Now, I would have thought that with the absurd legal machinations of the MPAA, and other shitty tactics like region encoding, the slashdot camp would staunchly denounce the DVD format. Why is it then that everyone here goes ape shit over DVD? Do they like region encoding?
Earth to mcelrath: Region coding only affects the 1% or so who don't have a region-free player, given that most outlets seem to sell mostly modified machines.
Now, PAL versus NTSC versus SECAM etc., that's a whole different kettle of fish...
use it to redirect you based on a choice in a dropdown list.
Pester the webmasters to tell the authors to add a small "submit"-button/image next to it. java.sun.com (ironically) used to have the same problem, but they learned the errors of their ways, and now feature small "go" images to click.
That's stupid, though, because it's *harder* to keep someone out than it is to let everyone in and let them see for themselves whether they can watch the movies or not.
You tell me. I use Opera 4 on Windows, which is quite capable of using Shockwave and Flash, but Macromedia's site is unavailable because it's not a "supported browser". As if there was some hard limit to the number of possible browsers which supported Netscape's plugin architecture or Microsoft's ActiveX.
Could someone please place roadblocks around Macromedia HQs with signs saying their cars aren't supported by this road?
No, it means it will be "backward compatible", and the performance hit is not much of an issue in modern JVMS. And is better than generating a new class for that particular type for each type.
Sort of, but templates (in the proposed extension to the language) provide a compile-time safety, whereas ordinary casts can cause type-exceptions at runtime. Even though the resulting code rewrites the template use to casts, it increases runtime safety dramatically.
MS has already submitted the language spec to the standards bodies, unlike SUN.
Um, Java has a standards body: Sun and the JCP. There is nothing inherent in an "official" standards body which makes it any better an arbitrator than a given company, as long as the process remains open to all interested parties. Want proof? Witness the success of "unofficial" standards like TCP/IP and SMTP over the "official" communications standards from ITU-T (formerly CCITT) and ISO, such as X.400/MOTIS.
Can someone tell me how the heck this thing works? The concept doesn't make any sense to me.
Hold your hand in front of your monitor, fingers spread. How many fingers does it have? Now move it rapidly up and down. How many fingers does it appear to have?
Meyer is upset because a group was inspired by RMS to write a free compiler which is competing with his own.
If so, the article should have been written way before March 2000. Why do adherents to the "Church of RMS" dig for such snide remarks? Is it because they have no actual arguments behind their dogmatic hate for people making a living?
ot only are the odds in favor of getting dozens of not-necessarily-correct opinions from non-lawyers very high, but I consider it extremely unlikely that any lawyer who does read this is going to give out free advice.
Do lawyers have monopoly on discussing law? I was under the impression that most civilized countries had laws that said that all citizens are supposed to know the laws, and that ignorance is no excuse. Just because USA has 40% of the worl'd lawyers doesn't mean they should have monopoly. They merely are more nerdy about the subject, much like most/. readers are about computing...:-P
(And if lawyers do have monopoly on opinions on law, then I kinda feel sorry for your country.)
No, as UTF-8 or UTF-16. In UTF-8, characters 0-127 (your American-centered ASCII) takes 1 byte, 128-some number takes two bytes and three bytes for even higher values.
A pure ASCII file thus takes just as little room as before.
IIRC, the NSDAP did have a contigent of socialists, and implemented some social reforms (for pure-bred Germans only, of course), but Hitler had most of the left-wingers "neutralized" at the same time that the Schutzabteilung (SA) was, er, "downsized" by the SS.
Again only a person with a weak mind is going to actually go on a shooting rampage with a gun.
That doesn't make it any more okay, does it?
Also it's far easier to defend yourself with a gun than without.
Only if you by "defend" mean "threaten" or "pre-emptively attack". For defense, it largely sucks:
It is relatively small, thus covers only a small area. An attacker would be very unlucky in order to hit it.
If hit, it has a high risk of becoming broken and useless.
The presence of guns in society means e.g. law enforcers are more likely to assume someone carries one, thus creating more volatile situations, and a higher risk of getting shot at in the first place.
Also, apparently half the gun deaths in the U.S. are suicides - obviously the gun did not defend the shooter from themselves.:-P
Re:Why you should boycott this movie
on
Battlefield Earth
·
· Score: 2
Why dont you replace the word "scientology" with "Jewish" and see how much sense your arguments make.
Doesn't work. Because L. Ron Hubbard didn't create the Jewish faith as a result of a bet with either Heinlein or Clarke or whomever: He created Scientology. And behold, it was a system so well-designed that he actually got followers, unlike Heinlein's philosophy in "Stranger in a Strange Land", which apparently was the "counter-bet" product, at least according to one of the explanations raised.
