Slashdot Mirror

This should get you there

I'm surprised that I haven't seen any mention of Thomas Gold's "Deep Hot Biosphere" theory. This would seem to support his idea that there is a second biosphere that produces hydrocarbons as a waste product.

Steve Shah writes to the millions of people who are familiar with Windows (and perhaps NT and/or 2000) but not with *nix. (He's even provided a 16-page blueprint section comparing how to perform common tasks in Linux and Windows 2000.)

It helped me over the hump when I became serious about learning Linux, and I use it as a resource still today. Even if you don't use it as a guide for your class, I'd highly recommend that you mention it to your students.

--SC

All? Not even. After tearing through the five Barsoom eTexts at Gutenburg, I finally had to track down several more from online used bookstores in order to try to finish the series.

I would tend to disagree.

The press has always been responsible for it's own failure or success. You can't expect people to regulate it, or steer it in the right direction, when people can only possibly learn of it's misdeeds and mistakes through *gasp*, THE PRESS! The media dips into sensationalism because it allows itself to be driven by profit and whatever it's ratings are, they're NEVER enough. Not ALL people are going to care about what's on the news, it's as simple as that. You can't ruin the news trying to cater to idiots who don't care what's going on outside their small world, and yet, that's exactly what's happened. Sept. 11th should've been a wake up call for the media, as well. I don't know how people could stand for that kind of coverage. Anyone who's watched serious news like the BBC might agree. It was no less than 20 minutes after the planes hit, that NBC had created a 'music video' for the tragedy, with slides of fire, explosions, and people covered in ash flying across the screen as corny, dramatic music played in the background. Despite everything that was happening, it still made me want to turn off the television.

And I think a lot of people are sick and jaded by the nature of our news media, but it's hard to say if anyone will ever know how big this problem is because, again, they'd have to hear about it from the news media.

The URLs in the text (http://slashdot.org/Barnesandnoble.com and http://slashdot.org/BookSense.com) unfortunately fail to exist, since Slashdot has not yet bought those fine companies and incorporated their sites.

Maybe the poster meant Barnesandnoble.com and BookSense

In the early 1900's, an eye doctor named William H. Bates developed and attempted to promote a set of theories and techniques for natural eyesight improvement. One of the more well known people he helped was famous author Aldous Huxley, who wrote a book about his experience titled The Art of Seeing. Unfortunately, Bates' ideas are not yet generally accepted and promoted by the western medical establishment.

www.i-see.org is a good source for information on natural eyesight improvement, and also has a good resources page. Some other useful sources are: www.seeing.org, Relearning to See, and Better Eyesight Without Glasses.

In the early 1900's, an eye doctor named William H. Bates developed and attempted to promote a set of theories and techniques for natural eyesight improvement. One of the more well known people he helped was famous author Aldous Huxley, who wrote a book about his experience titled The Art of Seeing. Unfortunately, Bates' ideas are not yet generally accepted and promoted by the western medical establishment.

www.i-see.org is a good source for information on natural eyesight improvement, and also has a good resources page. Some other useful sources are: www.seeing.org, Relearning to See, and Better Eyesight Without Glasses.

In the early 1900's, an eye doctor named William H. Bates developed and attempted to promote a set of theories and techniques for natural eyesight improvement. One of the more well known people he helped was famous author Aldous Huxley, who wrote a book about his experience titled The Art of Seeing. Unfortunately, Bates' ideas are not yet generally accepted and promoted by the western medical establishment.

www.i-see.org is a good source for information on natural eyesight improvement, and also has a good resources page. Some other useful sources are: www.seeing.org, Relearning to See, and Better Eyesight Without Glasses.

A quick warning... I consider myself a relative newborn in the world of software development. I present these opinions under the consideration that my opinions can change at any moment. =]

A lot of the dire predictions of software atrophy and such are a result of applying the wrong methodology to a project. Yes there are uses for Software engineering, but I think this approach is overkill for even large scale projects. Check out Software Craftsmanship: The New Imperative for a different perspective. A perspective I think is in need of serious consideration. The gist is returning to the days of master craftsman and apprenticeships. This focuses a bit more on the learning aspect than actual development methodologies, but you can always go to The Pragmatic Programmer to fill in that gap.

