Actually, you're the fool to think this has anything to do with power. So rename one of the heads. What is it with the ability to have the files Grok, grOk, GRok, and grOK in the same directory that gives you a sense of power? The mere thought only serves to give me a headache.
The same filename with different casing is still the same filename. The charachters we (we) use come from an alphabet where the letters 'a' and 'A' are identical in sound and meaning. That they have different numerical representations in the computer is completly irrelevant, that's just because the computer needs to encode them in some way. In real use, too all humans using our alphabet, every day, they represent the same letter. If your name is 'Gauss' you're likely to at some point have written is 'gauss' or 'GAUSS'. You recognise that this still is the same name don't you? That's because in our alphabet _it is_.
Filenames ultimately are a small piece of metadata attached to a file for the sake of humans. If filenames were meant for computers the files would have names like 1, 2, 3, 4,..., 54654654,...
This case isn't entierly language agnostic, implementing "complicated" algorithms is easier in a higher level language than in a lower level one, memory allocation can get quite hairy. But frankly, few ICFP tasks have been more language agnostic. There're simply so many completly different strategies to chose from for this problem that chosing the right one is the only thing that matters. Radical Too did one very smart thing, they knew the advantage of their language was execution speed and they went for an algorithm which uses this advantage to it's maximum, an semi exhaustive search algorithm. Instead of chosing to implement a "smarter" (in the AI sense, not in the programmer sense, their algorithm is plenty clever) and harder (more abstract) algorithm in which their language couldn't shine.
Someone else did chose even more wisely, however. Such is life and the imperative languages have still yet to see a victory in ICFP. It's comming though, especially with more contests like this one.
While a bag of potato chips won't turn you obese, a thousand ones will. And so since I believe that violent games/movies/books influence one just as everything else does, I also believe that consuming too much of it can be hazardous for your mental health. Obviously, for most normal and healthy individuals, that dosage is extremly high for achiving something as drastic as you suggest. But for kids and people who for some reason aren't as mentally stable to begin with...
Some people tend to get obese a lot easier as well.
If you expect your kids to reason and disconnect themselves as easily as you, well...
So, practising restraint in this respect is just like avoiding too much junk food. It keep one healthier and your mind clearer. Ofcourse, you won't make as good a crazy suffering artist. Those are the shots... =)
So what you are trying to say, in your own witty, sarcastic way, is that you aren't influenced by anything you see or hear? Or at least not by anything that isn't "real"? And that kids work the same way?
I'm think that's just as naive as believing that DOOM turns everyone who plays it into a gun-crazy maniac.
One more game my kids won't be playing when they are young. I might, but I don't really believe it's "good" for me either, it's just one of those thing one does despite it not being healthy.
In the end I just believe that everything I consume, with my body or with my mind, influences me, if only ever so slightly. I'm the end product of what I (and others) subject myself to. I'm reasonably healthy, a bag of chips won't kill me. But don't try to tell me that means it's not "bad" for me.
Ofcourse, abolishing that rule would completly destroy the game that is soccer. Teams would be forced to play with a lot more people on the defence, the number of goals scored would approach absolute zero, and it would not be anything near the beautiful game it now is.
It's very simple, without that rule the defence would always need one player closer to their own goal than each of the opposing players. Not pretty.
I'm not saying the transition is easy, merely that the issue is really easy. And that you have a hard time appreciating how important the difference it really makes is if your only experience with "the other side" is visits abroad.
It is my opinion that it makes a real and important enough difference to make the "tradition" argument look stupid. I also think it's worth the costs in time and money(!), but I understand how one could have a different opinion on _that_ matter.
It's really simple. They want to make your money _better_. Differentiated bills would be _better_ bills. They would be more useable. It really makes a difference for usability. Now, a quick visit abroad won't make you appreciate this difference, you can't use visual cues with which you aren't familiar. But once you are it makes a real, practical, everyday _difference_. It makes handling money less error prone and makes estimating the ammount of money you are carrying that much easier. Not to mention the benefits for the visually imparied.
You are resisting _real, tangible, and easy improvement_ because of _tradition_ and because you are unwilling to change what you grew up with, "It works swell now dammit, I don't need no hard disk, floppies do all I need!". That is what this boils down to.
I say we bring on this change, because I _know_ it's an improvement.
And yet, every time I see the original movies I'm surprised at how good they are, how the timing is about right, how varied and effective the pacing is and how internally consistent the flick is.
