Do you have an argument for the validity of the old standard other than an appeal to tradition? Anyone who cares and who needs to read those books or papers can certainly learn that before a certain date, an older definition was used.
Just because you don't use it doesn't mean it isn't useful or desired. I know a lot of people who have as much scorn for Slashdot as you seem to for Twitter.
Given how often I see articles claiming that "print media is in trouble, everything's online now", is investing R&D into video advertisements, not to mention increasing printing costs with this gimmick, REALLY the way to go? Are you trying to tell me that the only thing killing print media this whole time has been it's lack of flash ads!?
The V already stands for virus, ranking 'HIV Virus' up there with 'PIN Number' and 'ATM Machine'. I would hope that a tech site like Slashdot, used to dealing with acronyms, would do better.
At my high school, you were allowed to have cell phones if you turned them off in class. If your cell went off in class, though, you could be sure of getting detention. Since turning off cell phones during meetings and the like is good etiquette outside of high school too, I say let the students have their phones if only for a valuable learning experience.
Right - if the browsers used ANS.1 instead of looking for null, we wouldn't have this problem. If the certs used null instead of reading the string length, we wouldn't have this problem.
The real problem is that, regardless of what's specified, someone is doing something different. This could happen just as easily if it were the other way around.
It's not illegal to do this as far as I know. If you don't like it, your recourse is not to do business with them, and convince as many as you can to not do business with them. I've been doing this (buying DRM-free) for as long as Amazon was offering MP3s.
I consider it to be closest to philosophy, though I don't see why it can't be it's own field. Science and mathematics have completely different epistemological outlooks.
In science, if you say that anything has been "proven", you get laughed out of all respectable circles. Instead, you demonstrate a hypothesis by providing experimental evidence.
In mathematics, if you say that something has been demonstrated by empirical evidence, you get laughed out of all respectable circles. Instead, you need to prove everything rigorously.
Fortran 90 and Fortran 95 both, however, comply with the OO paradigm.
If only you were right, my life for the past two years would have been much easier. Give me inheritence, dynamic binding, and private members of derived types ("structs" or "classes" for everyone who doesn't speek fortran). THEN maybe I'll agree that these standards comply with the OO paradigm. 2003 certainly does, but point me to a single complier that fully implements it...
Most stuff written *today* is written in modern fortran where you can actually have variable names of a decent length. Most legacy code that you have to rely on (e.g. linear algebra routines) are written in the cruddy old fortran. But it's solid code, works as a black box, and I would venture to guess that it's not a *whole* lot less readable than your average implementation of printf. Plus, if you want to update it to modern fortran, be my guest - hope you have a lot of time, patience, money, and a good set of unit tests....
Note that 'amateur' comes from the French for "lover" and has a primary meaning someone who loves what they are doing, someone who is not paid being a secondary meeting. I would say that almost all astronomers are amateur. Some are even paid for doing it as well.
Argh, no! The English definition of Amateur (from Dictionary.com) is the following:
1. a person who engages in a study, sport, or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons. Compare professional.
2. an athlete who has never competed for payment or for a monetary prize.
3. a person inexperienced or unskilled in a particular activity: Hunting lions is not for amateurs.
4. a person who admires something; devotee; fan: an amateur of the cinema.
Your definition is the fourth down, under three definitions that state either lack of skill or lack of pay. Are you telling me that 1 through 3 are only "secondary definitions?" Because I think it's the other way around. Please do not confuse etymology with definition, either unintentionally or (as I see so often) as a rhetorical trick. The former is somewhat interesting, but only useful in this context if we happen to be posting on a French version of Slashdot.
"During the chilly exercise, they could repeat an expletive of their choice or chant a neutral word."
So they are letting people self-select themselves into the experimental and control groups... doesn't this bias the experimental results pretty badly? Wouldn't it have been more effective to ask a group specifically to cuss their head off and ask a group specifically to refrain from swearing?
Slashdot Mirror
Not in this decade it doesn't. But I get the hint, and will depart from your lawn forthwith.
I think the last thing they'd want to do is play a game set in space...
Do you have an argument for the validity of the old standard other than an appeal to tradition? Anyone who cares and who needs to read those books or papers can certainly learn that before a certain date, an older definition was used.
Just because you don't use it doesn't mean it isn't useful or desired. I know a lot of people who have as much scorn for Slashdot as you seem to for Twitter.
Did you try using it to read posts from people you know? Or just random people on the Internet?
Wrong. The whole point of Twitter is that you can text in your tweets wherever. Most people I know aren't in front of their computer when they update.