"As time passes, the system becomes less and less well-ordered. Sooner or later the fixing ceases to gain any ground. Each forward step is matched by a backward one. Although in principle usable forever, the system has worn out as a base for progress."

This is where "refactoring" (see Fowler's Refactoring) really shines. I find it difficult to believe that refining the software base is not progress. An initial revision where the code functions by its contract (if your into designing by contract), then you refactor the body of the function/method for speed / elegance. Then you can run your unit tests on the function / method to test that the refactoring session did not break any of the design contracts (whew).

I think they may be trying to restate the broken window theory (see Pragmatic Programmer), were a broken window (or bug) in a building (or system) leads to delapidation elsewhere in the building (or system).

And then there are the agile methods, including XP. I think these answer a lot of the limitations and issues with Software Engineering practices. Interacting with clients (having a client there during each iteration) gives you the benefit of almost real-time feedback so that you can update your user stories on the fly, etc.

Without rambling on any farther, my point is not too spend too much time looking for a specific unified theory. Read up about all the ideas, methods, and theories. Take the best parts from each, then crank the knob all the way up (if I may borrow that from XP =] ). Don't let anyone tell you there is a science to software development that is easy to reproduce, and that you are just a link in the overall chain. You practice and perform a craft. Enjoy it!

A quick warning... I consider myself a relative newborn in the world of software development. I present these opinions under the consideration that my opinions can change at any moment. =]

A lot of the dire predictions of software atrophy and such are a result of applying the wrong methodology to a project. Yes there are uses for Software engineering, but I think this approach is overkill for even large scale projects. Check out Software Craftsmanship: The New Imperative for a different perspective. A perspective I think is in need of serious consideration. The gist is returning to the days of master craftsman and apprenticeships. This focuses a bit more on the learning aspect than actual development methodologies, but you can always go to The Pragmatic Programmer to fill in that gap.

"As time passes, the system becomes less and less well-ordered. Sooner or later the fixing ceases to gain any ground. Each forward step is matched by a backward one. Although in principle usable forever, the system has worn out as a base for progress."

This is where "refactoring" (see Fowler's Refactoring) really shines. I find it difficult to believe that refining the software base is not progress. An initial revision where the code functions by its contract (if your into designing by contract), then you refactor the body of the function/method for speed / elegance. Then you can run your unit tests on the function / method to test that the refactoring session did not break any of the design contracts (whew).

I think they may be trying to restate the broken window theory (see Pragmatic Programmer), were a broken window (or bug) in a building (or system) leads to delapidation elsewhere in the building (or system).

And then there are the agile methods, including XP. I think these answer a lot of the limitations and issues with Software Engineering practices. Interacting with clients (having a client there during each iteration) gives you the benefit of almost real-time feedback so that you can update your user stories on the fly, etc.

Without rambling on any farther, my point is not too spend too much time looking for a specific unified theory. Read up about all the ideas, methods, and theories. Take the best parts from each, then crank the knob all the way up (if I may borrow that from XP =] ). Don't let anyone tell you there is a science to software development that is easy to reproduce, and that you are just a link in the overall chain. You practice and perform a craft. Enjoy it!

A quick warning... I consider myself a relative newborn in the world of software development. I present these opinions under the consideration that my opinions can change at any moment. =]

A lot of the dire predictions of software atrophy and such are a result of applying the wrong methodology to a project. Yes there are uses for Software engineering, but I think this approach is overkill for even large scale projects. Check out Software Craftsmanship: The New Imperative for a different perspective. A perspective I think is in need of serious consideration. The gist is returning to the days of master craftsman and apprenticeships. This focuses a bit more on the learning aspect than actual development methodologies, but you can always go to The Pragmatic Programmer to fill in that gap.