And every time is see TPM I just cringe, it's just.... not. And really mean it when I say it doesn't have anything to do with when I saw the movies and everything to do with the actual qualities of these movies (as percieved by me).
I could write a lot about AOTC, but let's just say:
Less unnecessary nothingness than TPM.
Some overly long and unnecessary action scenes (droid factory, courosant chase)
Wooden dialog.
Lot's of new designs (vehicles, weapons, and so on) but definitly with a lot spottier quality than the rest of the movies. Some things made little sense. Possibly the only area where TPM outshines ATOC.
I also don't understand my so many people want microscopic-sized phones. Sure, they're kind of cute; but the buttons and screens are so damned small. Also, one's home/land-line phone is "normal phone sized" so why insist on much smaller cell phones?
Because most of the time I don't want to log a bag around? I'm bothered enough by my constantly oversized (too many credit sized cards) wallet, I'd dearly like to lose that one. I'm not going to stretch my pockets by carrying big lump-o-phone, or PDA. Basically, the only phone/PDA that is of value to me is one that I'll actually bring everywhere. The only one I'll ever bring everywhere is the one which is small enough to fit in my pocket and then not be noticable. My T28 is about the right size, a little too big, but not bad.
The perfect phone/PDA would fold to a slightly thick credit card, be completly covered by it's own LCD touch sensitive screen, and replace my Id and credit/ATM cards. It would have the kind of functionality that works in that kind of form factor. I'm not going to watch Episode 2 on it, I'm no going to play Doom 3, I'm not going to do word processing, or read novels. I'll use more appropriate devices for that.
But I feel no need to carry that functionality around constantly.
I'll give that, oh, 10 years? And mostly not because of technical issues...
It just struck me that Mozilla and Emacs seem to have some common traits. They have both ventured beyond being single purpose applications and have become platforms of some fashion. What is it with this approach, what's the driving force that makes a project take a look at it's core technology and it's ideas and declare that "This is so cool it should be used elsewhere, everywhere, by everyone."?
You obviously haven't gotten 'it' yet. Haskell is really, really neat. You've just got to learn to think it, just like you learned to 'think' Java or whatever.
It's more abstract, so it often requires more thought from your side. But once you've gone there and explored and learned you are rewarded with a new way of viewing the world of computation and what goes on in it. Even if you never use it again, you'll at least know it's there and have a chance to understand why you do the things you do.
But sure, it costs a few hour of pure thought before you see that light. And you don't seem to be interested in bending your mind around something different in this manner.
Because the authors of the new books you read are likely to be well versed in classical literature. They know the ways to build plots, the obscureish references and the ways these 'old' books have covered and played with many styles and fashions.
Reading that 'old' stuff you're likely to find and appreciate new things in the 'new' stuff you read. Because the author did. It never hurt to have a wider frame of reference.
Ofcourse, under such a system rich enough companies will be able to keep on lying/denying for quite a while and have more people die. I think there's quite a bit of evidence that companies can carry on denying the painfully obvious for a long time.
And they sure won't spend money to investigate their own products. And if nobody investigates nobody will be able to establish the link. Which makes the 'little guy' fairly small if they'd try to take things to court.
When money is the only ruler, and you rely on media to extert pressure on those with the money, you'll find that media is also about money=/
-
Re:What, and Python doesn't?
on
Why not Ruby?
·
· Score: 1
Gee. What he describes is how operator overloading is done in Python. '__mul__' is the Python equivalent of 'operator*'. So yes, Python does support operator overloading. Real one.
Why did you have to step up on that soapbox and preach about 'real' operator overloading without giving Python the benefit of a doubt about having it and at least checking out what __mul__ does? That the naming convention isn't the same as in C++?
And if my memory doesn't serve me wrong said Traci has also said some stuff about how Used, Abused, Dirty, and generally Bad she feels when she thinks back. She did it willingly and certainly made plenty of dough, but from that interview it sure sounded like she felt it had destroyed her relationship with both her own body and with sex in general, talking about how she took long showers all time time because over time it just broke her mentally. Things getting progressivly worse through her career as it became harder and harder to shut out the reality of letting a important part of her private sphere be exploited byt herself and others. Or something like that:-/
She's certainly a great testament to how good the porn industry can be for someone don't you think?
