Of course, if you just re-solve the General Relativity equations using the data that's been collected in the last 100 years, it appears that dark matter may be completely unnecessary. This was previously discussed here.
Amateur only is one of the most idiotic restrictions imaginable. Winning an olympic gold medal is supposed to signify that you're the best in the world. How can that be if you're not even good enough to go pro?
It's the equivalent of the RIAA saying that piracy increases visits to movie theaters and record stores.
Since TFA doesn't mention a thing about lost money for big-pharma, I'm not really sure why it makes up such a big part of the summary.
Java also has pointers; it's not possible to say "I know Java but not pointers", because even the language itself admits it has pointers: it throws a null pointer exception when a pointer is null. That's pretty much the extent of pointers in Java. If knowing pointers is equivalent to knowing the name of an exception, then yeah -- it's impossible to know Java without pointers.
There is also a little bit of memory management thrown in, in the sense that pointers must be nullified as soon as possible so as that the collector clears unused objects. Garbage collectors were created specifically so you don't have to nullify objects for the memory to be reclaimed. You may need to free other resources in a timely manner, but nullification is a very bad way to handle that.
Java has some advantages over C++ that are important for teaching programming: it has an established set of patterns that all libraries use, whereas in C++ there is no discipline, anyone can make anything in any way possible. So the STL has no standards, and Java compilers/runtimes enforce style guidelines to the point where people can't just "make anything in any way." I learn something new every day.
For example, many Java libraries use the listener pattern. Event handlers handle events -- er, implement the listener pattern -- stop the presses!
Java treats exceptions correctly (despite of being boring to having to program around them), where is in C++ exceptions are not used You're a troll, right? Exceptions aren't used in C++? I guess this was modded interesting, and not insightful.
Another advantage of Java is its typing system, which covers a great spectrum of typing systems: it is strong, it is static, but it is also a little bit of dynamic when one uses interfaces. Interfaces are not dynamic in any way whatsoever. They are entirely static.
It's very important, and since OO is dominant these years and for the future, it's a very important aspect and Java is the best environment to teach and experiment on these issues. The lack of multiple inheritance automatically precludes it from being the best environment to teach OO. You need that in order to learn about the problems things like interfaces are meant to solve in the first place.
Java is also suitable for teaching concurrent programming, due to its support for threads. In fact, a Swing programmer must already know threads, because a Swing application is already threaded right from the start. Swing is single threaded. If you knew about interrupt driven programming from a low level class, you would understand that events can be handled without context switching between threads.
In conclusion, I think Java is a language designed to solve many problems that programmers have traditionally faced. However, the abstractions that it makes take away from the foundation that a beginning programmer should have to build upon. It should be easy for any programmer with good fundamentals to pick up Java on their own, if they so choose.
*I'm also rather amused at the numerous suggestions to teach scheme that have been posted on an article about the harm of teaching languages with heavy abstraction.*
Applications: Address Book,
Automator,
Calculator,
Chess,
Dashboard,
Dictionary,
DVD Player,
Exposé,
Font Book,
Front Row,
iCal,
iChat,
Image Capture,
iSync (Supported Devices),
iTunes,
Mail,
Photo Booth,
Preview,
QuickTime Player,
Safari,
Spaces,
Stickies,
System Preferences,
TextEdit,
Time Machine Utilities: Activity Monitor,
AirPort Utility,
Audio MIDI Setup,
Boot Camp Assistant,
Bluetooth File Exchange,
ColorSync Utility,
Console,
Digital Color Meter,
Directory,
Directory Utility,
Disk Utility,
Grab,
Grapher,
Keychain Access,
Migration Assistant,
Network Utility,
ODBC Administrator,
Podcast Capture,
RAID Utility,
Setup Assistant,
System Profiler,
Terminal,
VoiceOver Utility,
X11 Key Technologies: AppleScript,
Aqua,
Bonjour,
CDSA security architecture,
Cocoa, Carbon, and Java,
ColorSync,
Core Animation,
Core Audio,
Core Image,
Core Video,
H.264,
Inkwell,
OpenGL,
PDF,
Quartz Extreme,
QuickTime 7,
64-bit computing,
Sync,
Unicode 4,
Universal Access,
UNIX,
USB and FireWire peripheral support,
Xgrid Development: Xcode 3 IDE with Interface Builder 3,
Instruments,
Dashcode,
AppleScript Studio,
Automator 2,
Shark,
GCC compiler and toolset (original project by FSF.org),
DTrace (original project by Sun),
Complete Java JDK, including javac, javadoc, ANT, and Maven tools,
Apache web server,
AppleScript,
Ruby and the Ruby on Rails frameworks,
Python,
Perl,
PHP,
SQLite
That seems like a completely reasonable feature set for an OS though, right? My favorite part is Boot Camp -- it's ok to run Windows if you run it on Apple hardware bundled with OSX, but there's no way they'll let you run OSX on anything but Apple hardware. If the EU wants to discourage anticompetitive tactics, it needs to be consistent.