"As time passes, the system becomes less and less well-ordered. Sooner or later the fixing ceases to gain any ground. Each forward step is matched by a backward one. Although in principle usable forever, the system has worn out as a base for progress."

This is where "refactoring" (see Fowler's Refactoring) really shines. I find it difficult to believe that refining the software base is not progress. An initial revision where the code functions by its contract (if your into designing by contract), then you refactor the body of the function/method for speed / elegance. Then you can run your unit tests on the function / method to test that the refactoring session did not break any of the design contracts (whew).

I think they may be trying to restate the broken window theory (see Pragmatic Programmer), were a broken window (or bug) in a building (or system) leads to delapidation elsewhere in the building (or system).

And then there are the agile methods, including XP. I think these answer a lot of the limitations and issues with Software Engineering practices. Interacting with clients (having a client there during each iteration) gives you the benefit of almost real-time feedback so that you can update your user stories on the fly, etc.

Without rambling on any farther, my point is not too spend too much time looking for a specific unified theory. Read up about all the ideas, methods, and theories. Take the best parts from each, then crank the knob all the way up (if I may borrow that from XP =] ). Don't let anyone tell you there is a science to software development that is easy to reproduce, and that you are just a link in the overall chain. You practice and perform a craft. Enjoy it!

Time travel isn't that big a deal, I mean come on, when you can get a book on How To Build a Time Machine at your local bookstore why are people so amazed at this? The book is real, and it is a serious book (it is not to be confused with the children's book with the same title published previously). The author explains that we know how to travel through time, it is just really expensive at this point. It is a budgetry problem, not a science problem.

I didn't see your posting when I made mine along the same subject. I agree with what you have to say.

One only has to look the activities of W's cohorts, and where they get their $$$, to see the further damage that is being dealt in deregulation of these things, and handing control to lying, greedy companies like Enron.

Check out OpenSecrets.org to see who is getting money from where. Then check their voting record and see if they voting to represent the people or to represent their own greed.

Some people believe that George W. could have known about the corrupt dealings of Ken Lay and Enron? Perhaps they should read their correspondence with each other while Bush was governor of Texas on TheSmokingGun.com

I would highly recommend Michael Moore's new book, "Stupid White Men". He has done his research well on Bush and his cadre.

Amazon: New ($16.80) | Used ($12.00)

Barnes & Noble: New ($19.20, free shipping)

Half.com: All Used (from $11.99)

Sorry if I included any unnecessary variables in the URLs. I previewed and they seem to work fine. I personally recommend getting it from B&N since it's free shipping and would probably be your best bet for a used version. However, some libraries with fair budgets might have this book too (or you could ask for it), so that's always an option.
_________________________________________ ___
Partner Site

There was a book published a few years ago by an anonymous author that consisted of his humerous letters to companies and their responses. He would string them along with outlandish requests and questions.

One of my favorites was when he wrote to a casino in Atlantic City asking to gamble dressed as a large lobster.

You can get the book from Barnes and Noble

The Doh of Homer is a philosophy book about the Simpsons. I haven't read it yet, but I might when I get a chance.

The skinny of the news is a file called BPBOH.DLL that comes with the MORPHEUS PREVIEW version and carries the nasty little bugger that is causing CONSTANT browser crashes right now on my system. LAVASOFT's AdAware has a program called REFUPDATE which includes the killer for this little spyware nasty. The downside is RefUpdate is SUPPOSED to be aware of BPboh.dll, but didn't find it on my system as per Lavasoft's mirror page. So search the BPBOH.DLL and delete the nasty crashing bugger.

