Naming things based on shape names is ridiculous anyway.
Recently I built a hierarchical tree structure to organize a huge 2D tile-based world such that it could be easily sharded and scaled.
Similar approaches of spacial partitioning are: Binary Trees (2 children per node -- 1 axis), Quadtrees (4 children per node, 2 axes), and Octrees (8 children per node, 3 axes). To reduce bandwidth requirements and run-time, instead of multiple levels of Quadtrees each level of the tree has 256 more nodes...
I'm not calling it a damn dihectapentacontakaihextree!
The size of the UI receiving area for window resizing shouldn't be coupled to the pixel size of the actual border. That's stupid. Trade pixels of screen space as a hack to get easier to use UI. No. This is 2013. We should make UI that works -- Hover mouse over the edge of the screen frustratingly? Activate a window resize event then. It's not rocket science.
I think the problem here is the razor-thin window edges.
All the UI's I've used with the thin window edges have been difficult for me to interact with, by mouse, trackpad, or touchpoint ("eraser-pointer"), because of the challenges of hitting a particular very small spot.
I too raged against this, even before Unity. The simple answer to please the UI design folks and the usability folks is to decouple the border interaction size from the actual pixel size of the window border. Just make an invisible region that is the clickable border, and it can be as big as needed. I'm no Ubuntu apologist, in fact I switched DEs but they fixed this somewhat in the new version of Unity. Even the scrolling bars have adopted that larger interactive layer and smaller visual appearance. However, for SOME moronic reason the larger window drag edges are not available in Ubuntu2D. The only damn application we wanted that type of UI feature to work with -- The window borders, and it doesn't work in the 2D mode (all the other things like scroll bars still work though)...
Yeah, that's bullshit. It's not even a hardware related feature, and one that seems like it would arleady exist by neccesity in the shared Unity codebase. If you looked at the UI complaints chart it would probably stand out like a sore thumb as a notorious feature that people WANTED to have fixed badly. IMO, this feels like an arbitrary bullshit limitation to get me to use something I don't want or need (I make cross platform 3D games (and engines), Accelerated Unity eats GPU resources and degrades gameplay performance -- IT'S A WM, get it the hell out of my way, I'm trying to do serious graphics:P). Oh, and they're discontinuing Unity2D. Well, that makes sense in a Microsoft sort of way. Reminds me of how DirectX 11.1 features would be withheld from Win7 and only available on Win8... If you want basic OS features like software updates or new non WM / OS specific features then you have to "upgrade" (even if the feature should exist anyway). It's a monetarily advantageous strategy because MS gets more sales, and in the newer Ubuntu they have Amazon adverts. At least MS had the smarts to back down and ALLOW some of the more important DX11.1 features to work on Win7. Even if it's not Canonical's motive, who gives a crap? It's the same effect, motives be damned -- that's a major reason why I even use GNU and Linux in the first place: To avoid vendor lock-in BS. (GNU toolchains on Win7 = GNU/Windows?) I'm not talking window border features I'm talking a 2D UI that doesn't eat GPU like it's going out of style (hint: THAT's going out of style).
Some of the more hideous themes that are supplied with Unity have borders you can actually click, but IMO, even they're too small -- So sayeth my 76 year old neighbor who has shaky hands and now finds the new Ubuntu completely unusable -- Which is fucking stupid because he buys more shit on Amazon than anyone ever should!
Yeah... I can customize the border size, but I'm Not Their Target Demographic! The issue can be resolved, but IMO, the medicine is worse than the disease. Just go to XFCE or KDE or Gnome3 or Enlightenment if you've got the CPU to spare. When I have to test my code on their flavor of the week 3D API (It's Wayland now -- NOPE!? That was a waste of my time, back to X11 for EVER, screw what they do next (or after that even) ), I just use keyboard shortcuts: Alt+Space, M to move Alt+Space, R to resize. Alt + drag mouse == move window from any part you can click too (downright infuriating if you're making games that can use the alt key, hence my X11 input hook... which means I'm tied to X11, brilliant Ubuntu, just brilliant).
The world doesn't revolve around you: you don't have to interject about how proud you are of your "country".
You're correct. It's the Universe that revolves around me. Unless I'm not spinning... That's the basic idea behind relativity. Also, I fail to share your primitive concept of "countries" and borders -- We've just got to get you out into space: You can't see the borders from among the stars...
These are shows staring Earthlings of the English speaking variety and thus share a familiar setting with their largest target demographic's general location. I'd like to see more shows taking place in other regions of the planet too, but this does happen already: Unsurprisingly the number produced are in proportion to the population of prosperous people present in those places. Even less surprising is that the range in type of broadcasts is more limited the less advanced and poorer the region is. Ever watched Somali TV? It's surprisingly uplifting in some ways, sad in others -- Like any other good series.