I wouldn't mind the porn (and I don't on moral grounds) if it wasn't for the porn industry and what it does to a lot of the people involved. It's not a nice place to be and it eats away at people's lives, minds, and bodies. Not everyone all the time, but too many too much of the time. Yes, drugs play a role, but in parts it's a symptom and not the sole cause. Porn/drug, drugs/porn, in the industry I believe they have a incestual relationship:-/ Why do they do drugs? Could it possibly be that some of them don't feel 100% a OK about living the way they do and need the escape? That they are activly encouraged to (boogie nights reference)? Why do they do more porn then? Well, drugs aren't cheap ya'know.
And for some reason it strikes me as a bad idea that someone (the movie directors/owners/disitributors) actually stand to gain money from their employees being hooked on sunstance abuse. Does that sound like the basis for a healthy industry/relationship?
E-mail is fine. Everybody I know in Sweden is perfectly reachable by e-mail. But...
Last week me and my girlfriend was at a party with some friends of her family, mid summer festival party. One of the daughters of the host family, a friend of my girlfriend, is on Iceland a.t.m., going to work for a year. While we sat at the table her sisters cell phone went "meeeeep!". She had sent an SMS from Iceland, sitting in some café. The SMS was read aloud, and everybody came up with things to say in the reply, which was promptly sent. A few of minutes later the reply landed. It went back and forth like that a couple of times. This girl on Iceland was more or less sitting by the table =) She certainly has email access and uses it to communicate with her friends and family in Sweden. But they are different applications for different types of communication...
So what's the point? Well, an email is not an appropriate replacement for SMS (a.t.m., come back when sending email from a phone/PDA is a common thing, then it's essentially SMS anyhow), they do different things. The above scenario would not have worked out with email, it would have required a (noisy) computer in the same room, it would have required the typist to leave the table (or turn away), or it would have required a keyboard one the table (it was full of food and glasses anyhow).
And sending SMS from Iceland to Sweden works fine. Things working together makes it seem so seemless that one doesn't even consider the U.S. mess an possibility. It just works, if it didn't people wouldn't use it. Broken/useless service -> No demand -> No better service. And that's the way it always goes =)
It's just gotta be Amiga Inc (or whatever they're called):) The beginning of a new end far away from the mass market for two arcitechtures that should have been but never were.
Simple. Yes you can, because Python's license _isn't the GPL_, it's merely GPL compatible. The differences include that you can embed Python, modify it as much as you wish, and then distribute it with your closed source applications. No problemo, go ahead, do it. Just make sure you read the license yourself before you do it (this is a general rule):-)
Ah, but Python variables aren't valid before assigned to, they don't "magically" spring into existance because you happened to refer to them. Strict (if not static) typing also helps. It doesn't catch every and all mistake, but it catches most of them, and not having to declare variables turns out making _me_ more productive that I'd be in a stricter language. I used to buy into the "not declaring variables lead to hell" philosophy, but honestly, Python's way of handling this has made me a firm believer it's actually a good thing not having to declare them.
Above all Python is the most _fun_ I've had in any language I can think of. That's worth a bunch as well=)
The game programmer has a finite ammount of time to spend on a project before the deadline hits. He can spend that time optimizing HD space usage _or_ he can spend that time making the enemy AI smarter and the game faster. In the best of worlds he could do both, but in this reality he has to chose. What do you prefer this programmer choses?
The Hobbit was written before LOTR, when Tolkiens children were still kids. Thus, it's a "childrens book" in a way that LOTR isn't. At that time LOTR was only embryonic if even that and things changed between The Hobbit and LOTR. Most importantly things "grew up".
And so, The Hobbit isn't a "perfect fit" with the newer material about the LOTR universe but it is a part of it. It's the story of how Bilbo aquired the ring and a story that introduces Gandalf and a lot of the fundamental concepts of Middle Earth. It's not "LOTR light" but it's the perfect place for kids to get their introduction to Tolkien's work, a most "light read" fairt tale kind of story where the "deeper" meaning of things that happen isn't really discovered until reading LOTR.
Ofcourse, it's an essential read for every LOTR fan =)
And then you should know what everyone seem to miss:
Dirk Gently's Holistic Dectective Agency was his best book. A thing of beauty.
Him passing away is a sad, sad, thing. I'll miss him.
So what about your competitors? if you're product is selling for less then you are doing the same thing to them
Uhm, not as long as he's making enough money to support his kids he isn't...