The nasty is made by a sleazy firm called Wurld Media, Inc. (They spelled it "Wurld" not "World")

Here's a snippet of the bastard.
rdxr020305.dat (which appears on my desktop)
bpboh.dll (the offending file)
bpboh2.dll (not on my system but in the hex dump)
www.rdxrp.com
www.maplehollow.com
www.rdx rs.com
www.inmotiongolf.com
/rdxr020304.dat
/bp boh.dll
about:blank werule
\winbpupd.exe
www.sephora.com
http://www.sephora.com
(Who wants to boycott Sephora's "we'll make you look like a prostitute" makeup selection? I don't wear it, but who would?)
http://www.sephora.com/help/about_sephora.jhtml?lo cation=contact

www.shop.barnesandnoble.com
www.barnesandnoble. com
http://www.barnesandnoble.com
(Who wants to boycott Barnes&Nobles now for foisting crappy spyware on us? I sure do! By the way, MAKE CERTAIN you let them KNOW what we feel about spyware please.)
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/help/customer_servic e/morehelp.asp?userid=199PI1EZ1Y

Go to this nasty crapware website and share how you feel about their little spyware games please.
http://www.wurldmedia.com/
Their email address for contacting them is
corpcom@wurldmedia.com

Or use their snail mail address:
WURLD Media, Inc.
63 Putnam Street
Saratoga, Springs, NY 12866
Telephone: 1-518-691-1100
Fax: 1-518-691-1180
(Oh... let me think for a moment about what kinds of FAX pranks exist...)

http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInqu iry.asp?isbn=0201702711

Not trying to whore karma, but I do think it's silly to have to go through that stupid bfast link.

Here's to hoping that RE starts a resurgance of Zombie movies so we can see George in action again.

I would love to see that too. But in this August 2000 interview he said:

I cracked a joke about that once, and I think that's how people picked it up. For a long time I had this idea that I'd do one Dead film in each of the last four decades. And I jokingly said that maybe the last one should be called Twilight of the Dead, or, better yet, Brunch of the Dead, because I figured that the '90s were all about ignoring problems anyway. But it's never going to happen. The rights are so convoluted now; there must be eight different companies involved. To make another Dead film, I'd probably have to find a new way to make zombies. I'd have to reinvent them all over again.

If you have several people changing the same file in a given day, then one of two things (probably both) is wrong:

• Coordination between features/projects. Somebody should be keeping an eye on the list of fixes/enhancements that are coming down the line and making sure you don't get too many in the same neck of the woods. This person doesn't necessarily have to be a developer (but should be able to speak developerese), and their whole job is to tell people, 'No, I'm sorry, but there's no room in the schedule for feature X that you want. Can I interest you in feature Y, which is in a different part of the code?'

  Also, if your code is fairly big (more than a few hundred thousand lines), you need to break it into logical chunks and assign somebody to watch every checkin to each chunk. That person is a developer and responsible for making sure new code gets reviewed and unexpected changes aren't being made. If your code is smaller, one person can probably do that.

• Code Architecture. If several functionally-unrelated features end up needing to change the same file, then something is wrong with that file. There's too much going on in it--you've got to be dilligent about keeping your components small and keeping each component in a separate file. See the excellent Lakos book for tips on how and why to do that.

I just set up a mirror based on the 2.14 release (from the Texture CD NaN sold). This has versions for all platforms they supported at that time (no OSX).
Also the 2.23 Solaris release is there. Later this evening I will include the 2.23 Linux version I have at home.

I just checked and the "The Official Blender 2.0 Guide" is in stock here.

While we're on the subject of good books, one that should definitly be looked at if you are getting started with any kind of socket programming in C is The Pocket Guide to TCP/IP Sockets: C Version. It is short (~100 or so pages), to the point(lots of examples which actually work with linux and cygwin if you dare), and most importantly, CHEAP ($15)

Go check it out here

Yes, and the problem with most technological "solutions" is that they either seriously impede fair use by design, or make it cumbersome to excercise one's fair use rights. Horror stories of content being tied to particular hardware abound. What happens when the hardware breaks?

