Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:You mean... (Score 1) 191

by tlhIngan (#47917565) Attached to: AT&T Proposes Net Neutrality Compromise

And, your ISP isn't going to pay any attention to how you mark QoS in what you send out.

For IPv4, QoS simply means reordering packets so achieve low latency for applications that need it (VoIP, ssh), moderate priority for applications commonly used but transfer a lot of data (http, ftp), and low priority for packets used for stuff that could saturate both ends and cause issues with other applications (e.g., bittorrent, p2p)..

On IPv6, there is a QoS field, and you can bet once the switchover starts happening, you'll find ISPs charging by the QoS flag. I wouldn't be surprised if there was going to be a pay-by-the-packet scheme where high priority traffic gets billed separately from low priority "normal" traffic. Or that ISPs won't try to jitter or otherwise cause issues with low priority traffic to encourage use of the higher paying transport.

Comment: Re:I disagree (Score 1) 141

by tlhIngan (#47917519) Attached to: Why Apple Should Open-Source Swift -- But Won't

There is this part of the open source community that is quite willing to help - but requests that for their help, you are effectively losing control over your own work. That's why Apple dropped gcc. I think they can live without you.

No, the reason Apple invested a ton of money and development effort in LLVM (it started around 10.4/10.5 when the first Clang/LLVM compiler was offered as an alternative to gcc) was GPLv3.

Apple was paying very close attention to what the GPL was evolving into, decided they didn't particularly like the changes and decided it would be best to part ways. They saw that LLVM offered a reasonable alternative with a nice license, but was somewhat lacking, so Apple went and invested a LOT of effort into getting LLVM to a state where it could be used for production code. Including the creation of a C front end (Clang).

That's the reason they ditched gcc, and practically everything else. The GPLv3 was going to be an issue for Apple, so Apple ditched all the GPLv3 and soon-to-be GPLv3 code in their OS. It's why 10.6 shipped with a piss-poor SMB/CIFS stack because Apple had to rewrite it when they couldn't use Samba anymore (GPLv3).

The last commit Apple made to gcc was to support Grand Central Dispatch. That's it.

It's also why projects like FreeBSD have migrated away from gcc as well to LLVM - it's mature enough to switch out.

Comment: Re:Never been a fan of multiplayer. (Score 1) 230

by tlhIngan (#47917419) Attached to: The Growing Illusion of Single Player Gaming

So you're tired of being fragmeat in arena shooters and diss the entire multiplayer gameplay because of it
That's awfully shortsighted. For me this spastic experience is the most exhilerating gameplay
I can sign up for and I have played these games online since quakeworld. Nothing beats a quick quake3 or ut99 game
Try Left 4 Dead 2 or the man vs machine mode in Team Fortress 2 if you want coop.

Nothing wrong with that. But if I'm going to spend my precious time playing a game, I want to enjoy it. Getting fragged in seconds may be fun the first 10 times or so, then it just becomes a drag and rapidly degrades into pointlessness and in the end, just means wasted time. I could've played Angry Birds in that same time and at least felt entertained rather than bored and annoyed (you can only sit at respawn screens and loading screens for so long).

Some people don't mine and can spend hours racking up deaths by the hundreds (I guess trying to see how many decimals the K/D ratio goes?). Most people find that a frustration and then move on. And if multiplayer doesn't appeal, then the single player side better or the game purchase was a waste.

Comment: Re:It's not your phone (Score 1) 575

Unlimited data plans on cell phones are not very common these days. I think people have a right to be upset if 100M gets sent to them unexpectedly.

Two things.

1) "Download Purchases Automatically" is NOT the default setting. It's off. (It's slightly confusing in that it really means if you purchase something on your account somewhere else - iTunes, another iOS device, etc - it will also be downloaded on the device also rather than just where you bought it).

2) The option to use cellular data is also OFF by default, so it only downloads when you're on WiFi. No extra bills here.

And to be honest, it really just seems to be a case of a bunch of people wanting to make some noise over a complete non-issue. Given the actual transfer happened on Tuesday during the keynote, and it's reporting was idle and sporadic, it really is just a tempest in a teapot.