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, you're the fool to think this has anything to do with power. So rename one of the heads. What is it with the ability to have the files Grok, grOk, GRok, and grOK in the same directory that gives you a sense of power? The mere thought only serves to give me a headache.
..., 54654654, ...
The same filename with different casing is still the same filename. The charachters we (we) use come from an alphabet where the letters 'a' and 'A' are identical in sound and meaning. That they have different numerical representations in the computer is completly irrelevant, that's just because the computer needs to encode them in some way. In real use, too all humans using our alphabet, every day, they represent the same letter. If your name is 'Gauss' you're likely to at some point have written is 'gauss' or 'GAUSS'. You recognise that this still is the same name don't you? That's because in our alphabet _it is_.
Filenames ultimately are a small piece of metadata attached to a file for the sake of humans. If filenames were meant for computers the files would have names like 1, 2, 3, 4,
This case isn't entierly language agnostic, implementing "complicated" algorithms is easier in a higher level language than in a lower level one, memory allocation can get quite hairy. But frankly, few ICFP tasks have been more language agnostic. There're simply so many completly different strategies to chose from for this problem that chosing the right one is the only thing that matters. Radical Too did one very smart thing, they knew the advantage of their language was execution speed and they went for an algorithm which uses this advantage to it's maximum, an semi exhaustive search algorithm. Instead of chosing to implement a "smarter" (in the AI sense, not in the programmer sense, their algorithm is plenty clever) and harder (more abstract) algorithm in which their language couldn't shine.
Someone else did chose even more wisely, however. Such is life and the imperative languages have still yet to see a victory in ICFP. It's comming though, especially with more contests like this one.
Some people tend to get obese a lot easier as well.
If you expect your kids to reason and disconnect themselves as easily as you, well...
So, practising restraint in this respect is just like avoiding too much junk food. It keep one healthier and your mind clearer. Ofcourse, you won't make as good a crazy suffering artist. Those are the shots... =)
I'm think that's just as naive as believing that DOOM turns everyone who plays it into a gun-crazy maniac.
One more game my kids won't be playing when they are young. I might, but I don't really believe it's "good" for me either, it's just one of those thing one does despite it not being healthy.
In the end I just believe that everything I consume, with my body or with my mind, influences me, if only ever so slightly. I'm the end product of what I (and others) subject myself to. I'm reasonably healthy, a bag of chips won't kill me. But don't try to tell me that means it's not "bad" for me.
Garbage in, garbage out.
It's very simple, without that rule the defence would always need one player closer to their own goal than each of the opposing players. Not pretty.
It is my opinion that it makes a real and important enough difference to make the "tradition" argument look stupid. I also think it's worth the costs in time and money(!), but I understand how one could have a different opinion on _that_ matter.
You are resisting _real, tangible, and easy improvement_ because of _tradition_ and because you are unwilling to change what you grew up with, "It works swell now dammit, I don't need no hard disk, floppies do all I need!". That is what this boils down to.
I say we bring on this change, because I _know_ it's an improvement.
And every time is see TPM I just cringe, it's just.... not. And really mean it when I say it doesn't have anything to do with when I saw the movies and everything to do with the actual qualities of these movies (as percieved by me).
I could write a lot about AOTC, but let's just say: Less unnecessary nothingness than TPM.
Some overly long and unnecessary action scenes (droid factory, courosant chase)
Wooden dialog.
Lot's of new designs (vehicles, weapons, and so on) but definitly with a lot spottier quality than the rest of the movies. Some things made little sense. Possibly the only area where TPM outshines ATOC.
Better movie than TPM.
Because most of the time I don't want to log a bag around? I'm bothered enough by my constantly oversized (too many credit sized cards) wallet, I'd dearly like to lose that one. I'm not going to stretch my pockets by carrying big lump-o-phone, or PDA. Basically, the only phone/PDA that is of value to me is one that I'll actually bring everywhere. The only one I'll ever bring everywhere is the one which is small enough to fit in my pocket and then not be noticable. My T28 is about the right size, a little too big, but not bad.
The perfect phone/PDA would fold to a slightly thick credit card, be completly covered by it's own LCD touch sensitive screen, and replace my Id and credit/ATM cards. It would have the kind of functionality that works in that kind of form factor. I'm not going to watch Episode 2 on it, I'm no going to play Doom 3, I'm not going to do word processing, or read novels. I'll use more appropriate devices for that.