That's not to say I'm against the idea of Amazon making shows set in Nukualofa, Norway, Nambia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger or Nowheresville. It's just that I don't think its a bad move for them to do shows set in the USA. When you're starting out with anything you always cut your teeth on the easy stuff first (but really now, only one space colony -- the closest to the planet you can get -- after 4 whole decades? I'll never get a vacation at this rate). Could you imagine the actors trying to pull off an Indian accent? (outside a campy comedy of course) I've no doubt that there would eventually be shows set in less populated regions or even using other languages once they get over the hurdle of actually being successful at something -- Providing there's a audience of Internet connected folk to watch them -- I mean, it's a Corporation not a Charity; It's not like even existing studios are expected to make shows for needier folks with no funds to mine.
As a cultural connoisseur I'd have nothing against a Comedy set in Cambodia, or a Drama in Denmark, or Mystery in Malaysia. I'd even voraciously devour the various subtitled versions -- the translators actually add their own small artistic contribution in selecting the culturally equivalent meanings, and mapping between what was said and what was told in subtitles is very interesting (It's not just what's lost in translation, but what's defanged or even transformed altogether). Hell, I'd watch a Sex show about Sea Slugs with sultry seductive star laden voice-over instead of the dry nasally nature narrators -- Why oh Why do you humans typecast the other species so? However, unlike you, I rationally realize that everyone is not like me, in fact, I'm unique among you even though we sometimes share similar tastes. I don't expect folks to make shows singling out styles only I prefer, especially not in the first attempt at the show business. I mean who among you would make the market for a cosmic scale musical staring a sentient nebula in love with a beautiful but brain dead stellar nursery -- Ah, unrequited love, a classic plot element, but it gets me every time (especially the part where you find out the love interest is incapable of love -- Just like those temporary chat room romances between humans and spam-bot AI).... All things in due time.
I don't see why C++ needs language-based or standardized garbage collection support.
Well, I wrote my own Hash Map implementation. Before that I had my own Linked Lists too. Before C++ came along I even maintained my own OOP implementation in C with a spiffy pre-processor to convert syntactic sugar into the equivalent ugly object oriented C code riddled with namespace prefixes, indecipherable pointer math for dynamic (virtual) functions (actions), and statically complied variable (property) look-up tables for run-time type inspection (reflection).
It led to incompatibilities between codebases -- My Entities+C wouldn't be compatible with your C+OOP. Hell, we didn't even use the same terminology, or necessarily even support the same feature sets. The point is, I wasn't the only one who was doing that (see also: Objective C). There were lots of us, it was a huge waste of duplicated effort. So many, in fact, that C++ was born, and the STL too, And now C++11 has Hash Maps, I don't need to maintain my own going forward (use unordered_map). This means I don't have to worry if the hashmap implementation I used is compatible with another library's or if it'll run on another compiler or what its performance guarantees are. I can just use the language implementation -- which while not always optimal, is usually good enough -- and if I need to I can implement my own version tailored for my specific use case.
So The same reasoning is used for including a garbage collector / local memory pool management. Calling into the kernel code every allocation / deallocation of dynamic memory is slow. Yeah, you can override the new operator and/or create your own replacement allocator, but here's the thing: You can add OOP to C, and build your own collection APIs too. That's lame boorish work, not really beneficial to create that if we can avoid doing so, since the program itself typically isn't enmeshed deeply with the memory management details. We're better off if GC is already done, standardized, tailored to work well within the system we're compiling on, and completely optional for folks like you who would rather jump a codebase to a whole new language rather than add a GC...
Maybe once you've written a few GCs in C++ more times than you care to count then you'll have a different perspective -- Oh, but wait, we don't need your perspective, it's in the standard. The feature we all decided we should have will be supported.
I think you're underestimating the kinds of applications where we could use such features, or the actual need / demand of the feature itself, and even the "level" of the language as you define it I find suspect. I mean, C++ is right up there with the highest of the high level languages, bucko. EA (the game company) created their own STL replacement basically just to add a GC and hashmaps, because they were tired of reimplementing these features IN EVERY DAMN GAME. Now, games aren't the only applications being made, but you get the point. EA didn't employ the only set of programmers doing this -- Take me for example.
That is to say, I write bytecode interpretors & VMs for my compilable embeddable languages that are little more than macro assemblers during their 1st iterations. That's low level coding, sometimes even translatable into machine code (depending on the language) and even a few of the ASM-like languages I've made have garbage collection built in. That is to say: GC is not a bullet point that exclusive to any "level" of programming language. I'd consider it a BASIC feature.
...how long it would take before Eric Schmidt said something that made me facepalm. Accidentally referring to TOR as "Thor" in the very first topic he brought up was bad, but not bad enough. Admitting right after that that he doesn't really understand what it is or how it works? In 2011? Just two months after stepping down as the CEO of Google? Facepalm.
A shame Thor was misspoken: I could just imagine a Wikileaks Founder and a Google Exec getting together in a dark secluded room to discuss in secret the dire consequences of a Norse God's second coming.
