homedns.org · Domains · Slashdot Mirror

All you need is just lemon juice by 140Mandak262Jamuna · 2015-03-02 03:55 · Score: 1 · on AVG Announces Invisibility Glasses

It is very well known that if you smear face with lemon juice the security camera can not record your face. Don't believe it? Have you done the invisible writing trick when you were a kid using lemon juice. Same principle. Many well known crooks have used this method. Big universities are studying the method.

More citations:

http://awesci.com/the-astonish...

http://gagne.homedns.org/~tgag...

Re:java backend is not simple. by Xest · 2012-06-18 09:01 · Score: 1 · on Ruby, Clojure, Ceylon: Same Goal, Different Results

"This is the same case from the start. Its just taken several rounds for you to see why you can't use a single hierarchy."

But I've done exactly that. I've given you a solution. You're using a really weak argument here.

"I don't want a taxes data structure I want hundreds of methods and objects having to do with imported vs. domestic. Imported objects may have far service offices. They have shipping times. They may have multiple conflicting law sets that apply to them."

Sure, and all this can be represented as I say. You just need to know in your analysis from the outset what kind of level of flexibility you're planning for. You can't plan for no flexibility, then complain when you can't flex the system, sure, I agree, OO will never deal with that kind of abysmal planning, but few if any systems will. If however you have some degree of understanding of the problem domain though all this can be modelled using OO without MI in a perfectly logical and sensible manner as I have continued to prove by providing you examples.

"If I have to go back to dealing with the data of an object and not the method I've just broken the whole OO paradigm and then I am doing procedural code."

I don't even think you get the OO paradigm at all, when I mention that you can store the taxes against an object, I'm not suggesting a raw array of floats or whatever, I'm talking about implementing tax objects. You're at least aware that objects can have has-a relationships with other objects right?

"No it wasn't. I was citing Meyer's Object Oriented Software Construction. I'd like a cite for your position about the origins of OO. Of course OO is computer oriented, it is a computer language design paradigm. I way of designing programming languages."

You can cite a book that came out the best part of 30 years after the foundations for OO were laid all you want, but I'm not sure why you'd think it would be the stand out definition, more so than say, the accounts from the people who were around during the much earlier developments of OO such as here:

http://gagne.homedns.org/~tgagne/contrib/EarlyHistoryST.html

I guess you missed the whole reason why we decided to try and move away from computing-oriented paradigms.

"Why would it be likely to be reusable? The reason is because it is generic, abstract. It is the abstraction processes not the object hierarchy that creates reusability."

But the more you bundle into a function, the less generic it comes, which is precisely why it's better to break something down into less functions to ensure more components of the whole are generic, rather than writing a single monolithic function to do one single thing in a completely non-reusable manner.

"What's a property? A property in the OO sense has to respond to a method call. if x is a type of frog I want x.acceptableTemperature() to be a method. I don't want to do: x.origination.acceptableTemperature() otherwise I suddenly need to understand the internal structure of x and then I might as well just do:"

Yet again you show a complete failure to understand proper OO design, and yet again you're expanding a case that has previously been analysed with a set of given conditions to say "Hey, look, it's wrong now!". If you want to find out information about a climate zone, then you make that climate zone a more detailed data structure, or an object in itself that can tell you the temperature range. This makes sense because in your example you're saying it's really the climate zone that defines the temperature, so it should be the climate zone from which you find the temperature range, however this is a really dumb examples as species still have different temperature requirements even in existing climate zones, so more realistically you'd just set acceptableTemperature against the species anyway.

"Optimally you Toyota to inherit from dozens of classes:"

No you don't, that's absolutely horrendous design and yet

Retraining self-assessment skills by manaway · 2010-09-18 08:01 · Score: 3, Informative · on How Your Brain Figures Out What It Doesn't Know

The study mentioned at the end of the NPR article with this quote: "In fact, there was one study where people who are narcissistic would say they are really spectacularly good at this and they were actually worse than everyone else" is referring to Unskilled and Unaware of It (scanned pdf). The Unskilled study covers regular people too, not just us narcissists.

Re:up to their old tricks again by nguy · 2008-02-27 12:06 · Score: 1 · on Multitouch Gesture Patents Could Prevent Standardization

We don't have $150,000 workstations networked like Xerox was selling in the early 80s.

The Xerox 8010 cost around $16k in 1981. The Apple Lisa cost around $10k in 1983. And the Xerox 6085 cost about $6k in 1985.

Among other things, Apple invented Regions, which were critical to auto-updating multiple overlapping windows, something Xerox didn't ever do.

Here is a 1981 promotional video of the Xerox 8010 showing updates in a non-rectangular region in a partially obscured window:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7212449984702486365

Here is a 1982 video about the Bell Labs Blit, showing updates in overlapping windows, with multitasking:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4493242409722668078

Alan Kay may have been the first one to come up with, and implement, overlapping windows, in the early 70's:

http://gagne.homedns.org/~tgagne/contrib/EarlyHistoryST.html

Nobody other than Apple ever bothered with Atkinson regions as far as I know; there were better technologies even then.

Re:Typical MS "Planned Obselescence" by PitaBred · 2008-01-02 09:31 · Score: 1 · on Office 2003 Service Pack Disables Older File Formats

Seeing as this is a manual update, people using old documents are free to convert to a newer format before installing SP3. It's pretty simple. Only if they're aware of it. Does Microsoft say in big, bold letters on the SP3 download page that it'll break old documents, and you should do the conversion before upgrading? Or is it buried in some button-initiated popup, if it's shown at all? I'm betting it's the second. Oh, wait... looks like I'm right. You aren't rationally discussing Microsoft, you're either stupid or biased, because you can't see the inherent assumptions that you make. SP3 breaking the ability to open old documents even contravenes what Microsoft has implicitly promised as far as being backwards compatible. Here's the exact quote:

Open XML, on the other hand, reflects the rich set of capabilities in Office 2007, offers a platform for exciting user productivity scenarios through user-defined schema, and was designed to be backwards compatible with billions of existing documents. If Office 2007 isn't backwards compatible, then they're welshing on their promises, not to mention responsibilities as a monopoly.