But I feel no need to carry that functionality around constantly.
I'll give that, oh, 10 years? And mostly not because of technical issues...
Ad oh yeah, keys as well, I hate to carry keys...
It just struck me that Mozilla and Emacs seem to have some common traits. They have both ventured beyond being single purpose applications and have become platforms of some fashion. What is it with this approach, what's the driving force that makes a project take a look at it's core technology and it's ideas and declare that "This is so cool it should be used elsewhere, everywhere, by everyone."?
Hubris?
Everyone should read them.
You obviously haven't gotten 'it' yet. Haskell is really, really neat. You've just got to learn to think it, just like you learned to 'think' Java or whatever.
It's more abstract, so it often requires more thought from your side. But once you've gone there and explored and learned you are rewarded with a new way of viewing the world of computation and what goes on in it. Even if you never use it again, you'll at least know it's there and have a chance to understand why you do the things you do.
But sure, it costs a few hour of pure thought before you see that light. And you don't seem to be interested in bending your mind around something different in this manner.
Ah well. Your loss. Or mine =)
Reading that 'old' stuff you're likely to find and appreciate new things in the 'new' stuff you read. Because the author did. It never hurt to have a wider frame of reference.
And they sure won't spend money to investigate their own products. And if nobody investigates nobody will be able to establish the link. Which makes the 'little guy' fairly small if they'd try to take things to court.
When money is the only ruler, and you rely on media to extert pressure on those with the money, you'll find that media is also about money=/
-
Why did you have to step up on that soapbox and preach about 'real' operator overloading without giving Python the benefit of a doubt about having it and at least checking out what __mul__ does? That the naming convention isn't the same as in C++?
Bah:-/
-
She's certainly a great testament to how good the porn industry can be for someone don't you think?
I wouldn't mind the porn (and I don't on moral grounds) if it wasn't for the porn industry and what it does to a lot of the people involved. It's not a nice place to be and it eats away at people's lives, minds, and bodies. Not everyone all the time, but too many too much of the time. Yes, drugs play a role, but in parts it's a symptom and not the sole cause. Porn/drug, drugs/porn, in the industry I believe they have a incestual relationship:-/ Why do they do drugs? Could it possibly be that some of them don't feel 100% a OK about living the way they do and need the escape? That they are activly encouraged to (boogie nights reference)? Why do they do more porn then? Well, drugs aren't cheap ya'know.
And for some reason it strikes me as a bad idea that someone (the movie directors/owners/disitributors) actually stand to gain money from their employees being hooked on sunstance abuse. Does that sound like the basis for a healthy industry/relationship?
-
Last week me and my girlfriend was at a party with some friends of her family, mid summer festival party. One of the daughters of the host family, a friend of my girlfriend, is on Iceland a.t.m., going to work for a year. While we sat at the table her sisters cell phone went "meeeeep!". She had sent an SMS from Iceland, sitting in some café. The SMS was read aloud, and everybody came up with things to say in the reply, which was promptly sent. A few of minutes later the reply landed. It went back and forth like that a couple of times. This girl on Iceland was more or less sitting by the table =) She certainly has email access and uses it to communicate with her friends and family in Sweden. But they are different applications for different types of communication...
So what's the point? Well, an email is not an appropriate replacement for SMS (a.t.m., come back when sending email from a phone/PDA is a common thing, then it's essentially SMS anyhow), they do different things. The above scenario would not have worked out with email, it would have required a (noisy) computer in the same room, it would have required the typist to leave the table (or turn away), or it would have required a keyboard one the table (it was full of food and glasses anyhow).
And sending SMS from Iceland to Sweden works fine. Things working together makes it seem so seemless that one doesn't even consider the U.S. mess an possibility. It just works, if it didn't people wouldn't use it. Broken/useless service -> No demand -> No better service. And that's the way it always goes =)
-
A match made in heaven if I ever saw it =^)
-
-
Above all Python is the most _fun_ I've had in any language I can think of. That's worth a bunch as well=)
-
The game programmer has a finite ammount of time to spend on a project before the deadline hits. He can spend that time optimizing HD space usage _or_ he can spend that time making the enemy AI smarter and the game faster. In the best of worlds he could do both, but in this reality he has to chose. What do you prefer this programmer choses?
-
-
-
-
-