You and I know that the Neck-Beard the Gray is a force to be reckoned with in brain power and efficiency, however Graycial discrimination is still a thing in the tech sector. I started getting gray in my 20's, now in my 30's, it's a sharp contrast to my young looking "baby face". Still, I've had folks consider my apparent age vs my skills and experience (and actual age) frequently -- On paper I look like a great candidate. Show up with gray hair? The job's suddenly not for me. I dyed my hair and my job prospects pick back up, had to turn down the job offers instead of seek them out, and the salaries I was able to negotiate were 10-15% higher. Sometimes at the same company only a few weeks later.
Last decade I decided to be my own boss, so really I was just feeling out the market. (It's always nice to have a plan B). Still interesting to me that that here on Earth if you're getting gray so is your future, but in space no one can see your scalp.
Fuck religion, period. Christianity over time has had similar consequences. It's not a surprise that they are literally in the same family is nutty belief systems...
As a Baptized Born-Again Christian, I must interject: Hablam basepheth gandalphgolf mekalekahigh meccahigh nee ho! Banthapoodoo shoobob alobob awapbamboo!
Seriously, fuck that shit. I once was "saved" but now I'm Atheist. That shit religion fucked up my young life.
There was a stupid picture going around facebook today that was kind of right. Only in Boston will they shut down the entire goddamned city to search for someone like this. Don't fuck with Bawfston.
Sometimes they shut the whole place down just because of some damn snow. What's your point? The shut down was basically an uexpected snow-day in the middle of April? Fuck off, idiot.
I find it amusing when people call things a "conspiracy nut delusion" when it is something that has been known to occur at points in the past. It's like people who probably used to say "oh, you're just a conspiracy nut! nobody is doing crazy deadly experiments on black prisoners under the radar!" until, you know, years later we find out that the government has done exactly that.
For instance: It's well known that frat boys get drunk and sometimes crash vehicles. Ergo: Roswell incident was caused by drunken frat-boy Ailens. The cover up was to prevent embarrassing their powerful interplanetary diplomat parents.
We know this is true because this sort of thing happens all the time.
Sorry, but in every way that counts, your country has stopped being "great" a long time ago. It is basically a threat to everybody, including its own citizens. It is just that you do not have any meaningful comparison, or you would see that immediately. I have notices a growing number of US citizens that are trying to stay permanently in Europe after being here for a while. Not a coincidence.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I'm no statist so let me respond: Do not confuse the great American People as being purveyors of Government corruption. The People are the ones who sacrificed crockery to make weapons for war when needed. The People are the ones who fight in the wars too. The country is made not only of its government, but primarily it's people. You can change a government and still have the same people. America is HUGE. The political and legal systems are its Government, and they are likewise huge and lumbering. We know the beastly bureaucracy is not always right or even good at times, but if it gets too oppressive then we won't stand for that either. We don't make sacrifices to have the country turn into those very same things we sacrificed for. Potential for it do become so is not the same as it being so. Sure, there is a risk and hints its headed that way, but currently it's really not so bad -- Certainly not bad enough for a revolt. The average Person thinks things could be better here, and so it shall be in due time.
Better to adapt slowly than take radical action over mere "threats to everyone" and risk death or oppression.
^- Note that this is the opposite mentality than that of a terrorist...
In short, your concern has been noted, but it's not fresh news to us. WTF does it have to do with the pathetic ineffective attempts of a couple of nutters to get our attention? I hope you see that that way is useless. We're not doing the best we can to change things, but really now, who is?
Truly, you are "sorry" -- "in every way that counts".
Considering my family was stuck in some Soviet-occupied area for quite a while after the war and you didn't lift a finger to change anything about that,
So... Linux Advocates, is addressing a letter to... Themselves? Does Mrs Schmitz know about this?
While true that "money doesn't grow on trees", personally I think your solution is part of the problem. The answer is not to donate more money -- That doesn't solve the money problem, it just moves the money around. The answer is to breed currency bearing trees.
Really? A dollar is only worth what you can buy with it. It can become nearly worthless overnight. It is only paper and your faith in it is all that gives it value.
That's a foolish and tired cliche. It has centuries of history.
Tell me, in your lifetime did the USSR or the Berlin wall fall? Even if not, can you please inform me how such events affected the currencies involved?
For someone who cites history, you've little respect of it.
Furthermore, it ignores the obvious alternate solution: Destroy all the witnesses. That's why we should be pouring all our military assets into NASA. You think the aliens are going to let us take to the stars and tell all their friends about how they got drunk, buzzed Earth for grins, and crashed in Area 51?! They probably shouldn't have been doing it, but all the direct evidence of their involvement has been destroyed -- That is the lesson to learn.
Don't you get it? He says he's been impersonated and doesn't have time to post this thread to every story, unlike some kid would. Thus, the post is from the impersonator, obviously.
Software is a legitimate product that has value in and of itself. There's no reason why software should be free, anymore so than anything else. Since nothing else free, we need to stop giving away our labor.