I just looked at it on Tuesday, went "neat" and went about my day. It never downloaded to any of my devices (but the option remains open), but then again, I don't have the checkbox enabled. If you have more than one iOS device, you tend to keep it off because you don't want to accidentally fill up your other devices when you download a bunch of free stuff.

Comment: Re:iPhone 5S is already 8th fastest (Score 1) 206

by tlhIngan (#47909101) Attached to: Early iPhone 6 Benchmark Results Show Only Modest Gains For A8

(source note 1-7 and the next 22 are all double the clock speed and quad core)

so indeed, few will care about whatever speed increase the 6 brings.

Actually, the problem is the benchmarks don't run long enough because you cannot achieve the speed usefully on quad-cores.

The problem is thermal - if you try to get all 4 cores going full tilt (and most of the time, you don't), you're going to hit the thermal limit within a minute. (Most benchmarks run under 30 seconds for that test). And once you hit that, performance and drop rather substantially. From thermal models I've seen, in free space with best cooling possible, you're going to hit max junction temperature in a minute and you have to throttle back two cores to 50% to keep it at max.

But that's ideal conditions - where you effectively only have 3 cores available. Most of the time you won't have that, and you'll find those two extra cores are clocked to 25% or slower of the top speed.

I'm sure the numbers are going to be more interesting if the benchmarks were re-run over and over again without letting the CPU cool down to see what the max sustained processing speed is.

Comment: Re:reading the results wrong (Score 1) 206

by tlhIngan (#47908963) Attached to: Early iPhone 6 Benchmark Results Show Only Modest Gains For A8

Oddly enough, pushing pixels is the only sane reasons for doing 64 bit operations on a hand held device. If your not using more than 4 gig address space, going from 32 bits to 64 tends to mean you spend far more time moving pointers that have all zeros in the top half. Old stats showed the best a 64 bit PCU tends to do is about 6% worse based on average loads but operations with lots of indirect operations (like Java) it can be far worse.

Not on ARMv8.

ARMv8 only runs 32-bit (AArch32) code moderately faster than ARMv7. But if you can recompile the code for 64-bit (AArch64), you get an immediate speed boost because AArch64 makes several optimizations by getting rid of some legacy cruft in the old AArch32 architecture. (Some things, like conditional execution of instructions were great back in the day, but modern superscalar processors make that very inefficient because you're going to have to speculatively execute everything)

So one reason is pure speed.

Comment: Re:Go video go... (Score 1) 208

by tlhIngan (#47908841) Attached to: SanDisk Releases 512GB SD Card

First, I don't know how any of this is handled in Windows Phone or if there are any hacks or workarounds. All my smartphones have been Android.

Android (at least ICS) does allow this, though in a somewhat limited form, and it wastes^H^H^H^H^H^Huses more space than storing them on the phone. Another way if you have it rooted is the Link2SD app, which does some symlink trickery to put the app on the SD card exactly as it is on the phone. None of this allows easily transferring purchased apps to a new phone though. With the official way they're encrypted, and with the Link2SD way there's no easy way to transfer the links and the stub that says it's installed.

However, moving purchased apps to a new device is already pretty easy. I associated a new device with my Google account, went to Play Store, My Apps, all. It listed all apps I had purchased for my old phone and gave me the option to install each of them on my new one.

On iOS, it's a bit easier still, if you don't mind using iTunes. You just back up your phone, then when you get your new one, you restore from that backup.

It does two things - one, it means you have a LOCAL BACKUP of everything (including apps - Apple or the developer may remove apps, but if you have a local copy, you can always reinstall it on any device on your account!). Because the problem with the Google and Microsoft methods are, when you update, some apps inevitably go missing from this transition as they're no longer available and you cannot install them because you forgot to backup the APK.

Yeah, you can use iCloud. But that still suffers from the removed-app problem and the not-a-local-backup option.

Android did have a half-hearted attempt at a backup system using adb but it didn't save everything that was accessible over MTP, so you needed to copy everything from MTP when you did your adb backup, and then when you restored, you needed to copy everything back.

Comment: Re:Ion strengthened? (Score 2) 200

by tlhIngan (#47906105) Attached to: Sapphire Glass Didn't Pass iPhone Drop Test According to Reports

Is that $3 to replace a scratched screen, including all the AR coatings? At that price they might as well include three spare glass plates with every phone in case you scratch one.