The VP is just a figurehead position. Giving that to the loser (with no chance of actually becoming president) would just be four years of humiliation.
None of which would be an issue, by the way, if software vendors just distributed the frigging Source Code already Why would someone pay for a binary when the source is available? (Not counting corporate support)
Don't get me wrong. I think FOSS is great for promoting competition, innovation, learning, etc. It certainly doesn't hurt a company to pay for the creation of FOSS (especially since they can then legally leverage a large amount of existing source) when the main reason for development is for use as internal tools. However, I just can't comprehend how people see that as the ideal business model for companies who rely on selling said software.
Of course, I also don't understand how those companies feel they can incorporate (steal) GPL code and still charge for the derived work.
You're like the 8th person to mention Newton or some other scientist from hundreds of years ago. That also makes you the 8th person to mention his religious beliefs while conveniently leaving out a discussion of religious tolerance in pre-enlightentment England. These famous 'religious' scientists didn't actually have a choice. We'll obviously never know, but I'd guess that they'd have drastically different views if somehow brought into the 21st century.
On the opening page, it says that it is the "word of God" and that it contains no errors. If the church that promotes (sells) it knows that to be false (ie requires interpretation), how can anyone trust them at all?
To state that "Only scientific claims are knowable" is equivalent to stating, "Only ten-word sentences are true." Red is a color. So much for the ten-word claim.
It's not quite as easy to handle the first one. You yourself couldn't do it. You stated a bunch of things about beliefs -- even the belief that your beliefs are rational. You made philosophical statements about how we accept that the universe is real, even though it falls outside of the scientific method.
"Even for persons who have a legitimate fear that their statements may subject them to criminal prosecution, we have long permitted the compulsion of incriminating testimony so long as those statements (or evidence derived from those statements) cannot be used against the speaker in any criminal case." --Justice Thomas when delivering the opinion
The issue with this case (and why the Supreme Court reversed the lower court's ruling) is that Martinez was never actually charged with a crime
So, six months after the article you linked to (and still four and a half years ago):
"The Supreme Court ruled today that police questioning in the absence of Miranda warnings, even questioning that is overbearing to the point of coercion, does not violate the constitutional protection against compelled self-incrimination, as long as no incriminating statements are introduced at the suspect's trial.
But a person subjected to such questioning can still bring a civil suit against the police for damages for violating the Constitution's guarantee of due process, the court ruled." source
So, not only do you have the right to remain silent, you actually have the right to sue the police if they coerce you into giving up that right -- and they still can't introduce what you say as evidence.
"If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage." Deuteronomy 13:6-10
"Real operating systems don't slow down just because you use them or install software!"
Good point. B+ trees are O(1), right? So, the file system doesn't take longer to find and manipulate files as the indexes grow (not sure why it's bad on Windows though, since NTFS uses B+ trees, too). Oh, and background services run in the background, so they clearly don't get any time slices that would appear to cause slowdown.
The Hustler parody featured a picture of Falwell, and an "interview" in which "Falwell" describes his first sexual experience as occurring "with Mom" in an outhouse while both were "drunk off our God-fearing asses on Campari." In the spoof interview, "Falwell" goes on to say that he was so intoxicated that "Mom looked better than a Baptist whore with a $100 donation," that he decided to have sex with his mother since she had "showed all the other guys in town such a good time," and that they had intercourse regularly afterwards. Finally, when asked if he had tried Campari since, "Falwell" answered, "I always get sloshed before I go out to the pulpit. You don't think I could lay down all that bullshit sober, do you?"
