Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:The real purpose (Score 1) 61

by Dwonis (#45070707) Attached to: Chromium To Support Wayland
It all runs through an open-source compositor, which can render the video wherever it wants. Wayland even has "frames" built into the protocol; This is in order to avoid tearing, but it would also make it easier to re-encode the video at the correct frame rate.

Remote X11 never really worked properly anyway; It doesn't survive interruptions, and it's basically unusable over high-latency connections (you end up needing to use things like VNC). Network transparency is a nice feature, but X11 embedded it into the wrong layer, and it doesn't really work very well today anyway. Building a VNC server (or maybe something more rich based on streaming video) should be a lot easier under Wayland than it ever was under X11.

Comment: Re:Not compared to accelerated X? (Score 1) 61

by Dwonis (#45070575) Attached to: Chromium To Support Wayland

"Will wayland offer benefits as decreased power usage or better acceleration, compared to using X11?".

Based on playing around with Weston for a weekend, I think it'll get there sooner than you might think. Wayland's developers are familiar with Xorg, so they're not wasting a lot of time with NIH-syndrome rewrites of stuff that works (for instance, Weston uses the same low-level video drivers as Xorg, and xwayland is just a special build of Xorg). The protocol is specifically designed to take "frames" into account (so, no more tearing, ever), so even if it's somewhat slower (which I don't expect), it'll *feel* more responsive.

Flash in Chromium/X11 under xwayland already renders video more smoothly on my machine than it does on native Xorg (well, when rendering doesn't hang or crash xwayland). If you cut out some of the middlemen, I expect it'll only get better.

Comment: Re:Yes, spread the false information. (Score 3, Insightful) 97

Exactly. People who dismiss Wikipedia because of its inaccuracies often forget about what we usually did *before* Wikipedia existed: We made stuff up based on our intuitions, *maybe* talked about it at a coffee shop with a small number of our friends, and believed it as fact. Sure, if we were doing academic research, we were more rigorous (and that's improved, too, IMHO), but how often did that happen? Now, with portable devices that can access the WWW, our first reponse when we're not sure about something is often to look it up.

I can't emphasize this enough: Instant access to the web is resulting in a culture shift from making stuff up to looking it up, and Wikipedia is the most important place where people go to do that.

So, yes, even though Wikipedia is a repository of groupthink (and the critics are right that we mustn't forget that), it's groupthink that takes into account the views of a much larger number of contributors, and is much more accurate than the groupthink of a small, isolated group of people.

Comment: Re:I don't believe him (Score 1) 341

by Dwonis (#42485919) Attached to: Adrian Lamo Explains His Decision To Expose Bradley Manning

I think he got into something that was way more than he expected, and he pulled a c.y.a. move and sent Manning down the river.

Exactly.

Saying he did it for the good of the Afghan people that might be named in the documents seems revisionist.

It's not just revisionist, it's obviously false. He's acting as if those documents were transmitted in secret to the Taliban, and that if it weren't for him, nobody else would know about it. In reality, Wikileaks published the documents, so those Afghan people already had just as much warning, regardless of Lamo's involvement.

Comment: Re:no love for mutt? (Score 5, Interesting) 464

by Dwonis (#42229535) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Current State of Linux Email Clients?

but when you receive mail from business people, it's usually an image embedded in a Word document, or at the very least a pdf. This is where mutt fails.

I'm not sure about images, but mutt has a really fantastic auto_view feature, which will automatically decode HTML email, PDFs, Word documents, etc into text and display it inline in your viewer. When people email me PDFs, I can not only view them without spawning an external viewer, but the PDF/MSWord text gets included in the quoted text when I hit "reply", so I can just reply to their PDF/MSWord text in-line.

One picture is worth 128K words.

Working...