However, I think the hour is not as dark as it seams, and there may be a silver lining to this particular cloud. As Lawrence Lessig points out, code is becoming a proxy for law enforcement. By itself, this is ominous only because laws can be repealed, but code can't. But, what if every law had sunset clauses, and code to enforce it had to honour them? A copyright law enforced by code could also enforce release into the public domain at the appropriate time. No "Sonny Bono" act could change that, though, I suppose the act of benefitting from this "earlier law" enforcement could be made illegal. Still, I'd question the constitutionality of a law that made existing equipment functionality retroactively illegal.

I think, sadly, it's a given that we'll have hardware copy protection. Given public key cryptography, and an escrow mechanism for user-specific secret private keys within the equipment you own, it is technologically feasable. The challenge is for the public to standardize and control the depoloyment of same to ensure that the law it enforces reflects balance in copyright of digital content, as the constitution broadly intends.

I see a great potential here for crypto-hackers to ally with hardware manufacturers to produce a system with which we can live, and not one that enforces Hollywood's idea of maniacal control. While the best proportion of SSSCA-mandated hardware in a system is none at all, I'd settle for 1%, in playback or transcoding interfaces, espescially if I can leverage it to protect my own private content, and not in storage devices.

An interesting book I just finished reading was The Ultimate History of Video Games by Steven Kent. It goes all the way back... actually beginning with the precursors to pinball in the 19th century, and telling the story of video games and similar amusements as a narrative up to the year 2001. I thought it was well-written, and contains tons of quotes from firsthand sources.

Rich Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times, is an (as I said) excellent book by Robert W. McChesney, is a comprehensive story of how giant corporations are taking control of the mass media. It's not quite the same as having to be to get an ad-free slashdot, but it seems quite related to me. Here's a description:

"Rich Media, Poor Democracy addresses the corporate media explosion and the corresponding implosion of public life that characterizes our times. Challenging the assumption that a society drenched in commercial information "choices" is ipso facto a democratic one, McChesney argues that the major beneficiaries of the so-called Information Age are wealthy investors, advertisers, and a handful of enormous media, computer, and telecommunications corporations. This concentrated corporate control, McChesney maintains, is disastrous for any notion of participatory democracy."

(That was from bn.com.)

It lays bare, among other things, the myth of the "free" (NOT as in beer, or speech) market, and an analysis of the Internet and its potential direction (McChesney doesn't think it will set us free). And so on. It's damn good.

Let me put it this way: I attended a workshop with McChesney and John Nichols (editor at John Nichols (The Nation, The Capital Times) at RadFest 2001. Nothing at that conference got me more riled up than listening to their discussion about media megaconglomerates. Ohhhh...

Media, and media ownership, is rapidly becoming what Linux was to me two years ago. It affects more people more directly than free software does -- although I have not abandoned free software. Just wait... I've got somethin' up my sleeves for that. :-)

-- haaz.

What was amusing is that, even though I play female chars, it took a while to convince a few people I met in the game that I *was* female IRL. So, in essence, even if they suspect that I held a Y chromosome somewhere under my pixelated skirt, they still wanted to offer my character free stuff. I know of a few males who report playing female because they can get cooler items from other people.

I did not get a chance to check out every facet of this study, but I think it would be interesting to do some empirical research into whether the role-playing extends to being a "provider" for some of those female avatars - either men get the boost of being the one with the resources, or else, akin to some very fascinating studies by Dr. David Buss at the University of Texas at Austin Evolution of Desire, males feel like they are not spending much on a female avatar (besides imaginary money and time) in order to get something in return. Buss' research suggests there is empirical evidence of an inverse correlation between how much a man has to give to a women versus the degree to which he wants to sleep with her (basically, the less a guy has to do to get sex, the more he wants it - some of his studies are pretty amusing and faceted).

But hey, the more you adventure with someone, I am sure the more likely their gender will become apparent - that is, unless you have no experience with women and you have called your mother your Valentine for the last 25 years. ;-)

I think you may have misunderstood. I'm not sure the poster is saying he's a professional programmer. It's not very clearly written, but I believe he's just an amateur coder who works with professional programmers and sees an opportunity to advance to management because no managers seem to understand coders at all. I don't see the problem there.