Scientology does have the advantage - to us atheists, at least - that its existance may cause people to start wondering whether IYFRH also was designed so that a small group of people could control a larger group, and get away with it...
PC users spent years and years with Bill's horrid little command line - aka. MS-DOS - long after Apple made the easy-to-use Macintosh. 3rd party products like DesqView started the "let's get a GUI on the horrid PC" revolution, and Microsoft didn't get going properly until IBM came around with OS/2 and PM.
. Started the Internet revolution.
Hardly. The "Internet" had been in use for several years prior to Microsoft's sudden awakening in 1995; PC users who wanted TCP/IP, though, had to rely on third party applications. The "Internet revolution" was started by the folks at NCSA who wrote the first widely used graphical web browser: Mosaic.
3. Constantly improved their product.
You mean constantly stole features or bought companies with interesting technology.
I mean let's face it, the Amiga sucks in todays computing environment.
What do you define as "today's computing environment"? A Color Game Boy has terrible specs compared to a PC, yet it sells like hotcakes, because it serves a different purpose. Why should not an Amiga too? There are still a lot of them sitting around running Scala, for instance to "drive" a cable company's information channel.
(It's not like Intel-based PCs represent the epitome of computer architecture, either: Both PowerPC-based and Alpha-based architectures run rings around Intel's mangy workhorse cum electrical oven.)
You're an optimist. Why do you think people who write sucy, non-validating HTML will start writing well-formed, validating XHTML? The real problem is a history of lenient browsers and maNufacturerS more obsessed with adding features than actually creating a decent product.
Every 'language designer' "promotes" her/his language.
One could almost say that the success of a language is measured in the number of proponents of other languages who find it necessary to write "MyLanguage vs. YourLanguage" articles. For Java, there is the already-mentioned digs from Stroustrup, plus what some vocal Perl advocate wrote a few years ago, and IIRC some of the religious Eiffelians tend to spout their mouths off every now and then about how much better their insignificant little plaything is.</flamebait>
... since languages aren't software. Implementations of the languages can be open-source, though, and some are.
the stewardship of Java standards/apis is not open
... just like C++ et al. Except that you can go to Sun's site and download their official specs free of charge, while getting ISOs specs for "their" languages will cost you an arm, leg and your daughter's hand in marriage.
Sun's unwillingness to let go of their baby and let it grow up into an adult.
How long did it take for AT&T to let go of C++ and leave it to "grow" in the vats of ISO's JTCs? Do you really feel ISO's process has been to the advantage of the language? A single, steering body is always better, whether that body is called Sun or Guido von Rossum.:-)
We can fix all that, but not under the current conditions.
It seems you want Sun's source instead of working on the OSS projects already running, like Kaffe. Why?
Slashdot Mirror
Earth to mcelrath: Region coding only affects the 1% or so who don't have a region-free player, given that most outlets seem to sell mostly modified machines.
Now, PAL versus NTSC versus SECAM etc., that's a whole different kettle of fish...
Pester the webmasters to tell the authors to add a small "submit"-button/image next to it. java.sun.com (ironically) used to have the same problem, but they learned the errors of their ways, and now feature small "go" images to click.
There is, it's called HTTP redirect (status 301, 302, 304 etc.) and has worked since HTTP 1.0 was introduced.
But using it requires a minimum of technical knowledge, which web-DUH-signers aren't equipped with. :-)
Why not write a Pokémon adventure for the Kyle's Quest engine instead? :-)
You tell me. I use Opera 4 on Windows, which is quite capable of using Shockwave and Flash, but Macromedia's site is unavailable because it's not a "supported browser". As if there was some hard limit to the number of possible browsers which supported Netscape's plugin architecture or Microsoft's ActiveX.
Could someone please place roadblocks around Macromedia HQs with signs saying their cars aren't supported by this road?
No, it means it will be "backward compatible", and the performance hit is not much of an issue in modern JVMS. And is better than generating a new class for that particular type for each type.
Remember, though, that Hellfire wasn't made by Blizzard but by Sierra.
Sort of, but templates (in the proposed extension to the language) provide a compile-time safety, whereas ordinary casts can cause type-exceptions at runtime. Even though the resulting code rewrites the template use to casts, it increases runtime safety dramatically.
But it has goto! All things pale in significance to this modern language construct.
Um, Java has a standards body: Sun and the JCP. There is nothing inherent in an "official" standards body which makes it any better an arbitrator than a given company, as long as the process remains open to all interested parties. Want proof? Witness the success of "unofficial" standards like TCP/IP and SMTP over the "official" communications standards from ITU-T (formerly CCITT) and ISO, such as X.400/MOTIS.
No, that's Infocom and Rainbird text adventures. :-) Ten plus years ago.