This was accompanied by a disclaimer that it was a parody, and the US District Court of West Virginia found in favor of Hustler on the libel charge, but in favor of Falwell on the intentional infliction of emotional distress charge. The Supreme Court reversed the decision as they found that the lower court's decision "runs afoul of our longstanding refusal to allow damages to be awarded because the speech in question may have an adverse emotional impact on the audience." Hustler Magazine v. Falwell
Right, because any system in which you can win the 5 biggest states (and 1 other state of your choosing) with 51% and lose the other 44 by 100% (you flat out told them to fuck off because you didn't need them anyway) and still win the overall election is clearly the ideal way to 'balance the power of small and large states.'
Under this system, my state's electors effectively cast my vote (which is still worth roughly as much as it would be without them since the number of electors a state gets is based off of its population) to whoever they want (it doesn't technically have to be with the popular vote) regardless of whether I voted or even who I voted for.
It seems like it would be really easy to just let states' electors cast their votes proportionately to that of the voters. The biggest issue would likely be that campaigns would have to figure out how to effectively gain the most votes instead of just continuously pushing in "battleground states" to get that 51%, and the big parties are both extraordinarily opposed to change -- no matter how trivial.
He keeps calling for reduced government/spending, but then he goes and asks for hundreds of millions of dollars worth of funding for special projects for his constituents in Texas...
He doesn't know how much money income taxes bring in, but wants to get rid of them. He doesn't know how many troops we have, but he wants to bring them all home. He doesn't really know anything about any issue that he has a stance on. interview
MR. RUSSERT: "If elected president, Paul says he would abolish public schools, welfare, Social Security and farm subsidies."
REP. PAUL: OK, you may have picked that up 20 or 30 years ago, it's not part of my platform. As a matter of fact, I'm the only one that really has an interim program. Technically, a lot of those functions aren't constitutional. But the point is I'm not against the FBI investigation in doing a proper role, but I'm against the FBI spying on people like Martin Luther King. I'm against the CIA fighting secret wars and overthrowing government and interfering...
MR. RUSSERT: Would you abolish them?
REP. PAUL: I would, I would not abolish all their functions, but I--the, the, the...
MR. RUSSERT: What about public schools? Are you still...
REP. PAUL: OK, but let's go, let's go with the CIA. They're, they're involved in, in, in torture. I would abolish that, yes. But I wouldn't abolish their right and our, our requirement to accumulate intelligence for national defense purposes.
"Manslaughter is not a specific intent crime and does not require an intent to cause a particular result. In fact, if the defendant intends to kill, he is guilty of murder, not manslaughter. Accordingly, because manslaughter does not require the specific intent to kill, there can be no attempted manslaughter." WA case law
I don't entirely doubt that your state's judicial system may be less intelligent than mine, but if you could back up your assertions with some evidence it would certainly help convince me .
I understand why everyone thinks the US would be better if things like the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, and Education were completely replaced by the free market.
What I don't understand is/.'s support for someone to whom Microsoft's "monopoly" would just be a normal, acceptable result of said free market?
You're right -- it only makes a convincing case if you live in reality.
As for you, I guess it would only be biased if 100s of 1000s of Republicans were prevented from voting and lots of small towns with a few hundred voters cast 10s of 1000s of votes for Kerry. The opposite (as in what actually happened) is completely acceptable and calling it fraud is clearly partisan bias
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, if you just re-solve the General Relativity equations using the data that's been collected in the last 100 years, it appears that dark matter may be completely unnecessary. This was previously discussed here.
Amateur only is one of the most idiotic restrictions imaginable. Winning an olympic gold medal is supposed to signify that you're the best in the world. How can that be if you're not even good enough to go pro?
It's the equivalent of the RIAA saying that piracy increases visits to movie theaters and record stores. Since TFA doesn't mention a thing about lost money for big-pharma, I'm not really sure why it makes up such a big part of the summary.
How does 3000 Lumens (Maxablaster) make 4100 Lumens look weak sauce again?
In conclusion, I think Java is a language designed to solve many problems that programmers have traditionally faced. However, the abstractions that it makes take away from the foundation that a beginning programmer should have to build upon. It should be easy for any programmer with good fundamentals to pick up Java on their own, if they so choose.
