right of...," but it should definitely include things like, "the program shall adhere to the html x.x standards as published by...."
Once the requirements are listed, they have to be stuck to, with no willy-nilly adding of features. If there is something you want added or changed, it'll have to be brought up as a requirements issue, and the maintainer will approve or disapprove it before any changes are made.
I really think a process like this would help one of the major problems I've seen with open-source projects, and that's feature drift.
You can't test a program before you have specifically said what it should do.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
But the simply fact is most of the people in the country don't have the money or the time to
spend investing in the stock market.
I just had to point this out. Many, many, many, probably most, employed Americans have money in stock. Don't believe me? Ever heard of a 401(k)? Most pension plans have at least some money in stocks. That includes union pension plans. Never before have more people had more money in stock.
Sorry, but the "only rich, cigar-smoking, old white guys own stock" myth is a misconception that I hate to see propogated. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
Of course, Sneakers was fairly accurate (in certain aspects at least). It was one of the few computer movies that didn't seem more and more inaccurate the closer I got to my Computer Engineering degree.
Course, it flopped at the box office and got almost universally bad reviews. Looks like we're stuck with video game Gibson-ripoff "hacking" scenes at least for the time being.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
Is it just me, or does this program handle something that's better left at the network layer? I'm not an expert on network hardware and protocol design, but isn't host starvation something that should be prevented at that level? That makes sense to me, since you can't always trust other people on the network to throttle themselves.
Other than that, this program doesn't seem to do anything that simple buffering couldn't provide. And, as someone else pointed out, I didn't see a link to the source for these programs. I have absolutlely no problem with that, but they shouldn't advertise source if they don't have links to it.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless,
there would be like two messages here."
There is just one thing you missed. Indiana is one of the most conservitive state in the US (I know, I have the misfortune to live here). There is no special reason for it, just that people that live in the country tend to by conservitive, and Indiana has only one large city, Indianapolis. If you remember the last clinton election, all of the north east corner of the US was for clinton. But right smack in the middle was this ugly glaring red smeer of Indiana voting for Bush.
Keep in mind, Indiana had a Democrat governor for a long time and he was one of the most popular we had (cut the damn vehicle excise tax for one thing). He's now the U.S. Senator.
Indianapolis itself is actually a little on the liberal side, and so's Gary.
BTW, check out this Penny Arcade Comic on the subject. Having gone to school in Terrible Hole, I got more than a good laugh out of it.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Sorry for the mix up - although, if I remember correctly, I only said that it appears to be running Slashcode. I forget, though - it's been a couple days and a lot in between.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Keep in mind, in German, it'll be dot-Oi!, which kinda does have that short-strong combination. Not to mention it could become a favorite of German punks and ska-heads.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Slashdot Mirror
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
I should point out that there is no movie of Catcher in the Rye, and probably won't be one until J.D. Salinger kicks it. (And that's only if his estate doesn't honor his wishes.) The dude seems to really hate the movie industry, as evidenced by certain excerpts from the book itself.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
I like this hands-on idea. For the full experience, though, don't forget to give them an allotment of computer time, then charge them for more when they use it all up the first time they create an accidental infinite loop.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Am I the only one here that thinks that the premiere of "Lone Gunmen" tonight is a TV review much more suited for Slashdot? I dunno, maybe Katz couldn't get an advance copy of that.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Uh, if it's two of them, its not a monopoly is it?
As long as AT&T and AOLTW are in competition, I'm going to feel free to sit back and let them compete over my business.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Gnome and KDE have different design philosophies on a number of levels. For an example, witness Gnome's full-fledged CORBA approach, and KDE's lightweight CORBA subset approach. Which one is better? I can't say. They both have advantages and disadvantages. The best way to find out is put them both in the field and let the users decide. The beauty of it is, since both are open-source, the best approach is almost sure to win out, while the other will still be supported for compatibility.
In the end, I expect that both will still be around, but the differences will be inconsequential and both's programs will be compatible with the other.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Literally, "hochrechnungen" translates to "high reckonings." I'm guessing this would translate idiomatically to something like, "expert opinions."
