I hate it when people misuse the word exponentially to mean big.

At best, it will allow the current exponential growth to increase.

I'm not too keen on labelling every line, but if only there was some kind of automatic machine which could maniuplate numbers really quickly and flawlessly track and update cross-references...

Some basic variants acquired automatic renumbering 30 years ago, complete with updating goto/gosubs if you still insisted on using them, when the language provided proper functions. See e.g. BBC basic, and the REN. command.

I think it's a little longer than that: the BASIC on the HP3000 had structured programming (and other modern features), in the 1970s.

OK, I guess he needs to loose the flares and ghetto-blaser, then.

I'm not an expert on BASIC history. I was thinking of BBC basic, which I used a lot. It debuted in '82. It doesn't surprise me much that it wasn't the first BASIC with structure.

And you avoid learning GOTO.

What the hell is it with the BASIC detractors just making stuff up? BASICS with full structure have been available since 1982. That's 29 years ago. Seriously, loose the mullet and the walkman and join the present day.

You seem to have missed one of the major sources of fuding, if not the most major source. People and businesses want the softwarefor some reason, so they work on it or pay others to work on it. See e.g. IBM.

An action of this type not does not amount to a defense of freedom of speech and transparency at all.

Actually it does. The government is avoiding the censorship laws by essentially making veiled threats to companies doing the censorship for them. It seems people are responding by making slightly less thinly veiled threats in the opposite direction to prevent the government from using the companies to skirt the law.

But what about the companies caught in the middle? Well, they ammassed so much wealth and power that they put themselves in the middle. Once you get big enough, it is no longer possible to keep the devil may care, only beholden to the shareholders attitide, in the real world.

quite rightly distancing itself from Wikileaks because of some very illegal activities.

What is wikileaks doing that is illegal? And are they distancing themselves from the newspapers that are republishing the leaks? It's not quite right. It is a couple of very large corporations colluding to remove freedom of speech, when the speech in question reflects badly on them.

When AMD first released the Opteron and x86-64, they beat the pants off Intel, especially in SMP because they had Hybertransport versus Intel's rather dated FSB, not to mention the Netburst architecture which failed to scale to 20GHz.

Also, the 6100's currently get more FLOPS/socket than Intel, provided your workload can scale from 32 to 48 cores for a 4 socket motherboard. AMD also win on Flops/$, again assuming reasonable scaling.

Ok, ok, so it's more chauvinism, less racism. Happy?

Excuse me that I don't really make that much of a difference between two things I find pretty much equally despicable.

Huh? How is the belief that the majority of people share some negative attribute chauvanism?

To give you an example, to say Mexicans are generally lazy is racism.

To be pedantic, not necessarily (and ignoring that "Mexican" is not a race). For instance, if someone asked "do you think most Mexicans are lazy?". An appropriate answer might be "yes", if you believed that most peole (and therefore most Mexicans, most caucasians, most women, most men, most one-armed people, etc) are lazy.

Or, you know there are at least 561269 on shashdot and some of them hae different opinions.

I support transparency, but I get the impression that Assange is a hypocrite and egotistical douche.

So? You have to be a pretty unusual person with a very strong personality to do what he does. And what does it matter if he is an asshole? He's an asshole that airs important shit for the whole world to see, so to speak.

This doesn't mean that remote rendering won't be possible with Wayland, it just means that you will have to put a remote rendering server on top of Wayland.

Ah, that will lead to a lovely integrated experience where the user gets to choose their own window manager.

experimenting with new protocols is easier.

That is utter rot. On X11, you can bring up a GL enabled window in about 20 lines of code. Once that is done, you can experiemt with new protocols until you turn blue with no further inteference from X11.

They trim off all the useless fat

No, they don't. They cache things locally to reduce round trips and therefore cut down on latency. They are also strongly based on X11 and frankly blow RDP and VNC out of the water in terms of speed, responsiveness and general quality.

Anyway, X runs fine on OS X.

No, it doesn't. It doesn't integrate well with the base system, and you have to put up with either OSX window management or running X fullscreen. One of the most marvellous features of X is that it allows people to choose their windowmanger. On OSX if you do that it is really terribly integrated.

The same will happen on Linux if wayland gets traction. It will be probably the worst thing to happen.