Software is a token of your labor. It's intangible, and in infinite supply. Market that which is scarce: Your labor. Do not market that which is in infinite supply (bits) because Selling ice to Eskimos is a laughable business strategy. The bits have no value in of themselves, nor do the copies of the software.
This is Economics 101: If ( Supply == Infinity ) Price = 0;// Regardless of cost to create.
The reason software should be free is so that you can stop wasting your labor trying to sell ice to eskimos. Instead, do as any other labor industry does, from mechanics to home-builders to FLOSS devs: Get assurances that you will be paid for your work before you do the work. Once you have done the work and been paid, a mechanic does not charge you each time you drive the car, a home builder does not charge you extra for selling your house or if you do your own improvements. Cars do not have their hoods welded shut so you're beholden to the dealer to provide fixes instead of hiring a 3rd party mechanic you trust. Once you have been paid to built the software you give it away "for free" because you have been paid already: in the same way a fast food restaurant gives you your damn meal to do with as you please after you've paid for it -- including the option to go home, figure out the recipe and make your own additional food.
If the copies of software have value then BitTorrent networks would be the richest organizations in the world. They're not. Data is not scarce. What's scarce is your ability to configure the bits. Market that. Market your labor, do not seek rent or employ artificial scarcity.
The current pay-per-copy software market is not in line with the "get paid for doing work" idea that's inherent in all other labor markets. The cost of a copy does not reflect the cost to create it, or the cost to initially configure the bits. When you look at it rationally, economically: The pay-per-copy software model is the one that makes no sense.
Even the ideal situation proposed by open source advocates is ridiculous, "we'll give away the software and make money off of support."
That's not the ideal situation. The ideal situation is that we ask for money up front before we do the work of improving or making the software, THEN we do the work we've been paid to do -- Just like everyone else does, from contract software devs to mechanics, department store clerks, and paid anti-foss trolls.
"JBoss Application Server is now more."
It means the price went up. Unsurprisingly since it has to do with 'Enterprise' -- That means two things at once: Expensive and Fantasy Utopia that is every nerd's dream.
Representatives aren't working. That's not even the word for them, they don't represent us or decided based on the best interests of the people. A purely democratic system would be horrible due to the mob-rule, but it has become abundantly clear that we do need a 4th power as a check and balance. This is the information age, we now have the technology to put all these crap laws directly to vote by the people. The US Citizens are not being adequately represented by their representatives because of the percentage of apathy of the average American and of the lack of accountability afforded to those who are up for election to such offices. The founding fathers had a great idea, but they could not anticipate a design that operates in today's climate of vast corruption and apathetic voters who rightly feel that their votes don't matter. We have the technology to make our voices directly heard in the passing of any bill -- Laws that will directly impact our lives shouldn't be passed without a representative portion of voters actually aware of the bill and voting to instate it.
We need those registered voters to have their own individual digital offices of government. Each voter given the option to participate in voting to veto or pass the same bills that come before the president -- A public veto power. Furthermore we need only pass the laws that the public ACTUALLY knows and cares about. If there isn't enough direct voting support for a bill then it gets dropped automatically. This could be a HUGE boon to the current system: By opening up a direct line of thought to the actual people the laws will affect the other branches will better see how to align their decisions with that of the people who supposedly vote them into or out of office next term.
Of course there are many issues with gaming such a system, but just look at the current system! Can you say it's ANY Better?! Is it any LESS game-able? No, it is MORE SO. Anyone who has even heard of the practice of paperclipping a bill to another to fly it under our radar should either be fighting to change the broken and corrupt system, to save it from extinction.
Has nature taught us nothing? Any entity that does not adapt to its surroundings WILL become extinct. That is the mechanism by which History makes itself repeat -- Thus government-organisms have life cycles. Any system collects more baggage and entropy as it grows and ages, enough so that it eventually "dies" -- Governments are no different, except that now you recognize it as such a system we can prevent its death. It's time to re-make the government while its running... The alternative is a bloody new government is born of revolution, that's less efficient. It's time to make an evolutionary leap in terms of government: It's time to end the cycle of death by building adaptation right into the organism itself.
Uhhh, if they break up MS into new companies, one should be the fucking Office Suite (and the other applications and what not), one should be the OS (hint: "home" is not fucking different that "pro" other than a few limitations artificially imposed on the former), and the other should be games.
The shareholders would have to be convinced that throwing away free money by not porting Office, MSSQL, or Exchange (etc.) to Mac or Linux. Face it: Folks by Windows because of the vendor lock-in, not because Windows is actually any good -- even if it were.
Slashdot Mirror
Naming things based on shape names is ridiculous anyway.
Recently I built a hierarchical tree structure to organize a huge 2D tile-based world such that it could be easily sharded and scaled.
Similar approaches of spacial partitioning are: Binary Trees (2 children per node -- 1 axis), Quadtrees (4 children per node, 2 axes), and Octrees (8 children per node, 3 axes). To reduce bandwidth requirements and run-time, instead of multiple levels of Quadtrees each level of the tree has 256 more nodes...
I'm not calling it a damn dihectapentacontakaihextree!