The reason people call you a shill is because you quack like a duck, smell like a duck and look like a duck.

Re:I'm confused. by jdgeorge · 2007-12-06 06:54 · Score: 1 · on Blast-Proof Fabric Resists Multiple Explosions

The fabrics can ... be deployed in containment systems, military tents, ballistic mosquito nets and body armor, a $2 billionpret-a-porter market.

What?

I think Roy Spire would suggest this caution is justified.

in praise of reading and fiddling by Stu+Charlton · 2006-04-30 11:10 · Score: 1 · on Do Kids Still Program?

Writing a trivial program in Windows is quite easy in VB or VB.NET, I know of kids that can do this today, and could back in the mid-1990's. In Win32 C, sure, it's quite rough, but not even professional developers really do that anymore (they at least use C++ and MFC. And speaking from experience, I couldn't figure out Win16 when I was 14, but I could figure out the early versions of MFC and VC++ 3 and 4 (though barely). VB was much easier, as was Java 1.0's AWT.

Though arguably one can learn a lot more by reading, understanding the ideas behind what already exists, and fiddling with that, instead of crafting trivial programs from scratch. I recall the days with Logo as an example of this, when I was a child. Putting together crappy little C64 Basic programs also helped. But frankly it didn't teach me good habits or anything about "why" I may want to do something a certain way. It was when I read code from others in C64 assembly or basic that I really started to "get it". And then as I moved to other languages, great examples of code helped to show the way (in C, in Smalltalk, in Lisp, etc.).

PRO/Engineer arguably doesn't provide the intuitivity necessary as an exploratory environment, also because there is a large body of non-obvious theory behind its application. In programming, there is also this body, but I find you can at least get some meaningful feedback with small gestures to start with.

I really enjoyed the essay on the early history of Smalltalk. The PDF has fewer OCR errors. In particular, how it was used with children is an insightful example of the challenges of learning to program.

From the essay:

For example, Marion Goldeen's (12 yrs old) painting system was a full-fledged tool. A few yuears later, so was Susan Hamet's (12 yrs old) OOP illustration system (with a design that was like the MacDraw to come). Two more were Bruce Horn's (15 yrs old) music score capture system and Steve Ptz's (15 yrs old) circuit design system. Looking back, this could be called another example in computer science of the "early success syndrome." The successes were real, but they weren't as general as we thought. They wouldn't extend into the future as stringly as we hoped.

And on teaching adults:

It started to hit home in the Spring of '74 after I taught Smalltalk to 20 PARC nonprogrammer adults. They were able to get through the initial material faster than the children, but just as it looked like an overwhelming success was at hand, they started to crash on problems that didn't look to me to be much harder than the ones they had just been doing well on. One of them was a project thought up by one of the adults, which was to make a little database system that could act like a card file or rolodex. They couldn't even come close to programming it. I was very surprised because I "knew" that such a project was well below the mythical "two pages" for end-users we were working within. That night I wrote it out, and the next day I showed all of them how to do it. Still, none of them were able to do it by themsleves. Later, I sat in the room pondering the board from my talk. Finally, I counted the number of nonobvious ideas in this little program. They came to 17. And some of them were like the concept of the arch in building design: very hard to discover, if you don't already know them.

Re:One Word... by FooAtWFU · 2005-08-09 12:50 · Score: 1 · on Sanely Moving from Word to the Web?

I'll admit it: I am an intern. As a matter of fact, I'm one of the best interns money can buy. (oooooh look shiny resume). But it's only a summer internship and has nothing repeat NOTHING (sort of quasiobligatory disclaimer here in case someone IBM is watching) to do with my work with this web site management position, which I mostly do during the school year (and is officially some sort of part-time salaried position with a university's economics department, if I recall correctly).

Re:no link for you, Slashdot hordes! by FooAtWFU · 2005-08-09 11:23 · Score: 2, Interesting · on Sanely Moving from Word to the Web?

actually, I'm quite all right. At first I was a trifle worried when I saw that my machine's load was a little high and the story relatively new, but then I realized that it was just running pisg to generate channel statistics for #wikipedia. It's a beefy server on a fast line, really; I don't anticipate any issues if I can hide way down in the comments page instead of in the fine summary...

no link for you, Slashdot hordes! by SeanTobin · 2005-08-09 09:56 · Score: 5, Informative · on Sanely Moving from Word to the Web?

Hmmm... sounds like a challenge to me. Let's see what we can dig up.

Step 1: Let's look at his user page

Ahh! He put in a website with his profile. Let's all go and check out http://fennec.homedns.org/

Hmm... looks like a personal page. Not too sure what to make of the comic. Anyway, let's move on to..

Step 2: Let's look at his author page. Some interesting stuff here, including three separate e-mail addresses (which I won't post here. You're welcome :)

A-ha! There is a link to his employer! It's Economic History Services. And what do you know... there are a significant number of pages (especially under abstracts and book reviews) that seem to come straight out of a word processor, only with extensive cleaning. A quick look at the source reveals something interesting. It's clean. Very clean. We're talking on the level of I-use-vim-for-my-webpage-editor clean. Nice job.

Anyway, it looks like it was done by hand. I'm not saying its not good work (quite to the contrary), but I can see your need for an automated solution.