Re: Impressive
That was true even before Linus sat down to create it. He was well aware, for example, of Tannenbaum's Minix system. I expect it will remain true for some time to come. Fusion-powered micro-kernels for the win!
8168 publicly visible posts • joined 14 Jun 2007
It is blocked in the UK (and much of Europe, I believe) because lawmakers issued some kind of legal notice to all the ISPs within their jurisdiction.
I'm not sure quite how the blocking has been implemented. "drill"-ing Google's DNS server informs me that the address of www.rt.com is 178.176.128.128, but although I can ping that I don't seem to be able to point a web browser at it. The connection just gets reset. Perhaps someone else can fill in more details.
"But along came and come morons like John Harvey Jones."
To be fair to him, he didn't create the situation where so many public companies in the UK were worth less as a going concern than as a collection of second-hand assets. He was merely non-moronic enough to capitalise on the situation. Maybe he should have "turned them around", but that's pretty much what the original management had spent the previous 30 years failing to do, so what were the odds that he'd succeed?
The 80s happened the way they did because the 50s, 60s and 70s had left the UK with pretty much the same economy that they had at the end of WW2, but without the captive markets of the empire to prop it up. Meanwhile, over the same period, the Germans had been forced to build a modern economy.
Question: what is the 'bang for the buck' expected at the end of the process?
Three possibilities spring to mind:
1) it turns out that rusty code is no easier to write and/or slower to run. Over time, take-up is minimal and eventually the support is dropped. As a result, we now have a better idea of the properties that a language must have if you want to write a kernel.
2) The opposite. Over time, more and more of the kernel gets rusty and eventually the kernel is just some assembly language routines propping up a lot of rust. As a result, well, same as before except it is C that no-one ever uses again.
3) Something in between, with each language having a well-defined role for different kinds of kernel component. As a result, no-one ever tries to write a kernel without multi-lingual support designed in from the start.
Whatever the outcome, I'm pretty sure we're going to learn something fairly important about how to write an OS. I'm also fairly sure that lesson will carry over to a few other large software projects.
I stand corrected. Apparently 1993 (v5) is when Excel acquired a scripting language.
However, I do take issue with your implication that internet integration is required for it to be a fair comparison. Cloudy Excel only needs internet-ready scripting because some doofus has chosen to put an internet between the script and the spreadsheet. This is re-inventing something that we already had, to solve a problem that most of us didn't ask to be created.
The wavelength of 1THz light in vacuo is 0.3 millimetres. On silicon, probably nearer 0.1. Probably achievable, but you CPU die will have to be a cluster of tens of thousands of essentially independent CPUs, each with many times fewer transistors than we have now because we can't shrink transistors *much* further than we do now. (They are already only a few dozen atoms across.)
I don't understand the downvotes here. It seems pretty obvious that the only reason for Artemis is willy waving.
If you actually wanted to establish infrastructure or do science on the Moon, you'd use robots. The round-trip latency is only half a second and without the need to support life and bring it back, the deliverable payload is vastly greater and cheaper.
Actually, even if you want people on the Moon, you ought put some infrastructure there first. The current plan is just reckless.
And there was the example cited earlier, of scheduling a meeting at "local time X". What the Chilean government have effectively done is change the meaning of that data after the fact. This isn't something that your meeting software will even be aware of unless it follows the local news.
"Why does Microsoft make such a big deal about updating a data file?"
Because although updating the file is easy in principle, half your user base isn't going to do it, some unknown population of third-party applications will screw up because their programmers had never heard of using UTC internally, and still others will screw up because the distance between UTC and local has changed in between generating the UTC value and the time it actually refers to.
DST is a god-awful mind-fucking mess even when it is well-defined. Actually changing DST is stupid. Changing it within a week or two of the changeover date is self-harm.
Do we really have capitalism any more?
When the really big players get juicy contracts for doing bog-all with no penalty clauses for gross incompetence or non-delivery and in the unlikely event that they go bust can expect a government bail-out ... I'd say not.
minute fraction of computer users
I know lots of normal people. Really, I do. I don't think I know anyone who doesn't think computer interfaces suck donkey balls. They tell me about it, unsolicited. They ask me if there is a reason. Sadly, telling them that their UX suffering is caused by prima donna designers and willy waving contests in management rarely improves their mood.
Is it just software entropy?
Whatever, it seems perfectly reasonable and is one of the principle motives for re-factoring, the other being technical debt.
You'd have been quicker wiping it and installing Windows from a USB stick. That takes much less than an hour.
But it does rather assume that you have such a stick handy and obviously 99% of users don't. Sad, really. The ability to erase crap and make devices usable again is now a kind of superpower possessed by a handful of users.
"What you cannot find is an attempt to systematically analyze what agile has taught us about software engineering and project management, in its own terms or in the context of the total history of software."
What does that actually mean and how is it different from the previous sentence?
"You can easily find many discussions of how well it did these things, whether its time has passed, and what strengths and weaknesses have been exposed over two decades."
No, but I thought this was interesting...
"The numbers aren't great in academia either. Less than 14 percent of authors listed on ML papers are women, and only 18 percent of authors at top AI conferences are women. "
...bearing in mind that someone was complaining the other week that only 10% of CS undergraduates are female. It isn't academia where they are dropping out. I've seen similar figures for other STEM subjects over many years. It's teenagers who are making these life-changing decisions.
For certain kinds of decision, however, China is *tiny*, having only a handful of people who are allowed to think.
You may like to believe that economic and technical questions don't fall into that category, but just ask yourself how many times politicians in the west interfere in such decisions. It's a nuisance here. It's the end of the discussion there.