What's the difference between letting the radioactive wastes in the ground and putting them back in the ground after you get the ore out?
You mean other than the fact that the relative concentrations of these radioactive wastes are many times higher afterwards than they were originally in the soil?
Quite. So that's an arbitrary limitation on freedom of speech.
No, because "freedom of speech" was never applicable to private parties and their private property.
One that they have every legal right to apply but still indicates that Apple do not actively endorse freedom of speech as a virtue.
Unless you allow anyone and everyone to use your private property as their personal speech platform then you are no better and thus have no reason to complain.
You're confusing your front yard with an online marketplace used by millions of people with unlimited preferences.
No, actually I'm not. Both are private property. Both are subject to the rules set out by the owner.
Yes there should be limits and they should be balanced between the rights of the users, the companies, and the laws of where you reside.
Why should there be limits? Just because you say so?
Right now whatever Apple approves is gospel. (Conditions may apply, approval may and will change whenever we feel like it and we owe no-one an explanation)
Duh? It's their service. They make the rules. You don't like the rules, you go elsewhere.
Why? No private entity should be obligated to have their private property used as a platform for speech that they don't like. If you find this unfortunate, then you don't mind using your private property as platforms for their speech, right? If I come to your house and start putting campaign signs in your yard you're just going to leave them there and not remove them and censor me, right? You're just going to allow anyone and everyone to use your private property for their speech platform in any shape or form they choose, right?
Yes, I do. It says that a programmer is completely removed from having any memory management load. This goes in direct contradiction to the statement:
Specific to your troll, though, is that in fact the programmer DOES NOT need to do memory management beyond the basics of "don't keep allocating resources and never release them" (specifically database and file handles).
Gosling never claimed that Java would turn memory into this magical unlimited resource.
And no one claimed he said anything of the sort. Where exactly did anyone make such a claim? Not me.
Memory management is handled by the JVM, as opposed to by the code. This means that developers do not need to deal with memory management, but administrators do.
That's great. But the person I was replying to was talking about the programmers not the administrators so I don't see what relevance this has to anything. The word administrator is not even present at all in Shayde's post.
In other words, don't worry about memory management when you're writing the application, but do worry about it when you're deploying it.
Which is great, but wasn't the claim made by the person I was replying to.
Don't blame "butthurt Java weenies", as you so eloquently put it in multiple other posts, for the fact that you don't understand the difference between a programming task and a deployment/administrative task.
But the person I was talking to specifically mentioned programmers not administrators. Maybe you need to learn how to read?
We weren't talking about filesharing sites. He posted some article about a bunch of sites selling counterfeit goods and then claimed that some of them were actually legitimate sites despite nothing in the article backing up his claims. That is what I was asking for evidence on. Maybe you should actually read all the posts in the thread you decide to reply to before posting?
perhaps you should talk to the other poster to claims that Win7 has been in development since 2004..
The problem is that the people who claim that Win7 is Vista SP1 or SP2 are too lazy to look up these facts. It's well documented that what became Win7 was originally a branch of development called Blackcomb that was started late 2003, early 2004. This then became Vienna in 2006 and then later named Win7. Vista was started as Longhorn after the initial Blackcomb branch was launched. After scrapping thatfirst work, what became the Vista branch took a number of features from Blackcomb and diverged from there. This is why in many ways they have similar features but Win7 is in no way some retouched version of Vista.
How can that be when the development of the branch that became Win7 predates the development of Vista? In fact, what became Vista was basically a branching off of the Blackcomb branch after the first scrapping of Longhorn.
So of course it came-out fast. Seven is Vista with a new number - NT 6.1.
Ahh, this lame argument again. Do you also call XP Win2k with a new number? You do realize that Win2k was NT 5.0 and XP was 5.1, right?
Wow modded flamebait while not being flamebait at all and being 100% correct about Java history? There really must be butthurt Java weenies lurking this thread to downmod.
Hell even goto is actually useful in cases despite the universal parroting of the "GOTO IS BAD!!!" meme of people who misunderstood what Dijkstra was saying.
You are overloading the term "pirate" - selling knock-offs without identifying them as such is fraud, not "piracy" as the MAFIAA and most 'slashtards' use the term.
No, I am not and I used the scare quotes purposefully because the exact thing you mention at the end of your sentence. Maybe you should read up on what scare quotes means?
The idea that MS takes *years* between releases of Windows and Office is completely shredded with the speed that Windows 7 came out.
You mean except for the pesky little fact that the development of what became known as Windows 7 dates back to 2004 and predates the development of what was released as Windows Vista?
Slashdot Mirror
And activity like this definitely helps more than some abstract victories about ideals.
Really? Because most consumers are even going to know about this or care?
No, but don't try to veil this as some sort of win for the ideals of FOSS when it's not. It's a political play and nothing more.
What's the difference between letting the radioactive wastes in the ground and putting them back in the ground after you get the ore out?
You mean other than the fact that the relative concentrations of these radioactive wastes are many times higher afterwards than they were originally in the soil?
Why? VLC has to be one of the worst libavcodec-based media players in existence.
There was ever a time when 99% of the population cared that their device was open source and hacker-friendly outside of your mind?
Spelling exists the way it does for a reason;
Because someone arbitrarily decided that a word should be spelled a certain way in order to produce a dictionary?
Quite. So that's an arbitrary limitation on freedom of speech.
No, because "freedom of speech" was never applicable to private parties and their private property.
