True, but personally, things like Apache, databases, ect. are not "secondary" services. They are the core purpose of most of my linux boxen. I'd be pretty annoyed if Apache took an extra 10 seconds to come up so that X could startup sooner.The desktop is the "secondary" service.
From the above, it is obvious that I use linux mostly at the server level, not at a user level.
I think something like this will be great if there are no assumptions about what is primary. If I can say that I need Apache up before my desktop (or even not have X at all) and the person beside me can say that they need the GUI up first, then this will be a great system.
If assumptions about what is primary and what is secondary are coded into the system, then it won't work for everyone.
Actually, my understanding is that nothing in the GPL prevents you from having royalty generating IP in a GPL covered product.
The GPL says that when you distribute the code via the GPL, you can not require additional restrictions along with the GPL in that distribution. (I'm not talking linux distributions (eg. Suse, Slackware), but the more general give something to someone else)
This does not prevent you from also incorporating your code in a product that you license/sell/whatever so long as it is only your code and not anyone elses GPL'd code in your product.
Maybe this is why some people are put of on linux. The guy makes some comments about the visual appeal of a screen and suffers verbal abuse and the typical "If you don't like it, fix it".
Criticsm can be a good thing. Now I'm not a huge fan of the Mac screenshot Xyde presented, but lets not be children about this. Personally, I think the Mac fonts of the screenshot did look better than the Gnome shots. Since I'm not a font magician and can't just fix it, does that mean I'm not entitled to say I like those fonts better.
I have to agree. I love how he calls companies with offices in the US "unethical" because they are using H1Bs. How is that unethical. Sure there are alot of umemployed IT staff right now. But how many of them are actually qualified vs. having been hired during the boom when companies were hiring just about anyone.
He has a serious hate on for the H1B program.
Re:Shoehorn
on
Java vs .NET
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Maybe your developing for the school market where being able to run the same code on both a Mac and a Windows box is a great feature. Even linux is starting to come into schools. Guess what? Our products will already work with linux.
Sure, generally you know your target platform. But sometimes you don't. Also, since the toolset between unix and windows is very different, it is sometimes far easier to develop on one than the other.
With Java, you develop on whichever platform makes it easy. You test and deploy on the target platform.
I'm scared of the idea of one project written in many languages. The old web problem of HTML inside perl (or Java or any other language) should teach us that moving between languages on the fly requires a mental context switch that slows things down.
A code generator is a compiler. It takes some source and produces an implementation of the source using a more primitive language.
I wrote a code generator for EJBs. The template that was passed in was very much the source as a very high level language. The output was Java code.
I wrote a Pascal compiler for a virutal machine. The source taken in was Pascal, the output was VM code.
The two were very similar except the gramar for the code generator was much simpler so I didn't need a complex lexical parser.
Don't dismiss code generation as some trick. It is a very valid approach to simplifying repetitive steps and is as much a compiler as what you are thinking of.
All I can say is "WHATEVER". I don't suppose you read many papers or listen to much radio. Canadian health care is criticized (unjustly in my mind) on a daily basis. As are our leaders and just about anything else that can be defined as "Canadian". With the above statements you are angering patriotic Canadians, but I don't believe you are being factual. I suspect the real story behind your points (which you hadn't already noted by the way) are (a) you were being verbally abusive, not having a "peaceful" conversation; (b) You were being very beligerant and annoying and the cop was fed up with you; (c) I don't believe that one.
Basically, a primary color is one that can't be created by a mixture of other colors. This varies based on what medium of color you are talking about. The primary colors for light are different from the primary colors for pigments.
Is anyone else as bitter as I that WoC has changed to pre-painted plastic miniatures? I get almost as much fun from painting miniatures as from playing the game. I wish they'd kept the chainmail line and added the plastic prepainted miniatures as a (required) option.
Actually, I also dislike the 3.5 changes that make it a-lot harder to play without miniatures (I paint miniatures as a hobby, not to use in a campaign). What happened to imagining things in your mind? As Monte Cook mentions, many of the rules now assume the use of miniatures. I think this is a mistake.
I agree completely. I used to love lego (still do actually), but when I go to look for kits more my kids, nothing excites me. The pieces just don't provide the flexability they once did. You have to put it together like designed and no other way.
I remember a space station that kind of reminds me of an Apollo lander on steroids. Anyway, it was built exclusively from "standard" blocks. It had a few pieces that were smooth on top, a few hinges and lots of 2x2s that were slanted on top. I could build anything from that. Then a got a spaceship with lots of flat triangular pieces. Still good flexability, but not as much. Now, I see wing panels where the whole wing is one panel. Where's the flexability in that.
