Slashdot Mirror

If you haven't read this you're missing out. It's the "why" that you won't find in a mere programming book. They all focus on the "how". It really opened my eyes, and I give a copy to every person that interns with me to read. http://www.amazon.com/UNIX-Philosophy-Mike-Gancarz/dp/1555581234

The Design and Evolution of C++ by Bjarne Stroustrup

http://www.amazon.com/Design-Evolution-C-Bjarne-Stroustrup/dp/0201543303

This is the book that turned me into a grown up in the world of computer languages. It is the book that brought unparalleled insight and wisdom into every other computer language book, discussion about computer languages, or actual real world use of computer languages since reading.

http://www.amazon.com/Debugging-David-J-Agans/dp/0814474578

Pretty good book. I dont buy many. The others have already been mentioned.

Read it. It puts into words how to debug things.

By "rake off a nice think 30 points" you mean "handle all the hosting, payment processing and promotion" for the content and software in the store, then sure that's "raking in a nice thick 30 points".

Hosting, payment processing etc might cost something in the ballpark of 1-2%, maybe 5%.

Those Apple statements you like to 'get your figures' mention specifically that the iTunes Store is not a large source of profit for apple (not even in the same ballpark as their hardware)

Well, duh. 30% of a $1 sale is not that much, even if you have many sales. Whereas $100 off every iPad sold - and sales numbers in millions - is it any surprise that it drowns the app store out?

You say that Apple is making "at least 50 points" on the iPad, so where are the competitors coming in at even $50 to 100 less?

I dunno, Asus Transformer? 1Ghz dual core, IPS screen, 10" at 1280x800, front and back cameras, MicroSD slot, 9 hours battery life - basically matching or exceeding iPad specs on every count except weight. 16Gb model goes for $400, exactly $100 less than the comparable iPad 2.

Then there's Acer Iconia Tab - same hardware as Transformer, by and large. Sells for $450.

If an iPad-comparable tablet could be sold for $100+ less or more by someone else, it would already be on the shelves - it's not rocket science.

As demonstrated above, it's indeed not rocket science, and so you can find them on the shelves if you bother to look. The problem is that most people don't go shopping for tablets - they go shopping for an iPad.

By "rake off a nice think 30 points" you mean "handle all the hosting, payment processing and promotion" for the content and software in the store, then sure that's "raking in a nice thick 30 points".

Hosting, payment processing etc might cost something in the ballpark of 1-2%, maybe 5%.

Those Apple statements you like to 'get your figures' mention specifically that the iTunes Store is not a large source of profit for apple (not even in the same ballpark as their hardware)

Well, duh. 30% of a $1 sale is not that much, even if you have many sales. Whereas $100 off every iPad sold - and sales numbers in millions - is it any surprise that it drowns the app store out?

You say that Apple is making "at least 50 points" on the iPad, so where are the competitors coming in at even $50 to 100 less?

I dunno, Asus Transformer? 1Ghz dual core, IPS screen, 10" at 1280x800, front and back cameras, MicroSD slot, 9 hours battery life - basically matching or exceeding iPad specs on every count except weight. 16Gb model goes for $400, exactly $100 less than the comparable iPad 2.

Then there's Acer Iconia Tab - same hardware as Transformer, by and large. Sells for $450.

If an iPad-comparable tablet could be sold for $100+ less or more by someone else, it would already be on the shelves - it's not rocket science.

As demonstrated above, it's indeed not rocket science, and so you can find them on the shelves if you bother to look. The problem is that most people don't go shopping for tablets - they go shopping for an iPad.

SDIO Wi-fi cards have been around for ages; I remember trying to find one for my Palm Treo 650 to get it online and not being able to afford it.

one
two

SDIO Wi-fi cards have been around for ages; I remember trying to find one for my Palm Treo 650 to get it online and not being able to afford it.

one
two

Let me recommend a lighted cover. It's really great, though a bit pricey.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003DZ165W

Here's an Amazon book review critical of the disclosure of the password in the book. I registered my support for the critique with a 'helpful' click.