Given how often I see articles claiming that "print media is in trouble, everything's online now", is investing R&D into video advertisements, not to mention increasing printing costs with this gimmick, REALLY the way to go? Are you trying to tell me that the only thing killing print media this whole time has been it's lack of flash ads!?
Funny to think about at first, but not actually that weird. This is probably the best way to reach out to everyone who they think needs help...
A substantial minority of thing A is actually thing B. From a logical standpoint, there exists an A that is also a B.
Therefore, all addictions to A are addictions to B. Put another way, if someone is addicted to A, then they are addicted to B.
Spot the fallacy, kids!
Warm? Monster Cables are downright danceable!
I'm sure you could get that kind of bandwidth at your house, too, if you paid enough for it.
The V already stands for virus, ranking 'HIV Virus' up there with 'PIN Number' and 'ATM Machine'. I would hope that a tech site like Slashdot, used to dealing with acronyms, would do better.
Oh it does, if you believe the RIAA's legal theories...
At my high school, you were allowed to have cell phones if you turned them off in class. If your cell went off in class, though, you could be sure of getting detention. Since turning off cell phones during meetings and the like is good etiquette outside of high school too, I say let the students have their phones if only for a valuable learning experience.
Hi, you're reached Bob. If you don't know what to do here, there's really no helping you. (BEEP!)
This, of course, would be ruined with a cell phone voicemail system...
Right - if the browsers used ANS.1 instead of looking for null, we wouldn't have this problem. If the certs used null instead of reading the string length, we wouldn't have this problem.
The real problem is that, regardless of what's specified, someone is doing something different. This could happen just as easily if it were the other way around.
It's not illegal to do this as far as I know. If you don't like it, your recourse is not to do business with them, and convince as many as you can to not do business with them. I've been doing this (buying DRM-free) for as long as Amazon was offering MP3s.
A programmer with a big ego is more likely to write code that only they can maintain. So, I would have to disagree with your statement.
I consider it to be closest to philosophy, though I don't see why it can't be it's own field. Science and mathematics have completely different epistemological outlooks.
In science, if you say that anything has been "proven", you get laughed out of all respectable circles. Instead, you demonstrate a hypothesis by providing experimental evidence.
In mathematics, if you say that something has been demonstrated by empirical evidence, you get laughed out of all respectable circles. Instead, you need to prove everything rigorously.
Hopefully you can see a fundamental difference.
Fortran 90 and Fortran 95 both, however, comply with the OO paradigm.
If only you were right, my life for the past two years would have been much easier. Give me inheritence, dynamic binding, and private members of derived types ("structs" or "classes" for everyone who doesn't speek fortran). THEN maybe I'll agree that these standards comply with the OO paradigm. 2003 certainly does, but point me to a single complier that fully implements it...
Most stuff written *today* is written in modern fortran where you can actually have variable names of a decent length. Most legacy code that you have to rely on (e.g. linear algebra routines) are written in the cruddy old fortran. But it's solid code, works as a black box, and I would venture to guess that it's not a *whole* lot less readable than your average implementation of printf. Plus, if you want to update it to modern fortran, be my guest - hope you have a lot of time, patience, money, and a good set of unit tests....
Note that 'amateur' comes from the French for "lover" and has a primary meaning someone who loves what they are doing, someone who is not paid being a secondary meeting. I would say that almost all astronomers are amateur. Some are even paid for doing it as well.
Argh, no! The English definition of Amateur (from Dictionary.com) is the following:
1. a person who engages in a study, sport, or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons. Compare professional.
2. an athlete who has never competed for payment or for a monetary prize.
3. a person inexperienced or unskilled in a particular activity: Hunting lions is not for amateurs.
4. a person who admires something; devotee; fan: an amateur of the cinema.
Your definition is the fourth down, under three definitions that state either lack of skill or lack of pay. Are you telling me that 1 through 3 are only "secondary definitions?" Because I think it's the other way around. Please do not confuse etymology with definition, either unintentionally or (as I see so often) as a rhetorical trick. The former is somewhat interesting, but only useful in this context if we happen to be posting on a French version of Slashdot.
"During the chilly exercise, they could repeat an expletive of their choice or chant a neutral word."
So they are letting people self-select themselves into the experimental and control groups... doesn't this bias the experimental results pretty badly? Wouldn't it have been more effective to ask a group specifically to cuss their head off and ask a group specifically to refrain from swearing?
"Proof of Concept" != "Generally Useable". Wait a few years for that one.
At least until the hard panning starts driving you slowly insane... some people can wear one ear all day, while I can't last ten minutes like that.