*I'm also rather amused at the numerous suggestions to teach scheme that have been posted on an article about the harm of teaching languages with heavy abstraction.*
From OSX tech specs:
Applications: Address Book, Automator, Calculator, Chess, Dashboard, Dictionary, DVD Player, Exposé, Font Book, Front Row, iCal, iChat, Image Capture, iSync (Supported Devices), iTunes, Mail, Photo Booth, Preview, QuickTime Player, Safari, Spaces, Stickies, System Preferences, TextEdit, Time Machine
Utilities: Activity Monitor, AirPort Utility, Audio MIDI Setup, Boot Camp Assistant, Bluetooth File Exchange, ColorSync Utility, Console, Digital Color Meter, Directory, Directory Utility, Disk Utility, Grab, Grapher, Keychain Access, Migration Assistant, Network Utility, ODBC Administrator, Podcast Capture, RAID Utility, Setup Assistant, System Profiler, Terminal, VoiceOver Utility, X11
Key Technologies: AppleScript, Aqua, Bonjour, CDSA security architecture, Cocoa, Carbon, and Java, ColorSync, Core Animation, Core Audio, Core Image, Core Video, H.264, Inkwell, OpenGL, PDF, Quartz Extreme, QuickTime 7, 64-bit computing, Sync, Unicode 4, Universal Access, UNIX, USB and FireWire peripheral support, Xgrid
Development: Xcode 3 IDE with Interface Builder 3, Instruments, Dashcode, AppleScript Studio, Automator 2, Shark, GCC compiler and toolset (original project by FSF.org), DTrace (original project by Sun), Complete Java JDK, including javac, javadoc, ANT, and Maven tools, Apache web server, AppleScript, Ruby and the Ruby on Rails frameworks, Python, Perl, PHP, SQLite
That seems like a completely reasonable feature set for an OS though, right? My favorite part is Boot Camp -- it's ok to run Windows if you run it on Apple hardware bundled with OSX, but there's no way they'll let you run OSX on anything but Apple hardware. If the EU wants to discourage anticompetitive tactics, it needs to be consistent.
The VP is just a figurehead position. Giving that to the loser (with no chance of actually becoming president) would just be four years of humiliation.
Don't get me wrong. I think FOSS is great for promoting competition, innovation, learning, etc. It certainly doesn't hurt a company to pay for the creation of FOSS (especially since they can then legally leverage a large amount of existing source) when the main reason for development is for use as internal tools. However, I just can't comprehend how people see that as the ideal business model for companies who rely on selling said software.
Of course, I also don't understand how those companies feel they can incorporate (steal) GPL code and still charge for the derived work.
You're like the 8th person to mention Newton or some other scientist from hundreds of years ago. That also makes you the 8th person to mention his religious beliefs while conveniently leaving out a discussion of religious tolerance in pre-enlightentment England. These famous 'religious' scientists didn't actually have a choice. We'll obviously never know, but I'd guess that they'd have drastically different views if somehow brought into the 21st century.
On the opening page, it says that it is the "word of God" and that it contains no errors. If the church that promotes (sells) it knows that to be false (ie requires interpretation), how can anyone trust them at all?
It's not quite as easy to handle the first one. You yourself couldn't do it. You stated a bunch of things about beliefs -- even the belief that your beliefs are rational. You made philosophical statements about how we accept that the universe is real, even though it falls outside of the scientific method.
Acceptance of beliefs is not knowledge.
"Even for persons who have a legitimate fear that their statements may subject them to criminal prosecution, we have long permitted the compulsion of incriminating testimony so long as those statements (or evidence derived from those statements) cannot be used against the speaker in any criminal case." --Justice Thomas when delivering the opinion
The issue with this case (and why the Supreme Court reversed the lower court's ruling) is that Martinez was never actually charged with a crime
So, six months after the article you linked to (and still four and a half years ago):
"The Supreme Court ruled today that police questioning in the absence of Miranda warnings, even questioning that is overbearing to the point of coercion, does not violate the constitutional protection against compelled self-incrimination, as long as no incriminating statements are introduced at the suspect's trial.
But a person subjected to such questioning can still bring a civil suit against the police for damages for violating the Constitution's guarantee of due process, the court ruled." source
So, not only do you have the right to remain silent, you actually have the right to sue the police if they coerce you into giving up that right -- and they still can't introduce what you say as evidence.
I know you were making a joke, but that really is how the *AAs see it.
The point is that KDE 3.5 can't be used for LTS either, since it won't be supported for 3 years.