OK, so now I'm ranting and tripping down memory lane. Ah well. Time to pull out my... (I mean my kids) lego.
While the budget deficit MAY be a smaller percentage of GDP than other major powers (I haven't found info on this), this site says that if your debt was payed off, the US budget would have a $175 billion dollar surplus. It also says that interest on debt accounts for 19% of US GDP. So don't get too pleased with the possible fact that the deficit is low. Without paying off debt, the US is going to have rising deficits just to cover interest on your debt.
A small quible, but I believe it would only null and void the section that is requiring you to do something illegal. The remainder of the contract would still be in force. That is what section 9 "severability" covers.
I know Stallman frowns on it, but I've happily used the LGPL. We produced a library to access the Windows registry from Java. We LGPL'd it to share with the world, but were able to incorporate it into a product for sale because of the reduced restrictions of the LGPL.
I agree, the line I quoted could be read both ways, but taking other similar lines together with this one. eg. "too restrictive of programmers' rights, in the sense of forcing them to open what they've done to the world", I think tends to direct the meaning the wrong way.
Sorry, I was unclear. If you distribute your project outside of "in house", you must use the GPL. I got carried away with talking about release source, but meant releasing your project.
Dan Gillmor is adding to the GPL FUD with errors in this article. He says a number of times that " If you create software that is derived from software previously licensed under the GPL, you must release what you've written under the same license.". This is not exactly true, you are not forced to release what you have written and you don't have to share the code unless you release your changes. In the case of OpenTV, it sounds like they are releasing the code, but doing an in-house mod to GPL code does not require you to release what you've written. Errors like this in the mainstream media just muddy the issue and add to GPL detractors.
I've also seen some pretty convincing arguments that the GPL is on pretty solid legal ground. The GPL gives you the right to view the source -> modify it -> release it. In return for that right, you agree to the conditions of the license. Namely , that if/when you release your work, you use the GPL. IANAL, but this sounds like a simply contract you are agreeing to when you release your code.
I know where you were coming from (and agree to some extent). But think about what you said.
Your statement says it's reasonable to assume a 3-4 year old window system should be faster than a current window system. Aren't we going backwards here? I'm not convinced that adding fluff that slow things down is a good thing.
I'm torn on this. At first it seemed like a brilliant idea, but then I started to think that without a strong editor at the helm, the S/N ratio in the Jargon file would quickly erode.
I'm not saying he isn't a geek (well maybe I was, but you've convinced me he is). What I am saying is that he definately isn't an Ubergeek.
I still deny that geekness and blogging are related in any way. In fact I question how a true Ubergeek would have time to waste on blogging. I guess this is just personal opinion, but being a pretty serious geek myself (In fact I have been labeled an Ubergeek by others), I don't see the point in blogging. Do something, stop wasting time sharing your thoughts, show them in code or something physical.
I'm sorry, none of these things (except maybe for having worked on the Video Toaster (I don't know what he did on it)) qualifies as Ubergeek.
Being a TV actor has nothing to do with being a geek (except maybe negatively).
Coding and maintaining a website does not provide any geek status anymore.
Using Linux instead of Windows definately adds to his geek score.
In my mind, being a blogger of any sort is a count against geekness (it is too mainstream).
Posts on slashdot may or may not add to his geek score.
Free speech is good, but unrelated to geekness.
Again, being on TV doesn't related to geekness
Being a video and role-playing gamer can add to geekness.
To conclude, he may very well be a geek, but to be an Ubergeek, you have to be doing something technical that few others could. Linus Torvelds was an Ubergeek when he started Linux. Now he is a Demigod. Bruce Schneier's security/crypto work makes him an Ubergeek. ect.
I have to disagree with you saying a touch screen remote is useless. A 100% touch screen might be tough, but I find that the only things I typically have to adjust once a movie/music is going is volume (and if I'm watching TV, then channel). I think most touch screen remotes have enough hard buttons to implement these tasks.
I've also found that after using my touch screen remote for 2-3 years, I've gotten pretty adept at hitting the right point on the screen using finger memory (I don't have to look down). Admittedly, I'm a touch typist and accomplished piano player, so I have a lot of practice in putting my fingers where they need to be without looking at them.
Slashdot Mirror
True, but personally, things like Apache, databases, ect. are not "secondary" services. They are the core purpose of most of my linux boxen. I'd be pretty annoyed if Apache took an extra 10 seconds to come up so that X could startup sooner.The desktop is the "secondary" service.
From the above, it is obvious that I use linux mostly at the server level, not at a user level.