The size of the UI receiving area for window resizing shouldn't be coupled to the pixel size of the actual border. That's stupid. Trade pixels of screen space as a hack to get easier to use UI. No. This is 2013. We should make UI that works -- Hover mouse over the edge of the screen frustratingly? Activate a window resize event then. It's not rocket science.
I think the problem here is the razor-thin window edges.
All the UI's I've used with the thin window edges have been difficult for me to interact with, by mouse, trackpad, or touchpoint ("eraser-pointer"), because of the challenges of hitting a particular very small spot.
I too raged against this, even before Unity. The simple answer to please the UI design folks and the usability folks is to decouple the border interaction size from the actual pixel size of the window border. Just make an invisible region that is the clickable border, and it can be as big as needed. I'm no Ubuntu apologist, in fact I switched DEs but they fixed this somewhat in the new version of Unity. Even the scrolling bars have adopted that larger interactive layer and smaller visual appearance. However, for SOME moronic reason the larger window drag edges are not available in Ubuntu2D. The only damn application we wanted that type of UI feature to work with -- The window borders, and it doesn't work in the 2D mode (all the other things like scroll bars still work though)...
Yeah, that's bullshit. It's not even a hardware related feature, and one that seems like it would arleady exist by neccesity in the shared Unity codebase. If you looked at the UI complaints chart it would probably stand out like a sore thumb as a notorious feature that people WANTED to have fixed badly. IMO, this feels like an arbitrary bullshit limitation to get me to use something I don't want or need (I make cross platform 3D games (and engines), Accelerated Unity eats GPU resources and degrades gameplay performance -- IT'S A WM, get it the hell out of my way, I'm trying to do serious graphics :P). Oh, and they're discontinuing Unity2D. Well, that makes sense in a Microsoft sort of way. Reminds me of how DirectX 11.1 features would be withheld from Win7 and only available on Win8... If you want basic OS features like software updates or new non WM / OS specific features then you have to "upgrade" (even if the feature should exist anyway). It's a monetarily advantageous strategy because MS gets more sales, and in the newer Ubuntu they have Amazon adverts. At least MS had the smarts to back down and ALLOW some of the more important DX11.1 features to work on Win7. Even if it's not Canonical's motive, who gives a crap? It's the same effect, motives be damned -- that's a major reason why I even use GNU and Linux in the first place: To avoid vendor lock-in BS. (GNU toolchains on Win7 = GNU/Windows?) I'm not talking window border features I'm talking a 2D UI that doesn't eat GPU like it's going out of style (hint: THAT's going out of style).
Some of the more hideous themes that are supplied with Unity have borders you can actually click, but IMO, even they're too small -- So sayeth my 76 year old neighbor who has shaky hands and now finds the new Ubuntu completely unusable -- Which is fucking stupid because he buys more shit on Amazon than anyone ever should!
Yeah... I can customize the border size, but I'm Not Their Target Demographic! The issue can be resolved, but IMO, the medicine is worse than the disease. Just go to XFCE or KDE or Gnome3 or Enlightenment if you've got the CPU to spare. When I have to test my code on their flavor of the week 3D API (It's Wayland now -- NOPE!? That was a waste of my time, back to X11 for EVER, screw what they do next (or after that even) ), I just use keyboard shortcuts: Alt+Space, M to move Alt+Space, R to resize. Alt + drag mouse == move window from any part you can click too (downright infuriating if you're making games that can use the alt key, hence my X11 input hook... which means I'm tied to X11, brilliant Ubuntu, just brilliant).
The world doesn't revolve around you: you don't have to interject about how proud you are of your "country".
You're correct. It's the Universe that revolves around me. Unless I'm not spinning... That's the basic idea behind relativity. Also, I fail to share your primitive concept of "countries" and borders -- We've just got to get you out into space: You can't see the borders from among the stars...
These are shows staring Earthlings of the English speaking variety and thus share a familiar setting with their largest target demographic's general location. I'd like to see more shows taking place in other regions of the planet too, but this does happen already: Unsurprisingly the number produced are in proportion to the population of prosperous people present in those places. Even less surprising is that the range in type of broadcasts is more limited the less advanced and poorer the region is. Ever watched Somali TV? It's surprisingly uplifting in some ways, sad in others -- Like any other good series.
That's not to say I'm against the idea of Amazon making shows set in Nukualofa, Norway, Nambia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger or Nowheresville. It's just that I don't think its a bad move for them to do shows set in the USA. When you're starting out with anything you always cut your teeth on the easy stuff first (but really now, only one space colony -- the closest to the planet you can get -- after 4 whole decades? I'll never get a vacation at this rate). Could you imagine the actors trying to pull off an Indian accent? (outside a campy comedy of course) I've no doubt that there would eventually be shows set in less populated regions or even using other languages once they get over the hurdle of actually being successful at something -- Providing there's a audience of Internet connected folk to watch them -- I mean, it's a Corporation not a Charity; It's not like even existing studios are expected to make shows for needier folks with no funds to mine.