One that they have every legal right to apply but still indicates that Apple do not actively endorse freedom of speech as a virtue.
Unless you allow anyone and everyone to use your private property as their personal speech platform then you are no better and thus have no reason to complain.
Why would an object reference be a pointer?
Because it's faster to only copy a 4 byte pointer to an object instead of the entire object which could possibly be many magnitudes larger?
This is not is much abnout legal obligations as it is about a moral belief that all opions should be heard even if some people find it offensive.
You can still be heard. Just not on their private property.
You're confusing your front yard with an online marketplace used by millions of people with unlimited preferences.
No, actually I'm not. Both are private property. Both are subject to the rules set out by the owner.
Yes there should be limits and they should be balanced between the rights of the users, the companies, and the laws of where you reside.
Why should there be limits? Just because you say so?
Right now whatever Apple approves is gospel. (Conditions may apply, approval may and will change whenever we feel like it and we owe no-one an explanation)
Duh? It's their service. They make the rules. You don't like the rules, you go elsewhere.
Unfortunately the First Amendment doesn't apply.
Why? No private entity should be obligated to have their private property used as a platform for speech that they don't like. If you find this unfortunate, then you don't mind using your private property as platforms for their speech, right? If I come to your house and start putting campaign signs in your yard you're just going to leave them there and not remove them and censor me, right? You're just going to allow anyone and everyone to use your private property for their speech platform in any shape or form they choose, right?
Do you not understand what the bolded words mean?
Yes, I do. It says that a programmer is completely removed from having any memory management load. This goes in direct contradiction to the statement:
Specific to your troll, though, is that in fact the programmer DOES NOT need to do memory management beyond the basics of "don't keep allocating resources and never release them" (specifically database and file handles).
Gosling never claimed that Java would turn memory into this magical unlimited resource.
And no one claimed he said anything of the sort. Where exactly did anyone make such a claim? Not me.
Memory management is handled by the JVM, as opposed to by the code. This means that developers do not need to deal with memory management, but administrators do.
That's great. But the person I was replying to was talking about the programmers not the administrators so I don't see what relevance this has to anything. The word administrator is not even present at all in Shayde's post.
In other words, don't worry about memory management when you're writing the application, but do worry about it when you're deploying it.
Which is great, but wasn't the claim made by the person I was replying to.
Don't blame "butthurt Java weenies", as you so eloquently put it in multiple other posts, for the fact that you don't understand the difference between a programming task and a deployment/administrative task.
But the person I was talking to specifically mentioned programmers not administrators. Maybe you need to learn how to read?
We weren't talking about filesharing sites. He posted some article about a bunch of sites selling counterfeit goods and then claimed that some of them were actually legitimate sites despite nothing in the article backing up his claims. That is what I was asking for evidence on. Maybe you should actually read all the posts in the thread you decide to reply to before posting?
perhaps you should talk to the other poster to claims that Win7 has been in development since 2004..
The problem is that the people who claim that Win7 is Vista SP1 or SP2 are too lazy to look up these facts. It's well documented that what became Win7 was originally a branch of development called Blackcomb that was started late 2003, early 2004. This then became Vienna in 2006 and then later named Win7. Vista was started as Longhorn after the initial Blackcomb branch was launched. After scrapping thatfirst work, what became the Vista branch took a number of features from Blackcomb and diverged from there. This is why in many ways they have similar features but Win7 is in no way some retouched version of Vista.
Windows 7 is just Vista (NT6.0) with bugfixes.
How can that be when the development of the branch that became Win7 predates the development of Vista? In fact, what became Vista was basically a branching off of the Blackcomb branch after the first scrapping of Longhorn.
So of course it came-out fast. Seven is Vista with a new number - NT 6.1.
Ahh, this lame argument again. Do you also call XP Win2k with a new number? You do realize that Win2k was NT 5.0 and XP was 5.1, right?
If I even do get a reply from them I look forward to a Bill Clintonesque "that depends on what the definition of is is" type comeback.
Wow modded flamebait while not being flamebait at all and being 100% correct about Java history? There really must be butthurt Java weenies lurking this thread to downmod.
Troll? Really? Looks like there's a butthurt Java weenie with mod points lurking.
Java at no point specified that there wasn't going to be any memory management at all.
O rly?
Under section 2.1.6 Memory Management and Garbage Collection and I quote:
Java technology completely removes the memory management load from the programmer.
This white paper was written in 1996 by James Gosling and Henry McGilton. M-M-M-MONSTER FAIL!
In reality, Java Memory Management is quite complex and widely misunderstood.
Most often by Java programmers and evangelists themselves.
What next? Pointers?
Well to be fair, object references are pointers you just aren't allowed to do things like pointer arithmetic on them.
Packt Publishing: Check
Rick J Wagner: Check
8/10 Score: Check
This is just another shill review bought and paid for by Packt Publishing.
Hell even goto is actually useful in cases despite the universal parroting of the "GOTO IS BAD!!!" meme of people who misunderstood what Dijkstra was saying.
You are overloading the term "pirate" - selling knock-offs without identifying them as such is fraud, not "piracy" as the MAFIAA and most 'slashtards' use the term.
No, I am not and I used the scare quotes purposefully because the exact thing you mention at the end of your sentence. Maybe you should read up on what scare quotes means?
The idea that MS takes *years* between releases of Windows and Office is completely shredded with the speed that Windows 7 came out.
You mean except for the pesky little fact that the development of what became known as Windows 7 dates back to 2004 and predates the development of what was released as Windows Vista?