Ever read The Cuckoo's Egg? It's about an astronomer who finds a $0.75 accounting error on billing time on a mainframe. Since he's got some coding experience and management doesn't realize the scope of the problem at first (it was a cracker screwing up covering his tracks), they assign him to track down the problem since he's the one that first noticed it and opened his mouth about it.

To paraphrase his own words "The coders I work with say 'He's not much of a coder, but what a great astronomer!' while the other astronomers I know all say, 'He's not the best astronomer, but what a great programmer!'"

Just because someone isn't an expert in a job doesn't (always) mean they can't manage it. Especially true if one is managing workers in multiple fields. A good understanding of the job(s) is necessary, but I'm not sure the poster is seeking management because he "can't hack it" (sorry for the pun) as a coder.

to have a manager who actually manages, not simple a super programmer. That is, the manager should be someone who understands design processes, software architecture process, development processes, and manages the infrastucture to keep developers moving forward for whichever phase(s) they are currently working in. Technical experience is necessary, but studying management, including handling people and groups, is likewise necessary. This combination should result in a manger that doesn't make irresponsible promises (unrealistic goals). We know what happens when unrealistic goals are set: the geek corps to have to push the panic button, generally resulting in Bad Software. Reading something like Project Management : Best Practices for IT Professionals by Richard Murch (available from Barnes and Noble is a Good Idea.

What about Programming Pearls , by Jon Louis Bentley?

Don't knock on AI until you understand it.
Everything in the world can be simulated with an algorithm; it's just a matter of how many millions, billions, or trillions of lines of code it takes.

I agree with the first statement but the second? Apparently you don't understand it either. Turing proved there are intractable algorithms. Read Feynman's lectures on computation. Do the buzzwords "NP complete" ring any bells? There will always be things science can't explain or model, that is what God is for.

The author spends a lot of time explaining exactly what happens to food as you change the pH, explains what happens on the cellular level when you cook at different heats and for different times, basically reads like a chemistry text at times, all while giving some GREAT recipes.

I first heard the author on NPR a few years ago, and was very impressed. She would be talking your traditional cook-show talk, then suddently dive into these marvelously technical chemistry explanations that would just make Julia Childs fall over, foaming at the mouth.

Try here. It's isbn #0312243189.

In 1971 I began to extend the B language by adding a character type and also rewrote its compiler to generate PDP-11 machine instructions instead of threaded code. Thus the transition from B to C was contemporaneous with the creation of a compiler capable of producing programs fast and small enough to compete with assembly language. I called the slightly-extended language NB, for `new B.'

A counterpoint to the counterpoint, especially in the Appendix on American anime culture. Susan Napier's bias in favor of anime fan subculture is much more academic and lacks the axe to grind that the anti-anime webmaster seems intent to wield.

The publisher has a sample chapter online (though their HTML looks weird to me; I hope it looks better in your browser). Also, you can read a little more about the book, find links to online reviews, get errata listings, and so on, at its support site.

Oh, and I, er, happen to know the author. :-)

Counties sorted by (Gore+Bush)*log(Bush/Gore)

Gore, Bush, County, State

338047, 466232, Orange, CA
173705, 286843, Tarrant, TX
415514, 525679, Harris, TX

...

445196, 89377, Brooklyn, NY
1291805, 541208, Cook, IL
1598375, 812154, LosAngeles, CA

The issue is that U235 and U238 are the same chemical element with the same chemical properties. They can only be separated by distinguishing their atomic weights, hence very expensive gaseous diffusion processes, centrifuges, laser isotope separation, etc. Plutonium, on the other hand, is a chemical element in its own right, and can be separated from reactor fuel by chemical means. That's certainly not trivial, but it's much easier than isotope separation.

Taylor compared the difficulty of separating plutonium with the difficulty of processing opium poppies into heroin: both are achievable by someone with money to obtain the required materials and chemical engineering skills. And as the heroin example shows, it can be done on a large scale despite the efforts of governments to stop it.