"If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage." Deuteronomy 13:6-10
Good point. B+ trees are O(1), right? So, the file system doesn't take longer to find and manipulate files as the indexes grow (not sure why it's bad on Windows though, since NTFS uses B+ trees, too). Oh, and background services run in the background, so they clearly don't get any time slices that would appear to cause slowdown.
The Hustler parody featured a picture of Falwell, and an "interview" in which "Falwell" describes his first sexual experience as occurring "with Mom" in an outhouse while both were "drunk off our God-fearing asses on Campari." In the spoof interview, "Falwell" goes on to say that he was so intoxicated that "Mom looked better than a Baptist whore with a $100 donation," that he decided to have sex with his mother since she had "showed all the other guys in town such a good time," and that they had intercourse regularly afterwards. Finally, when asked if he had tried Campari since, "Falwell" answered, "I always get sloshed before I go out to the pulpit. You don't think I could lay down all that bullshit sober, do you?"
This was accompanied by a disclaimer that it was a parody, and the US District Court of West Virginia found in favor of Hustler on the libel charge, but in favor of Falwell on the intentional infliction of emotional distress charge. The Supreme Court reversed the decision as they found that the lower court's decision "runs afoul of our longstanding refusal to allow damages to be awarded because the speech in question may have an adverse emotional impact on the audience." Hustler Magazine v. Falwell
Chuck Norris doesn't have a chance.
Right, because any system in which you can win the 5 biggest states (and 1 other state of your choosing) with 51% and lose the other 44 by 100% (you flat out told them to fuck off because you didn't need them anyway) and still win the overall election is clearly the ideal way to 'balance the power of small and large states.'
Under this system, my state's electors effectively cast my vote (which is still worth roughly as much as it would be without them since the number of electors a state gets is based off of its population) to whoever they want (it doesn't technically have to be with the popular vote) regardless of whether I voted or even who I voted for.
It seems like it would be really easy to just let states' electors cast their votes proportionately to that of the voters. The biggest issue would likely be that campaigns would have to figure out how to effectively gain the most votes instead of just continuously pushing in "battleground states" to get that 51%, and the big parties are both extraordinarily opposed to change -- no matter how trivial.
Anyway, he's an idiot.
He keeps calling for reduced government/spending, but then he goes and asks for hundreds of millions of dollars worth of funding for special projects for his constituents in Texas...
He doesn't know how much money income taxes bring in, but wants to get rid of them. He doesn't know how many troops we have, but he wants to bring them all home. He doesn't really know anything about any issue that he has a stance on.
interview
MR. RUSSERT: "If elected president, Paul says he would abolish public schools, welfare, Social Security and farm subsidies."
REP. PAUL: OK, you may have picked that up 20 or 30 years ago, it's not part of my platform. As a matter of fact, I'm the only one that really has an interim program. Technically, a lot of those functions aren't constitutional. But the point is I'm not against the FBI investigation in doing a proper role, but I'm against the FBI spying on people like Martin Luther King. I'm against the CIA fighting secret wars and overthrowing government and interfering...
MR. RUSSERT: Would you abolish them?
REP. PAUL: I would, I would not abolish all their functions, but I--the, the, the...
MR. RUSSERT: What about public schools? Are you still...
REP. PAUL: OK, but let's go, let's go with the CIA. They're, they're involved in, in, in torture. I would abolish that, yes. But I wouldn't abolish their right and our, our requirement to accumulate intelligence for national defense purposes.
Why not use both?
"Manslaughter is not a specific intent crime and does not require an intent to cause a particular result. In fact, if the defendant intends to kill, he is guilty of murder, not manslaughter. Accordingly, because manslaughter does not require the specific intent to kill, there can be no attempted manslaughter." WA case law
I don't entirely doubt that your state's judicial system may be less intelligent than mine, but if you could back up your assertions with some evidence it would certainly help convince me .
I understand why everyone thinks the US would be better if things like the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, and Education were completely replaced by the free market.
/.'s support for someone to whom Microsoft's "monopoly" would just be a normal, acceptable result of said free market?
What I don't understand is
You're right -- it only makes a convincing case if you live in reality. As for you, I guess it would only be biased if 100s of 1000s of Republicans were prevented from voting and lots of small towns with a few hundred voters cast 10s of 1000s of votes for Kerry. The opposite (as in what actually happened) is completely acceptable and calling it fraud is clearly partisan bias
right click->edit site preferences->network
uncheck "enable automatic redirection"
you are using opera, right?