I think something like this will be great if there are no assumptions about what is primary. If I can say that I need Apache up before my desktop (or even not have X at all) and the person beside me can say that they need the GUI up first, then this will be a great system.
If assumptions about what is primary and what is secondary are coded into the system, then it won't work for everyone.
I'd like to respectfully point out that NWN and Baldur's Gate are not US products. They are Canadian.
Actually, my understanding is that nothing in the GPL prevents you from having royalty generating IP in a GPL covered product.
The GPL says that when you distribute the code via the GPL, you can not require additional restrictions along with the GPL in that distribution. (I'm not talking linux distributions (eg. Suse, Slackware), but the more general give something to someone else)
This does not prevent you from also incorporating your code in a product that you license/sell/whatever so long as it is only your code and not anyone elses GPL'd code in your product.
Maybe this is why some people are put of on linux. The guy makes some comments about the visual appeal of a screen and suffers verbal abuse and the typical "If you don't like it, fix it".
Criticsm can be a good thing. Now I'm not a huge fan of the Mac screenshot Xyde presented, but lets not be children about this. Personally, I think the Mac fonts of the screenshot did look better than the Gnome shots. Since I'm not a font magician and can't just fix it, does that mean I'm not entitled to say I like those fonts better.
Come on and grow up!
Maybe it's just me, but it seems wrong for a geek's preferred computer vendor to be Dell (or to even consider walking into a Best Buy).
Being a geek myself, I'd never consider getting a name brand computer (unless the name is Alien Ware (shamelessly copied from a previous article).
Having said that, some of the choices for tech are cool (like the Yamaha musicast).
I have to agree. I love how he calls companies with offices in the US "unethical" because they are using H1Bs. How is that unethical. Sure there are alot of umemployed IT staff right now. But how many of them are actually qualified vs. having been hired during the boom when companies were hiring just about anyone.
He has a serious hate on for the H1B program.
Maybe your developing for the school market where being able to run the same code on both a Mac and a Windows box is a great feature. Even linux is starting to come into schools. Guess what? Our products will already work with linux.
Sure, generally you know your target platform. But sometimes you don't. Also, since the toolset between unix and windows is very different, it is sometimes far easier to develop on one than the other.
With Java, you develop on whichever platform makes it easy. You test and deploy on the target platform.
I'm scared of the idea of one project written in many languages. The old web problem of HTML inside perl (or Java or any other language) should teach us that moving between languages on the fly requires a mental context switch that slows things down.
A code generator is a compiler. It takes some source and produces an implementation of the source using a more primitive language.
I wrote a code generator for EJBs. The template that was passed in was very much the source as a very high level language. The output was Java code.
I wrote a Pascal compiler for a virutal machine. The source taken in was Pascal, the output was VM code.
The two were very similar except the gramar for the code generator was much simpler so I didn't need a complex lexical parser.
Don't dismiss code generation as some trick. It is a very valid approach to simplifying repetitive steps and is as much a compiler as what you are thinking of.
All I can say is "WHATEVER". I don't suppose you read many papers or listen to much radio. Canadian health care is criticized (unjustly in my mind) on a daily basis. As are our leaders and just about anything else that can be defined as "Canadian".
With the above statements you are angering patriotic Canadians, but I don't believe you are being factual. I suspect the real story behind your points (which you hadn't already noted by the way) are (a) you were being verbally abusive, not having a "peaceful" conversation; (b) You were being very beligerant and annoying and the cop was fed up with you; (c) I don't believe that one.
See here for a discussion of primary colors.
Basically, a primary color is one that can't be created by a mixture of other colors. This varies based on what medium of color you are talking about. The primary colors for light are different from the primary colors for pigments.
Is anyone else as bitter as I that WoC has changed to pre-painted plastic miniatures? I get almost as much fun from painting miniatures as from playing the game. I wish they'd kept the chainmail line and added the plastic prepainted miniatures as a (required) option.
Actually, I also dislike the 3.5 changes that make it a-lot harder to play without miniatures (I paint miniatures as a hobby, not to use in a campaign). What happened to imagining things in your mind? As Monte Cook mentions, many of the rules now assume the use of miniatures. I think this is a mistake.
I agree completely. I used to love lego (still do actually), but when I go to look for kits more my kids, nothing excites me. The pieces just don't provide the flexability they once did. You have to put it together like designed and no other way.
... (I mean my kids) lego.
I remember a space station that kind of reminds me of an Apollo lander on steroids. Anyway, it was built exclusively from "standard" blocks. It had a few pieces that were smooth on top, a few hinges and lots of 2x2s that were slanted on top. I could build anything from that. Then a got a spaceship with lots of flat triangular pieces. Still good flexability, but not as much. Now, I see wing panels where the whole wing is one panel. Where's the flexability in that.