That's the cost of the glass plate. (Note: Traditionally the iPhone uses Gorilla Glass, but for some reason I don't know why Apple and Corning couldn't come to a marketing arrangement. Probably because Apple traditionally doesn't hype up the products of its suppliers - so it may be Gorilla Glass, but Apple will never use the term).

Don't forget modern phones have a touchscreen embedded on the plate, followed by a bit of regular glass, followed by the LCD fabricated right on the glass as well so the touchscreen and display form a single unmoving unit. Alas, this extra processing means your $3 plate now costs $20 to manufacture, and maybe $25 after amortizing defective displays.

So no, the front glass is not just a single piece, it's the whole display assembly.

Comment: Re:Great one more fail (Score 1) 574

by tlhIngan (#47906051) Attached to: High School Student Builds Gun That Unlocks With Your Fingerprint

Just what I need in a firearm. One more area that can fail epically. Also yet another battery to carry and eventually run out of.

Call me crazy but none of my firearms accidentally go off.

I understand there may be times when the use of gun to harm another human is necessary.

However, there are perfectly normal situations where you own a gun and this technology is perfectly acceptable.

There's a rather large contingent who really only use a gun for recreation. Perhaps they hunt. Or shoot targets (paper, clay. metal, whatever). They don't need a gun for constant companionship or ready access, they just have it for fun.

Perhaps after a day at the range or after bagging some animals, they head to the bar. Well, the gun's not put away, and there's a risk of your vehicle being broken into (actually quite common in the city). Well, it's one more thing that would make it worthless to someone and one less gun for druggies shooting at random people or whatever people do with stolen guns.

Yes, some people want it for protection. Others want it because they look cool (there's more than a few people who buy an AR and load it up with optics and grips and other accessories, only for it to sit on the shelf because they never have any intention of shooting it - just that it looked cool in Call of Duty and they wanted it).

Guns are versatile - there's lots of uses for them. In places where they're regulated, well, you often don't need one for protection but can often own one for recreational purposes.

So having the option makes sense - if you're going out to use it, you charge up the batteries and be done with it.

(Off-topic - why is it the real gun nuts take offense when they evacuate and leave guns out in the open, unguarded in an unlocked house often visible from the street, and the police come around and put it away for safe-keeping? I mean, is it somehow more offensive that the police are holding the guns for you (with a promise to return them) than if some random stranger decided to go and rob you? Perhaps it's less offensive if they were "stolen" by the police? The guns were right there waiting to be stolen, after all. Anyone else could've done it had the police not swept the area for items people may leave behind that are valuable)

Comment: Re: illogical captain (Score 1) 860

by MickLinux (#47903061) Attached to: Why Atheists Need Captain Kirk

First, there are two kinds of atheism: active and passive atheism. Active atheism is a religion. It is an active belief, even a need, that there MUST BE NO GOD.

Passive atheism again is of two kinds. The first is actually a form of self-worship, and is the most common; in the end, such a passive atheist ends up enslaved to many things. The second, I think to be extremely rare, but is more of an unawareness of God.

That last kind of atheism, yes, is not a religion.

As far as it goes, it takes actual believing effort to ignore or deny the gaps. Moreover, when I talk of gaps, they are different for you and for me, because I have no gap for (for example) the Bible, Noah's flood, and asteroids. You may have no gap for asteroids, but have a gap for Noah's flood. BOTH of us have gaps for the severity of the asteroid problem: is the Holocene Working Group more right, or is the traditional interpretation of asteroid frequency more right? We discuss and read and argue, but currently we don't know.

The gaps don't terrify either the Christian or the atheist, surely. To say otherwise is to be hot-winded. But the gaps are evidence that one's current working theory might be wrong. And my point was that to be SURE in your atheistic faith (for an ironic association of terms), you have to deny the gaps.

I acknowledge the gaps. Maybe that is why I can be a Christian, and yet sometimes be on the edge of despair. But that isn't all of it. Some of it has to do with the future I see. Some of it has to do with the people around me. A lot of it may have to do with my own biochemical and genetic makeup. As I wrote before, I'm not quite 100% sure what the source is. It may not matter.

Comment: Re: illogical captain (Score 1) 860

by MickLinux (#47902959) Attached to: Why Atheists Need Captain Kirk

Reeves showing how he 'flew' as superman using special effects, did not debunk the annual migration of geese.