Again, if I'm not even close or something, just ignore me. Thanks.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
I dunno - maybe the use of computer aided design tools could make up for this. It might just be waiting for some outside thinker to bring it back and improve computing for all of us. I'm just not betting on it.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
The Russians developed base 3 logic a long time ago, but it was abandoned and has never been given a second look. Why? It was too difficult to work with. Base 2 logic has a well developed language to describe it in Boolean algebra - well developed for more than a hundred years and so simple it's taught in most high schools. Base 3 or more has no such simple language; think about it - what is 1 AND 2? You'd need a whole new set of mathmatical language to just to lay out the simplest circuits, let alone reduce and optimize them. The more complicated it is to design something, the more likely there'll be errors in the design. Interfacing circuitry is also a bitch - how do you make a button that has three positions?
Of course, this doesn't really apply to storage media - you'd just need a translation layer to go from base-whatever to binary. If anyone knows of any newer developments in base >2, please reply - personally, I find it really interesting.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Every measurement has an element of error in it, and, in a sufficiently large/complex system, it can never be totally eliminated. However, it can be measured.
What I'm suggesting is that we institute statistical methods in elections that not only let us measure the result, but the error as well. If the results are within each others' margin of error, allow a run-off between the top two. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about demographics to make any specific suggestions, but I'm sure it's possible. If it's not, let me know.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Bit-depth - what does it gain you? The answer is, less quantization noise. Whenever you sample something, the accuracy of each sample is a function of how many bits you're using. The difference between the real and the sampled signals, although not truly random, looks a lot like white noise. This is quantization noise. White noise has a frequency spectrum that's flat across the board, and is therefore impossible to filter out, and a Bad Thing. 16 bits gets you a signal to noise ratio of like 96 db. Not bad at all for home audio, but for the master tapes, you'll probably want something better. Less quantization noise is all, repeat, all, that more bit depth gains you.
Frequency response, on the other hand, is determined only by sampling rate. If you sample a signal with frequencies higher than half your sampling rate, they get aliased. That means they will be reproduced as frequencies different from what they started out as - generally a bad thing. Reconstruction (in a practical way) will also add artifacts. Filtering can fix this (theoretically) perfectly, but again practicality stops perfection. Higher sampling rates have the advantage of moving these artifacts higher, where they are more easily filtered, as well as less likely to be heard in the first place.
The thing that worries me about this system (SACD)is that it sacrifices bit depth for sampling rate. The sampling rate related artifacts can be filtered. Quantization noise, however, can't be.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
It's not just a matter of documenting the code itself, it should also extend to the program requirements. There should be a clear list and description of everything the program should do. This doesn't necessarily include nit-picking details like, "the program shall have a pull-down list enumerating options for blah located 50 pixels to the right of... ," but it should definitely include things like, "the program shall adhere to the html x.x standards as published by ...."
Once the requirements are listed, they have to be stuck to, with no willy-nilly adding of features. If there is something you want added or changed, it'll have to be brought up as a requirements issue, and the maintainer will approve or disapprove it before any changes are made.
I really think a process like this would help one of the major problems I've seen with open-source projects, and that's feature drift.
You can't test a program before you have specifically said what it should do.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
I just had to point this out. Many, many, many, probably most, employed Americans have money in stock. Don't believe me? Ever heard of a 401(k)? Most pension plans have at least some money in stocks. That includes union pension plans. Never before have more people had more money in stock.
Sorry, but the "only rich, cigar-smoking, old white guys own stock" myth is a misconception that I hate to see propogated. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Course, it flopped at the box office and got almost universally bad reviews. Looks like we're stuck with video game Gibson-ripoff "hacking" scenes at least for the time being.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
(sorry, but I just love gratuitous quotes)
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Other than that, this program doesn't seem to do anything that simple buffering couldn't provide. And, as someone else pointed out, I didn't see a link to the source for these programs. I have absolutlely no problem with that, but they shouldn't advertise source if they don't have links to it.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
Keep in mind, Indiana had a Democrat governor for a long time and he was one of the most popular we had (cut the damn vehicle excise tax for one thing). He's now the U.S. Senator.
Indianapolis itself is actually a little on the liberal side, and so's Gary.
BTW, check out this Penny Arcade Comic on the subject. Having gone to school in Terrible Hole, I got more than a good laugh out of it.
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."
"If I removed everything here that I thought was pointless, there would be like two messages here."