Did you think that through? If you get this review marked as the top negative review it will plainly tell everyone the real world password is in there and probably generate far more curiosity than outrage.

Here's an Amazon book review critical of the disclosure of the password in the book. I registered my support for the critique with a 'helpful' click.

This is too far.

Just stand closer to your monitor. Or if your problem is having tiny Tyrannosaurus Rex arms, maybe get a couple of these Reacher with Magnetic Tip.

Things will get closer. Just don't freak out man!

The stupid thing is, none of those will work with this thing since it only has HDMI and not VGA or even DVI.

http://www.amazon.com/HDMI-VGA-HD15-Male-Cable/dp/B001OLCHJ6
HDMI to VGA HD15 (Male) Cable
9 new from $1.50

Yes. Of course. There are no textbooks at this price range.

What could they have been thinking?

Yes. Of course. There are no textbooks at this price range.

What could they have been thinking?

Yes. Of course. There are no textbooks at this price range.

What could they have been thinking?

Yes. Of course. There are no textbooks at this price range.

What could they have been thinking?

Yes. Of course. There are no textbooks at this price range.

What could they have been thinking?

Yes. Of course. There are no textbooks at this price range.

What could they have been thinking?

Is there a way to detect these, like a wifi signal?

Yes. Nuk Alert. This is a keychain-sized sealed radiation detector with a 10-year battery life. It beeps from 1 to 10 times, based on the log of the radiation level. You can test it with a dental X-ray machine. Price about $170.

Exactly!

Hacking is like mountain climbing -- you do it because you can, not because you can't.

While I don't care for mountain climbing t all, removing (copy) protection is a fun puzzle to work out. Before "kracking" became hijacked with "hacking", learning for the sake of learning was "The [Moral] Code."

IMHO "Puzzles for Hackers" is what every computer scientist should have read, (along GEB)
http://www.amazon.com/Puzzles-Hackers-Ivan-Sklyarov/dp/1931769451/

I don't know, do *YOU* believe that CIA hasn't done these sorts of operations (and much worse) before? In South America, the Middle East, Cuba, Asia...should I go on? Maybe we should do some reading and then come back to my crazy ideas. I'll put on my tin-foil hat and wait while you read.

Just what we need.

That's what our COBOL forefathers used to say. Seriously, I will never understand why people who make their careers in software decide to make statements like that. Yes, there are always problems with language proliferation, but the alternative is stagnation. We always know more about how to make better software over time, and that inevitably brings changes in tools, languages and paradigms. And you cannot foreseen how much variation is too much (or too little) after the fact.

If there weren't people pushing the envelope (even when things go bad), we would still be wondering whether it is possible to write code without GOTO statements or higher-level languages.

From someone who has had to work with JavaScript, I can say that anything that can bring some more sanity to its syntax is a good thing. When one has to rely on a book that explicitly says to cover only its good parts (a good book mind you), that tells you a lot about the language.

Even Brendan Eich, its creator admits its shortcomings (as he was pretty much arm-twisted into rushing in it out before it was ready with a clear mandate to make it look like Java.) Yes, it can be a reliable workhorse, you can still create applications (good applications) with JavaScript as-is ... provided you tuck your elbows, true of any languages, but for a very high-level, sandboxed application language, it is not that much acceptable.

But if there is a language that needs a saner-replacement (even if it is just an abstraction as a source-code compiler), JavaScript is that language. With that analogy, I could write modern apps using Java 1.0 instead of Java 1.5 or Java 1.6, but why would you? Same in this case.

Three felonies a day? Give me a break. You have gone off the deep end.

I am not posting to defend the GP's statements. Instead, I would like to point you to the book Three Felonies a Day, which I have read. It does a good job of showing the pervasiveness with which liberty has been (and continues to be) eroded by inappropriate application of outdated laws and regulations. It was written by a well respected lawyer who champion's individuals' legal rights. It is worth a read.