As a cultural connoisseur I'd have nothing against a Comedy set in Cambodia, or a Drama in Denmark, or Mystery in Malaysia. I'd even voraciously devour the various subtitled versions -- the translators actually add their own small artistic contribution in selecting the culturally equivalent meanings, and mapping between what was said and what was told in subtitles is very interesting (It's not just what's lost in translation, but what's defanged or even transformed altogether). Hell, I'd watch a Sex show about Sea Slugs with sultry seductive star laden voice-over instead of the dry nasally nature narrators -- Why oh Why do you humans typecast the other species so? However, unlike you, I rationally realize that everyone is not like me, in fact, I'm unique among you even though we sometimes share similar tastes. I don't expect folks to make shows singling out styles only I prefer, especially not in the first attempt at the show business. I mean who among you would make the market for a cosmic scale musical staring a sentient nebula in love with a beautiful but brain dead stellar nursery -- Ah, unrequited love, a classic plot element, but it gets me every time (especially the part where you find out the love interest is incapable of love -- Just like those temporary chat room romances between humans and spam-bot AI).... All things in due time.
Sadly it's the mob that rules the ratings.
I don't see why C++ needs language-based or standardized garbage collection support.
Well, I wrote my own Hash Map implementation. Before that I had my own Linked Lists too. Before C++ came along I even maintained my own OOP implementation in C with a spiffy pre-processor to convert syntactic sugar into the equivalent ugly object oriented C code riddled with namespace prefixes, indecipherable pointer math for dynamic (virtual) functions (actions), and statically complied variable (property) look-up tables for run-time type inspection (reflection).
It led to incompatibilities between codebases -- My Entities+C wouldn't be compatible with your C+OOP. Hell, we didn't even use the same terminology, or necessarily even support the same feature sets. The point is, I wasn't the only one who was doing that (see also: Objective C). There were lots of us, it was a huge waste of duplicated effort. So many, in fact, that C++ was born, and the STL too, And now C++11 has Hash Maps, I don't need to maintain my own going forward (use unordered_map). This means I don't have to worry if the hashmap implementation I used is compatible with another library's or if it'll run on another compiler or what its performance guarantees are. I can just use the language implementation -- which while not always optimal, is usually good enough -- and if I need to I can implement my own version tailored for my specific use case.
So The same reasoning is used for including a garbage collector / local memory pool management. Calling into the kernel code every allocation / deallocation of dynamic memory is slow. Yeah, you can override the new operator and/or create your own replacement allocator, but here's the thing: You can add OOP to C, and build your own collection APIs too. That's lame boorish work, not really beneficial to create that if we can avoid doing so, since the program itself typically isn't enmeshed deeply with the memory management details. We're better off if GC is already done, standardized, tailored to work well within the system we're compiling on, and completely optional for folks like you who would rather jump a codebase to a whole new language rather than add a GC...
Maybe once you've written a few GCs in C++ more times than you care to count then you'll have a different perspective -- Oh, but wait, we don't need your perspective, it's in the standard. The feature we all decided we should have will be supported.
I think you're underestimating the kinds of applications where we could use such features, or the actual need / demand of the feature itself, and even the "level" of the language as you define it I find suspect. I mean, C++ is right up there with the highest of the high level languages, bucko. EA (the game company) created their own STL replacement basically just to add a GC and hashmaps, because they were tired of reimplementing these features IN EVERY DAMN GAME. Now, games aren't the only applications being made, but you get the point. EA didn't employ the only set of programmers doing this -- Take me for example.
That is to say, I write bytecode interpretors & VMs for my compilable embeddable languages that are little more than macro assemblers during their 1st iterations. That's low level coding, sometimes even translatable into machine code (depending on the language) and even a few of the ASM-like languages I've made have garbage collection built in. That is to say: GC is not a bullet point that exclusive to any "level" of programming language. I'd consider it a BASIC feature.
...how long it would take before Eric Schmidt said something that made me facepalm. Accidentally referring to TOR as "Thor" in the very first topic he brought up was bad, but not bad enough. Admitting right after that that he doesn't really understand what it is or how it works? In 2011? Just two months after stepping down as the CEO of Google? Facepalm.
A shame Thor was misspoken: I could just imagine a Wikileaks Founder and a Google Exec getting together in a dark secluded room to discuss in secret the dire consequences of a Norse God's second coming.
How old is their oldest IT or software engineer employee...
I noticed that the Canadian Astronaut, Chris Hadfield, wringing out a wet cloth in microgravity was getting gray too.
You and I know that the Neck-Beard the Gray is a force to be reckoned with in brain power and efficiency, however Graycial discrimination is still a thing in the tech sector. I started getting gray in my 20's, now in my 30's, it's a sharp contrast to my young looking "baby face". Still, I've had folks consider my apparent age vs my skills and experience (and actual age) frequently -- On paper I look like a great candidate. Show up with gray hair? The job's suddenly not for me. I dyed my hair and my job prospects pick back up, had to turn down the job offers instead of seek them out, and the salaries I was able to negotiate were 10-15% higher. Sometimes at the same company only a few weeks later.