Or again, the proof that 99.99999% of people do NOT have eidetic memory does not prove that Tesla was a fraud, and all his inventions nonsense. I happen to claim that I know one of few in our country who has been documented as having such memory, and it has caused her great trouble.

To put it shortly, yes thereeare frauds and chareletans.

There also exist the works of God, and there also exists healing. The first does not compare with the second.

The woman who was healed, a family friend of ours, seems to be okay with it.

Comment: Re:That title needs work, for one thing (Score 2) 93

by tlhIngan (#47900717) Attached to: Early Reviews of Destiny: Unfulfilled Potential

Don't forget they fired their award winning composer who'd been with them since Marathon (?) days & treated him bad while doing so - made me wonder what was going on over there at the executive level (and add a bit of apprehension for this game's release - which turned out to be warranted).

The problem is Activision. That's the problem with Activision - they are all about the money, and even Kottick's admitted to it. And they've already forced Bungie's hand - it's presumed Activision put pressure on Bungie's board to fire Marty. He's been there since the beginning I believe - one of the founding members.

Unfortunately, Marty had the last laugh. First, the courts awarded him unpaid overtime and vacation accrued ($30K, plus another $30K for being idiots for not just giving it to him, and $40k in attorney's cost). And in the past couple of weeks, the courts also re-awarded him Bungie Founder's Shares, that Bungie tried to illegal take from him.

Well, the courts ruled that according to the terms of issuance, yes, Marty is due all his shares (even ones that weren't issued yet), undiluted. The argument that he left was invalid since the only way the shares could get cancelled was if he voluntarily left. Since he was forced out, he's still due all shares. And Bungie even protested saying Marty would use his shares to screw up the business because he holds powerful shares as an ex-employee forced out. The judge disregarded that reason basically stating that Bungie made the bed.

So $100K and powerful shares because Activision didn't want him. (Probably because he cost a lot of money and with Paul McCartney's special track). And Marty's not obliged to sell those shares, either. So he technically still has a say.

Bungie's following the path of Blizzard - from great gaming company to hollowed out shell coasting on a name.

Hell, Bungie/Activision made a super classic mistake - they didn't let game reviewers have a go in advance. The cynical response (and history has shown it to be true) is that it's because the game is so bad, they can at least count on a few early sales before reviews basically end up killing sales. They tried to couch it in terms of "we want everyone to evaluate it on the full content with real players" but that rings hollow - the easiest way to do that is to recruit a bunch of beta players for a special play session for reviewers.

Ars Technica wasn't kind to it either. Their same-day early review showed a lack of content (though they were kind in saying "the servers worked". Their later review calls it "Rent it" saying there's not enough content for whatever-kind-of-game-it-is.

Somehow, after taking 4 years to do it (2010 - Halo Reach), to release this disappointment means that Bungie probably had a few ideas for a Halo MMO like game in the background, then used that. And tons of committee meetings later, well, you have this as everyone tried to get their say in the game. Resulting in something no one is quite sure what it is.

Hell, I suppose the final insult is when Activision reported "shipped" numbers. Well, at least they got a bunch of money from Sony for exclusives.

Comment: Re:illogical captain (Score 0, Flamebait) 860

by MickLinux (#47899933) Attached to: Why Atheists Need Captain Kirk

First of all, religion is not irrational. You have to ignore a ton of evidence about what you cannot explain, to actively deny that there is a God.

Second, though, I think the article and the title are very intuitive, and point out the irony of the department: 'need a way to cheat death'. Because one of the real complete failures, as you have noted, is the need-to-cheat-complete-meaninglessness.

And most religions, whether utter nonsense, or really evil, or extremely dangerous, do offer some kind of meaning, even if it is false. And that is probably why many atheists, while officially of that religion, in fact end up believing in government as god. They need something to fill the void, and government really reeeally wants to.

Not that there isn't a level of dispair there: there will be. If I. as a Christian who has seen healings, and experienced the voice of good, and seen his power, can bounce along on the edge of despair, surely someone with less evidence might as well.

And I'm not 100% sure why.

"I have more information in one place than anybody in the world." -- Jerry Pournelle, an absurd notion, apparently about the BIX BBS

Working...