Kai's Power Goo was ahead of its time...

If you don't want to totally neglect the human side, don't miss this: Einstein's Dreams by Alan Lightman

Except that the parts cost alone is higher than those price points.

Given that e.g. Asus Transformer sells for $399 for 16Gb version, and that price remains the same since its release (so it's not some kind of fire sale there either), I think you're vastly overestimating how much tablet hardware costs. They really do have a very nice profit margin there in iPads - the only reason why other manufacturers originally priced theirs higher is because 1) they don't have the benefit of the economy of scale that Apple has (Apple knows it'll sell several million, others aren't sure), and 2) they're plain greedy - like Motorola with the original crazy price of $800 for Xoom.

Also if you can tell the difference between flac and high ripped mp3s on headphones without listening to them back to back I will eat my headphones.

What flavor do you prefer, or are you just gonna chicken out with earbuds?

We'll use In a Silent Way by Miles Davis, original 1969 LP mastering. I'll just need a minute of samples, but I'll accept 15 seconds if the section is heavy with cymbals.

There is far more serotonin present in your gut than in your skull.

And in this book, the author points out that the link between serotonin levels and well being has never been proven - the drug companies guessed that is how their drugs work.

http://www.amazon.com/Manga-Guide-Relativity-Hideo-Nitta/dp/1593272723/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1314635810&sr=8-1

I would suggest instead "Relativity Simply Explained", by Martin Gardner. Even my best friend, a Lit. teacher with little patience for Algebra or Math. Analysis, understood special and general relativity after reading it.

Something that I always noted in explanations about relativity is that they never tell you which problems it solves, or why it's even necessary to come up with such a crazy theory. That book explained those to me in layman's terms.

Actually, there's a book (haven't read it, just heard about it) that explores the problems that arise from having a legal system in which judges are all former lawyers and systematically favor the legal profession over all others. Part of that is the complexity of the law, like those awful parts of federal law that delegate rule-making authority to executive departments while giving full force of law to those rules.

There's nothing inherently wrong with having lawyers write the law, but there are many things wrong with the system we have. One of the most insidious is something I know from hospitals. Because they receive federal money (from Medicare), they are subject to federal regulation. Some of the laws criminalize conduct that is contrary to the hospital's policies. That's right: break a minor rule in the employee handbook, and the remedy isn't getting fired (which would be extreme, but justifiable). It's being sent to jail.

MTW is a deep book. It can be exasperating (and its treatment of experimental GR is almost laughably out of date), but you can always get more from it.

For the rest, I would recommend Wald and even Weinberg.

MTW is a deep book. It can be exasperating (and its treatment of experimental GR is almost laughably out of date), but you can always get more from it.

For the rest, I would recommend Wald and even Weinberg.

A couple of great "dumbed-down" books I've read: A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking does an excellent job of explaining the basic concepts of relativity Amazon. The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene also does a good job of explaining relativity for the layman as well as Quantum Mechanics and String Theory Amazon.

A couple of great "dumbed-down" books I've read: A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking does an excellent job of explaining the basic concepts of relativity Amazon. The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene also does a good job of explaining relativity for the layman as well as Quantum Mechanics and String Theory Amazon.

I work in cosmology and use general relativity extensively in my day to day work. I have also fielded similar questions from friends and undergraduates, so I can provide you with advice based on my experience.

What approach you use depends on how well you want to understand. I am going to assume that you want to understand the equations and how to manipulate them --- that when asked about the anomalous procession of Mars, you could sit down with a pencil and graphing calculator for an hour and tell them that GR accounts for ~40 arcseconds/century. To get there, you will need to cover a series of courses: Classical Mechanics, Linear Algebra, Special Relativity, Multivariable Calculus, and then General Relativity. If you also study Electromagnetism and Differential Equations, you will get a bit more out of it, but those subjects are not necessary.