Has anyone ever read the book CIA and the cult of intelligence ?

Anyone notice the blank line at the top of this article?

What's going on here? I smell a censor!

The cia has [deleted] civil liberties

[deleted] Former Director [delted]

without any thought

[deleted]

won't stand for this!

(please don't mod this down if you haven't read the book)

Locus Magazine Best Novels of 2001
Barnes and Noble Best SF of 2001
January Magazine Best of 2001 (go down to the bottom for SF)
Borders Best SF of 2001
Amazon Best Science Fiction of 2001
Amazon Best Fantasy of 2001
Some guy's Best SF of 2001 list
An Amazon Listmania Best SF of 2001 list

It's a tiny sample, but it looks like these are clear favorites:

1. The Wooden Sea, Jonathan Carroll
2. Perdido Street Station, China Mieville
3. American Gods, Neil Gaiman

And all these do well, showing up on several lists and/or ranking high where they're mentioned:

Cosmonaut Keep, Ken MacLeod
Nekropolis, Maureen McHugh
The Chronoliths, Robert Charles Wilson
Thief of Time, Terry Pratchett
Kushiel's Dart, Jacqueline Carey
Revelation Space, Alastair Reynolds

Personally, I haven't read enough 2001 novels to make a decent list.

Sleep Theives, by Stanley Coren.

http://www.animalnews.com/coren/e_thieves.htm
http://www.ucalgary.ca/UofC/students/VOX/Books/cor en.htm
http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInqu iry.asp?isbn=0684831848

Ten hours a night, please.

The baseball player Moe Berg, was sent to Europe as part of the OSS during the war to attend lectures and try to glean how close the Germans were to making the bomb.

The book The Catcher Was a Spy: The Mysterious Life of Moe Berg is a really interesting read if you get a chance.

I strongly recommend the book Heisenberg's War by Thomas Powers. It provides a much deeper background into this meeting (and the entire German nuclear arms program) and is quite readable. Here's a bn.com link to the book if you want to avoid amazon.

.... is knowledge.

Try this book - Sometimes referred to as the LDAP Bible

A regular Linux Journal columnist, Marcel Gagné writes about system administration using a French Chef theme. He has written a book: Linux System Administration: A User's Guide. Look for it at Barnes and Noble

I don't have any experience programming engineering problems period, much less doing it in C++. I read somewhere that strictly numerical problems don't translate very well into OO terms, so you might just be trying to apply a design technique that doesn't fit. On the other hand, it seems some people are programming engineering probolems using OO and publishing books about it. I went to the Barnes & Noble website and searched the book section with the keywords "numerical C++" and turned up half a dozen titles. Numerical Recipes in C++. There were links at the bottom of the web page that even looked more interesting, like C++ and Object Oriented Numeric Computing for Scientists and Engineers. Good luck!

I don't have any experience programming engineering problems period, much less doing it in C++. I read somewhere that strictly numerical problems don't translate very well into OO terms, so you might just be trying to apply a design technique that doesn't fit. On the other hand, it seems some people are programming engineering probolems using OO and publishing books about it. I went to the Barnes & Noble website and searched the book section with the keywords "numerical C++" and turned up half a dozen titles. Numerical Recipes in C++. There were links at the bottom of the web page that even looked more interesting, like C++ and Object Oriented Numeric Computing for Scientists and Engineers. Good luck!

There are even a few movies out that deal with these kinds of issues: Erin Brockavich, Born Yesterday, etc. People probably just think it these kinds of things don't happen. Businessmen with senators in their pockets, companies poisoning their residential neighbors with thier toxic chemicals. Wake up people - America is fscked!

I own this set and I love it. I happened to pick it up at my local Warehouse club store back in October. However, for those that wish to purchase it, but do not shop at Amazon.com, you may wish to try Barnes and Noble online. Look here.

Now we need a Bored of the Rings movie.