Last decade I decided to be my own boss, so really I was just feeling out the market. (It's always nice to have a plan B). Still interesting to me that that here on Earth if you're getting gray so is your future, but in space no one can see your scalp.
Fuck religion, period. Christianity over time has had similar consequences. It's not a surprise that they are literally in the same family is nutty belief systems...
As a Baptized Born-Again Christian, I must interject: Hablam basepheth gandalphgolf mekalekahigh meccahigh nee ho! Banthapoodoo shoobob alobob awapbamboo!
Seriously, fuck that shit. I once was "saved" but now I'm Atheist. That shit religion fucked up my young life.
Exactly. Shooting a cop, running, throwing bombs out windows, more shootouts, are all things that innocent people do.
Clearly, calling up the BPD and saying "hey we are the guys in the pictures and we didn't do it! lets talk!" would be crazy
Well, that all depends on how innocent you are, and what you're innocent of.
There was a stupid picture going around facebook today that was kind of right. Only in Boston will they shut down the entire goddamned city to search for someone like this. Don't fuck with Bawfston.
Sometimes they shut the whole place down just because of some damn snow. What's your point? The shut down was basically an uexpected snow-day in the middle of April? Fuck off, idiot.
I find it amusing when people call things a "conspiracy nut delusion" when it is something that has been known to occur at points in the past. It's like people who probably used to say "oh, you're just a conspiracy nut! nobody is doing crazy deadly experiments on black prisoners under the radar!" until, you know, years later we find out that the government has done exactly that.
For instance: It's well known that frat boys get drunk and sometimes crash vehicles. Ergo: Roswell incident was caused by drunken frat-boy Ailens. The cover up was to prevent embarrassing their powerful interplanetary diplomat parents.
We know this is true because this sort of thing happens all the time.
Sorry, but in every way that counts, your country has stopped being "great" a long time ago. It is basically a threat to everybody, including its own citizens. It is just that you do not have any meaningful comparison, or you would see that immediately. I have notices a growing number of US citizens that are trying to stay permanently in Europe after being here for a while. Not a coincidence.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I'm no statist so let me respond: Do not confuse the great American People as being purveyors of Government corruption. The People are the ones who sacrificed crockery to make weapons for war when needed. The People are the ones who fight in the wars too. The country is made not only of its government, but primarily it's people. You can change a government and still have the same people. America is HUGE. The political and legal systems are its Government, and they are likewise huge and lumbering. We know the beastly bureaucracy is not always right or even good at times, but if it gets too oppressive then we won't stand for that either. We don't make sacrifices to have the country turn into those very same things we sacrificed for. Potential for it do become so is not the same as it being so. Sure, there is a risk and hints its headed that way, but currently it's really not so bad -- Certainly not bad enough for a revolt. The average Person thinks things could be better here, and so it shall be in due time.
Better to adapt slowly than take radical action over mere "threats to everyone" and risk death or oppression.
^- Note that this is the opposite mentality than that of a terrorist...
In short, your concern has been noted, but it's not fresh news to us. WTF does it have to do with the pathetic ineffective attempts of a couple of nutters to get our attention? I hope you see that that way is useless. We're not doing the best we can to change things, but really now, who is?
Truly, you are "sorry" -- "in every way that counts".
Considering my family was stuck in some Soviet-occupied area for quite a while after the war and you didn't lift a finger to change anything about that,
Help us help you. How many fingers did they lift?
It can be read in total darkness, if you use a fleshlight.
FTFY
So... Linux Advocates, is addressing a letter to... Themselves? Does Mrs Schmitz know about this?
While true that "money doesn't grow on trees", personally I think your solution is part of the problem. The answer is not to donate more money -- That doesn't solve the money problem, it just moves the money around. The answer is to breed currency bearing trees.
What about the 32,248 other potential terrorists?
Don't they need to be detained and questioned before we know we're safe?
Really? A dollar is only worth what you can buy with it. It can become nearly worthless overnight. It is only paper and your faith in it is all that gives it value.
That's a foolish and tired cliche. It has centuries of history.
Tell me, in your lifetime did the USSR or the Berlin wall fall? Even if not, can you please inform me how such events affected the currencies involved?
For someone who cites history, you've little respect of it.
Furthermore, it ignores the obvious alternate solution: Destroy all the witnesses. That's why we should be pouring all our military assets into NASA. You think the aliens are going to let us take to the stars and tell all their friends about how they got drunk, buzzed Earth for grins, and crashed in Area 51?! They probably shouldn't have been doing it, but all the direct evidence of their involvement has been destroyed -- That is the lesson to learn.
Don't you get it? He says he's been impersonated and doesn't have time to post this thread to every story, unlike some kid would. Thus, the post is from the impersonator, obviously.
Software is a legitimate product that has value in and of itself. There's no reason why software should be free, anymore so than anything else. Since nothing else free, we need to stop giving away our labor.