Classical Mechanics (prereqs: none): You don't need anything beyond an AP physics level understanding of mechanics, but you do need that. MIT has all of the 8.01 (classical mechanics) lectures online.

Linear Algebra (prereqs: none): You need to understand what a vector is, what a matrix is, what a linear transformation is, and what traces and determinants are. You probably have this knowledge from stats. If not, trys Jacob or any similar text.

Multivariable Calculus (prereqs: Linear Algebra): A standard undergrad book is fine. You need to know how to transform variables and use multivariable differential operators. A standard course is online.

Special Relativity (prereqs: Classical Mechanics, Linear Algebra): Special Relativity is essential for understanding General Relativity. Of particular importance is the 4-vector notation and the Lorentz transformation. A. P. French is one of the classic textbooks.

General Relativity (prereqs: Special Relativity, Multivariable Calculus): The nice thing about introductory Physics texts is that they teach you all the differential geometry you need to understand. The unfortunate thing is they tend to be aimed at Physics graduate students. There are a few undergrad textbooks, but they are not as rigorous and not as worthwhile to read. The classic General Relativity textbook is Misner, Wheeler, Thorne, but MWT is better as a reference text than as a first course. Better textbooks would be Wald, General Relativity, and Carroll, Spacetime and Geometry . Of the two, I would recommend the latter.

You should keep in mind that the texts will be hard and the learning curve will be steep. The best way to understand the material is to do most of the problems in the undergraduate books or all the problems in the graduate texts, and ideally, have someone read over your problem sets. It will, however, be rewarding.

I work in cosmology and use general relativity extensively in my day to day work. I have also fielded similar questions from friends and undergraduates, so I can provide you with advice based on my experience.

What approach you use depends on how well you want to understand. I am going to assume that you want to understand the equations and how to manipulate them --- that when asked about the anomalous procession of Mars, you could sit down with a pencil and graphing calculator for an hour and tell them that GR accounts for ~40 arcseconds/century. To get there, you will need to cover a series of courses: Classical Mechanics, Linear Algebra, Special Relativity, Multivariable Calculus, and then General Relativity. If you also study Electromagnetism and Differential Equations, you will get a bit more out of it, but those subjects are not necessary.

Classical Mechanics (prereqs: none): You don't need anything beyond an AP physics level understanding of mechanics, but you do need that. MIT has all of the 8.01 (classical mechanics) lectures online.

Linear Algebra (prereqs: none): You need to understand what a vector is, what a matrix is, what a linear transformation is, and what traces and determinants are. You probably have this knowledge from stats. If not, trys Jacob or any similar text.

Multivariable Calculus (prereqs: Linear Algebra): A standard undergrad book is fine. You need to know how to transform variables and use multivariable differential operators. A standard course is online.

Special Relativity (prereqs: Classical Mechanics, Linear Algebra): Special Relativity is essential for understanding General Relativity. Of particular importance is the 4-vector notation and the Lorentz transformation. A. P. French is one of the classic textbooks.

General Relativity (prereqs: Special Relativity, Multivariable Calculus): The nice thing about introductory Physics texts is that they teach you all the differential geometry you need to understand. The unfortunate thing is they tend to be aimed at Physics graduate students. There are a few undergrad textbooks, but they are not as rigorous and not as worthwhile to read. The classic General Relativity textbook is Misner, Wheeler, Thorne, but MWT is better as a reference text than as a first course. Better textbooks would be Wald, General Relativity, and Carroll, Spacetime and Geometry . Of the two, I would recommend the latter.

You should keep in mind that the texts will be hard and the learning curve will be steep. The best way to understand the material is to do most of the problems in the undergraduate books or all the problems in the graduate texts, and ideally, have someone read over your problem sets. It will, however, be rewarding.

I work in cosmology and use general relativity extensively in my day to day work. I have also fielded similar questions from friends and undergraduates, so I can provide you with advice based on my experience.