Hold your hand in front of your monitor, fingers spread. How many fingers does it have? Now move it rapidly up and down. How many fingers does it appear to have?
The trick is to trick the eyes.
If so, the article should have been written way before March 2000. Why do adherents to the "Church of RMS" dig for such snide remarks? Is it because they have no actual arguments behind their dogmatic hate for people making a living?
Do lawyers have monopoly on discussing law? I was under the impression that most civilized countries had laws that said that all citizens are supposed to know the laws, and that ignorance is no excuse. Just because USA has 40% of the worl'd lawyers doesn't mean they should have monopoly. They merely are more nerdy about the subject, much like most /. readers are about computing... :-P
(And if lawyers do have monopoly on opinions on law, then I kinda feel sorry for your country.)
No, as UTF-8 or UTF-16. In UTF-8, characters 0-127 (your American-centered ASCII) takes 1 byte, 128-some number takes two bytes and three bytes for even higher values.
A pure ASCII file thus takes just as little room as before.
IIRC, the NSDAP did have a contigent of socialists, and implemented some social reforms (for pure-bred Germans only, of course), but Hitler had most of the left-wingers "neutralized" at the same time that the Schutzabteilung (SA) was, er, "downsized" by the SS.
That doesn't make it any more okay, does it?
Also it's far easier to defend yourself with a gun than without.
Only if you by "defend" mean "threaten" or "pre-emptively attack". For defense, it largely sucks:
Also, apparently half the gun deaths in the U.S. are suicides - obviously the gun did not defend the shooter from themselves. :-P
Doesn't work. Because L. Ron Hubbard didn't create the Jewish faith as a result of a bet with either Heinlein or Clarke or whomever: He created Scientology. And behold, it was a system so well-designed that he actually got followers, unlike Heinlein's philosophy in "Stranger in a Strange Land", which apparently was the "counter-bet" product, at least according to one of the explanations raised.
Scientology does have the advantage - to us atheists, at least - that its existance may cause people to start wondering whether IYFRH also was designed so that a small group of people could control a larger group, and get away with it...
Hello, troll.
1. Made computers easy to use.
PC users spent years and years with Bill's horrid little command line - aka. MS-DOS - long after Apple made the easy-to-use Macintosh. 3rd party products like DesqView started the "let's get a GUI on the horrid PC" revolution, and Microsoft didn't get going properly until IBM came around with OS/2 and PM.
. Started the Internet revolution.
Hardly. The "Internet" had been in use for several years prior to Microsoft's sudden awakening in 1995; PC users who wanted TCP/IP, though, had to rely on third party applications. The "Internet revolution" was started by the folks at NCSA who wrote the first widely used graphical web browser: Mosaic.
3. Constantly improved their product.
You mean constantly stole features or bought companies with interesting technology.
What do you define as "today's computing environment"? A Color Game Boy has terrible specs compared to a PC, yet it sells like hotcakes, because it serves a different purpose. Why should not an Amiga too? There are still a lot of them sitting around running Scala, for instance to "drive" a cable company's information channel.
(It's not like Intel-based PCs represent the epitome of computer architecture, either: Both PowerPC-based and Alpha-based architectures run rings around Intel's mangy workhorse cum electrical oven.)
You're an optimist. Why do you think people who write sucy, non-validating HTML will start writing well-formed, validating XHTML? The real problem is a history of lenient browsers and maNufacturerS more obsessed with adding features than actually creating a decent product.
Well, the fastest way to do a mod 4 (which conveniently is a power of 2) is to AND with 3. :-) Which should save you one IDIV.
Add RougeWave's Tools.h++ to your project and you can play with RWString as well... :-)
One could almost say that the success of a language is measured in the number of proponents of other languages who find it necessary to write "MyLanguage vs. YourLanguage" articles. For Java, there is the already-mentioned digs from Stroustrup, plus what some vocal Perl advocate wrote a few years ago, and IIRC some of the religious Eiffelians tend to spout their mouths off every now and then about how much better their insignificant little plaything is.</flamebait>
All this points to Java as a winner.:-)
... since languages aren't software. Implementations of the languages can be open-source, though, and some are.
the stewardship of Java standards/apis is not open
... just like C++ et al. Except that you can go to Sun's site and download their official specs free of charge, while getting ISOs specs for "their" languages will cost you an arm, leg and your daughter's hand in marriage.
Sun's unwillingness to let go of their baby and let it grow up into an adult.
How long did it take for AT&T to let go of C++ and leave it to "grow" in the vats of ISO's JTCs? Do you really feel ISO's process has been to the advantage of the language? A single, steering body is always better, whether that body is called Sun or Guido von Rossum. :-)
We can fix all that, but not under the current conditions.
It seems you want Sun's source instead of working on the OSS projects already running, like Kaffe. Why?