Software is a token of your labor. It's intangible, and in infinite supply. Market that which is scarce: Your labor. Do not market that which is in infinite supply (bits) because Selling ice to Eskimos is a laughable business strategy. The bits have no value in of themselves, nor do the copies of the software. // Regardless of cost to create.
This is Economics 101: If ( Supply == Infinity ) Price = 0;
The reason software should be free is so that you can stop wasting your labor trying to sell ice to eskimos. Instead, do as any other labor industry does, from mechanics to home-builders to FLOSS devs: Get assurances that you will be paid for your work before you do the work. Once you have done the work and been paid, a mechanic does not charge you each time you drive the car, a home builder does not charge you extra for selling your house or if you do your own improvements. Cars do not have their hoods welded shut so you're beholden to the dealer to provide fixes instead of hiring a 3rd party mechanic you trust. Once you have been paid to built the software you give it away "for free" because you have been paid already: in the same way a fast food restaurant gives you your damn meal to do with as you please after you've paid for it -- including the option to go home, figure out the recipe and make your own additional food.
If the copies of software have value then BitTorrent networks would be the richest organizations in the world. They're not. Data is not scarce. What's scarce is your ability to configure the bits. Market that. Market your labor, do not seek rent or employ artificial scarcity.
The current pay-per-copy software market is not in line with the "get paid for doing work" idea that's inherent in all other labor markets. The cost of a copy does not reflect the cost to create it, or the cost to initially configure the bits. When you look at it rationally, economically: The pay-per-copy software model is the one that makes no sense.
Even the ideal situation proposed by open source advocates is ridiculous, "we'll give away the software and make money off of support."
That's not the ideal situation. The ideal situation is that we ask for money up front before we do the work of improving or making the software, THEN we do the work we've been paid to do -- Just like everyone else does, from contract software devs to mechanics, department store clerks, and paid anti-foss trolls.
"JBoss Application Server is now more."
It means the price went up. Unsurprisingly since it has to do with 'Enterprise' -- That means two things at once: Expensive and Fantasy Utopia that is every nerd's dream.
Representatives aren't working. That's not even the word for them, they don't represent us or decided based on the best interests of the people. A purely democratic system would be horrible due to the mob-rule, but it has become abundantly clear that we do need a 4th power as a check and balance. This is the information age, we now have the technology to put all these crap laws directly to vote by the people. The US Citizens are not being adequately represented by their representatives because of the percentage of apathy of the average American and of the lack of accountability afforded to those who are up for election to such offices. The founding fathers had a great idea, but they could not anticipate a design that operates in today's climate of vast corruption and apathetic voters who rightly feel that their votes don't matter. We have the technology to make our voices directly heard in the passing of any bill -- Laws that will directly impact our lives shouldn't be passed without a representative portion of voters actually aware of the bill and voting to instate it.
We need those registered voters to have their own individual digital offices of government. Each voter given the option to participate in voting to veto or pass the same bills that come before the president -- A public veto power. Furthermore we need only pass the laws that the public ACTUALLY knows and cares about. If there isn't enough direct voting support for a bill then it gets dropped automatically. This could be a HUGE boon to the current system: By opening up a direct line of thought to the actual people the laws will affect the other branches will better see how to align their decisions with that of the people who supposedly vote them into or out of office next term.
Of course there are many issues with gaming such a system, but just look at the current system! Can you say it's ANY Better?! Is it any LESS game-able? No, it is MORE SO. Anyone who has even heard of the practice of paperclipping a bill to another to fly it under our radar should either be fighting to change the broken and corrupt system, to save it from extinction.
Has nature taught us nothing? Any entity that does not adapt to its surroundings WILL become extinct. That is the mechanism by which History makes itself repeat -- Thus government-organisms have life cycles. Any system collects more baggage and entropy as it grows and ages, enough so that it eventually "dies" -- Governments are no different, except that now you recognize it as such a system we can prevent its death. It's time to re-make the government while its running... The alternative is a bloody new government is born of revolution, that's less efficient. It's time to make an evolutionary leap in terms of government: It's time to end the cycle of death by building adaptation right into the organism itself.
We have the technology. Let us use it.
Take what you believe and make that your party planks.
Also -- I would prefer a follow through for the given promises (instead of any position that will be discarded as soon as you come to power)
Political candidates should sign a contract, where violating more than X% (30%?) of your promises results in an automatic and immediate eviction.
I agree, except that the X% variable should be a zero initialized constant -- For efficiency.
Uhhh, if they break up MS into new companies, one should be the fucking Office Suite (and the other applications and what not), one should be the OS (hint: "home" is not fucking different that "pro" other than a few limitations artificially imposed on the former), and the other should be games.
The shareholders would have to be convinced that throwing away free money by not porting Office, MSSQL, or Exchange (etc.) to Mac or Linux. Face it: Folks by Windows because of the vendor lock-in, not because Windows is actually any good -- even if it were.