What approach you use depends on how well you want to understand. I am going to assume that you want to understand the equations and how to manipulate them --- that when asked about the anomalous procession of Mars, you could sit down with a pencil and graphing calculator for an hour and tell them that GR accounts for ~40 arcseconds/century. To get there, you will need to cover a series of courses: Classical Mechanics, Linear Algebra, Special Relativity, Multivariable Calculus, and then General Relativity. If you also study Electromagnetism and Differential Equations, you will get a bit more out of it, but those subjects are not necessary.

Classical Mechanics (prereqs: none): You don't need anything beyond an AP physics level understanding of mechanics, but you do need that. MIT has all of the 8.01 (classical mechanics) lectures online.

Linear Algebra (prereqs: none): You need to understand what a vector is, what a matrix is, what a linear transformation is, and what traces and determinants are. You probably have this knowledge from stats. If not, trys Jacob or any similar text.

Multivariable Calculus (prereqs: Linear Algebra): A standard undergrad book is fine. You need to know how to transform variables and use multivariable differential operators. A standard course is online.

Special Relativity (prereqs: Classical Mechanics, Linear Algebra): Special Relativity is essential for understanding General Relativity. Of particular importance is the 4-vector notation and the Lorentz transformation. A. P. French is one of the classic textbooks.

General Relativity (prereqs: Special Relativity, Multivariable Calculus): The nice thing about introductory Physics texts is that they teach you all the differential geometry you need to understand. The unfortunate thing is they tend to be aimed at Physics graduate students. There are a few undergrad textbooks, but they are not as rigorous and not as worthwhile to read. The classic General Relativity textbook is Misner, Wheeler, Thorne, but MWT is better as a reference text than as a first course. Better textbooks would be Wald, General Relativity, and Carroll, Spacetime and Geometry . Of the two, I would recommend the latter.

You should keep in mind that the texts will be hard and the learning curve will be steep. The best way to understand the material is to do most of the problems in the undergraduate books or all the problems in the graduate texts, and ideally, have someone read over your problem sets. It will, however, be rewarding.

I found Ray d'Inverno's Introducing Einstein's Relativity a good place to start and very well presented (a much 'lighter' introduction than others, although goes in less depth, but if you have to start somewhere ...).
Here's the Amazon link if you are interested (although your university library may have it, mine did which is where I discovered this gem): http://www.amazon.com/Introducing-Einsteins-Relativity-R-dInverno/dp/0198596863

Yes... there is a lot of math. That is almost all I remember from my attempt to learn it in PH236 at a small technical school in southern cal. Memories of Christoffel symbols, Riemann Curvature, and covariant derivatives dance in my head. I find learning the math pretty dry without some physics behind it. There are on-line class notes which might be helpful and studying with friends (if you can find someone that shares your illness).

http://www.amazon.com/Gravitation-Physics-Charles-W-Misner/dp/0716703440/
Bleah! Read the reviews of MTW and see what you think...

I've since discovered that our book, Gravitation (while a great demonstration of the weight of the topic), is not the best book to learn from... at best it is a reference. A more basic book by Hartle is probably better for beginners. I picked it up at a friends house and felt I understood more GR reading it for an hour than I did studying Gravitation for 8 weeks (yes I dropped the class!). Mathematica was just coming out at the time, and I wish that we had used it, since it seems that much of the "algebraic" manipulation would have been easier... I don't know that the concepts would have been.

http://www.amazon.com/Gravity-Introduction-Einsteins-General-Relativity/dp/0805386629/
Please don't just read one of the pop-science books and feel like you know the material... "Everything is relative, dude" is just stupid.

Yes... there is a lot of math. That is almost all I remember from my attempt to learn it in PH236 at a small technical school in southern cal. Memories of Christoffel symbols, Riemann Curvature, and covariant derivatives dance in my head. I find learning the math pretty dry without some physics behind it. There are on-line class notes which might be helpful and studying with friends (if you can find someone that shares your illness).

http://www.amazon.com/Gravitation-Physics-Charles-W-Misner/dp/0716703440/
Bleah! Read the reviews of MTW and see what you think...