OK, so now I'm ranting and tripping down memory lane. Ah well. Time to pull out my
Pain in the A..
While the budget deficit MAY be a smaller percentage of GDP than other major powers (I haven't found info on this), this site says that if your debt was payed off, the US budget would have a $175 billion dollar surplus. It also says that interest on debt accounts for 19% of US GDP. So don't get too pleased with the possible fact that the deficit is low. Without paying off debt, the US is going to have rising deficits just to cover interest on your debt.
A small quible, but I believe it would only null and void the section that is requiring you to do something illegal. The remainder of the contract would still be in force. That is what section 9 "severability" covers.
I know Stallman frowns on it, but I've happily used the LGPL. We produced a library to access the Windows registry from Java. We LGPL'd it to share with the world, but were able to incorporate it into a product for sale because of the reduced restrictions of the LGPL.
I agree, the line I quoted could be read both ways, but taking other similar lines together with this one. eg. "too restrictive of programmers' rights, in the sense of forcing them to open what they've done to the world", I think tends to direct the meaning the wrong way.
Sorry, I was unclear. If you distribute your project outside of "in house", you must use the GPL. I got carried away with talking about release source, but meant releasing your project.
Dan Gillmor is adding to the GPL FUD with errors in this article. He says a number of times that " If you create software that is derived from software previously licensed under the GPL, you must release what you've written under the same license.". This is not exactly true, you are not forced to release what you have written and you don't have to share the code unless you release your changes. In the case of OpenTV, it sounds like they are releasing the code, but doing an in-house mod to GPL code does not require you to release what you've written. Errors like this in the mainstream media just muddy the issue and add to GPL detractors.
I've also seen some pretty convincing arguments that the GPL is on pretty solid legal ground. The GPL gives you the right to view the source -> modify it -> release it. In return for that right, you agree to the conditions of the license. Namely , that if/when you release your work, you use the GPL. IANAL, but this sounds like a simply contract you are agreeing to when you release your code.
I know where you were coming from (and agree to some extent). But think about what you said.
Your statement says it's reasonable to assume a 3-4 year old window system should be faster than a current window system. Aren't we going backwards here? I'm not convinced that adding fluff that slow things down is a good thing.
A slashdot based Jargon file. I can just see it now.
/loo'zr/ n.
...
luser
A user; esp. one who is also a loser. ( luser and loser are pronounced identically.)
First Post
By AC
FIRST POST!!!!!
I'm torn on this. At first it seemed like a brilliant idea, but then I started to think that without a strong editor at the helm, the S/N ratio in the Jargon file would quickly erode.
I'm not saying he isn't a geek (well maybe I was, but you've convinced me he is). What I am saying is that he definately isn't an Ubergeek.
I still deny that geekness and blogging are related in any way. In fact I question how a true Ubergeek would have time to waste on blogging. I guess this is just personal opinion, but being a pretty serious geek myself (In fact I have been labeled an Ubergeek by others), I don't see the point in blogging. Do something, stop wasting time sharing your thoughts, show them in code or something physical.
I'm sorry, none of these things (except maybe for having worked on the Video Toaster (I don't know what he did on it)) qualifies as Ubergeek.
Being a TV actor has nothing to do with being a geek (except maybe negatively).
Coding and maintaining a website does not provide any geek status anymore.
Using Linux instead of Windows definately adds to his geek score.
In my mind, being a blogger of any sort is a count against geekness (it is too mainstream).
Posts on slashdot may or may not add to his geek score.
Free speech is good, but unrelated to geekness.
Again, being on TV doesn't related to geekness
Being a video and role-playing gamer can add to geekness.
To conclude, he may very well be a geek, but to be an Ubergeek, you have to be doing something technical that few others could. Linus Torvelds was an Ubergeek when he started Linux. Now he is a Demigod. Bruce Schneier's security/crypto work makes him an Ubergeek. ect.
I have to disagree with you saying a touch screen remote is useless. A 100% touch screen might be tough, but I find that the only things I typically have to adjust once a movie/music is going is volume (and if I'm watching TV, then channel). I think most touch screen remotes have enough hard buttons to implement these tasks.
I've also found that after using my touch screen remote for 2-3 years, I've gotten pretty adept at hitting the right point on the screen using finger memory (I don't have to look down). Admittedly, I'm a touch typist and accomplished piano player, so I have a lot of practice in putting my fingers where they need to be without looking at them.