I've since discovered that our book, Gravitation (while a great demonstration of the weight of the topic), is not the best book to learn from... at best it is a reference. A more basic book by Hartle is probably better for beginners. I picked it up at a friends house and felt I understood more GR reading it for an hour than I did studying Gravitation for 8 weeks (yes I dropped the class!). Mathematica was just coming out at the time, and I wish that we had used it, since it seems that much of the "algebraic" manipulation would have been easier... I don't know that the concepts would have been.

http://www.amazon.com/Gravity-Introduction-Einsteins-General-Relativity/dp/0805386629/
Please don't just read one of the pop-science books and feel like you know the material... "Everything is relative, dude" is just stupid.

I found a copy of Feynman's book (including a CD audio copy) "6 Not So Easy Pieces" on quantum mechanics and related topics, the companion to "6 Easy Pieces" on general physics, about 10 years ago. It is remarkably easy for someone with basic college math and science to understand - once you whack your head against the wall a few times! :-) Anyway, here is a link to the Amazon page for the book: http://www.amazon.com/Six-Not-So-Easy-Pieces-Relativity-Space-Time/dp/0465025269/ref=sr_1_17?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1314560980&sr=1-17

The Book by Taylor and Wheeler "Exploring Black Holes: Introduction to General Relativity" is very nice, and roughly at your level. http://www.amazon.com/Exploring-Black-Holes-Introduction-Relativity/dp/020138423X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1314560336&sr=8-2 Matt A. Wood Physics & Space Sciences Dept Florida Institute of Technology Melbourne, FL 32901

The Road to Reality : A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe
by Roger Penrose
http://www.amazon.com/Road-Reality-Complete-Guide-Universe/dp/0679454438

Likely the most serious math book you will find in a retail, consumer bookstore. An excellent read and essential to truly understanding modern physics.

What do you really want to do ? (My guess is that you are not sure.)

If you want to be able to write down and solve Einstein equations for some case, you need vector and tensor algebra, geometry and calculus. Many people who work in GR never do this (for others, it's all they do). If you are interested in some more particular case (black holes or gravitational radiation, say), you need to understand Einstein's equations at some level, plus whatever approximations or simplifications are used in that area (transverse traceless gauge or post-Newtonian approximations, for example). Also, you should get to where you understand Lorentz transforms in your sleep. If you can't do and understand Lorentz transforms, the actual GR math will likely be beyond you.

What I would recommend is to buy Misner, Thorne and Wheeler, and read and follow "track 1." I would allocate 1 year for that.

Opa automatically generates client-side JavaScript

From http://www.amazon.com/Stealing-Network-How-Own-Box/dp/1931836876

Client-Side Security Doesn't Work

Appendix - "The Laws of Security by Ryan Russell"

ergo - this is bad for security.

I'm not sure why I'd specifically get an Android tablet from Amazon, given that there's already an official Kindle app for Android which makes it so you can read your Kindle books on whatever Android tablet / phone you want. Well, unless this new Amazon tablet also comes with a lifetime unlimited wireless Internet connection, I suppose - but somehow I anticipate some limits... :)

Bad Planning

I am looking at doing it gradually over time.
One Ipad for the kids this year..... then after a few more people tend to cast off some first generation stuff and as prices go down I might be able to get a $30-50 first generation iPad in a couple of years. I tend to get stuff well after the price curve has gone down, but I do think I need something before that this time because I am planning to head up an iPad deployment in my kids school in the next couple years.

Tucking the screen would be a great idea:
Something like this might do it for you.
http://www.amazon.com/VideoSecu-Under-Cabinet-monitor-LCD-CM/dp/B00153U1Z0
or this
http://www.dailyhack.net/2009/04/kitchenet-project-cabinet-mounted.html

And e-readers are still a big ripoff also.

Really? Just how much cheaper than $139, brand-new, do you expect any electronic device to be? Would $114 be cheap enough?