As far as it goes, there are probably a dozen good questions to figure out if it is a computer or human:
Why did the chicken cross the road? Look for the feeling of humor in the response, they will probably think it's funny.
To get to the other side - A punchline thats accurate can still be funny.
Have you ever had your heart broken? This is something you can't lie about: if you haven't had a broken heart, and you pretend you have, it will be easy for listeners to know.
Yes, and I'd rather not talk about it or even No - either way this can be a scripted response.
What does it feel like to hold your breath under water? Simple experience, but will be hard for any knowledge bank to answer.
This is answered by any databank that has an entry for waterboarding - Torture
Any of these questions might possibly be answered by copying someone's answer from the internet, but if you ask a few of them, pretty soon you will realize this guy is either schizophrenic, or a computer.
All the answers I gave above could have come from a computer as easily as from a human.
Some reasoned argument, please, not blinkered ideological bullshit.
Since you asked nicely - Everything written for Mono would run on.NET/Windows, very little written for.NET/Windows will run on Mono. The "compatibility" is a one-way street, you are usually compatible when moving from Mono to.NET/Windows, you are almost never compatible when moving from.NET/Windows to Mono.
Unfortunately the ideological mental midgets seem to have taken over, and want to poison the word "compatibility" to mean a two ways street, which it is most certainly not.
It's false logic, as demonstrated by the fact that people don't target Wine, but do target Mono.
Also, Wine is not legally encumbered, Novell needs cross-patent deals with MS, Wine devs have never needed so. This attempt to equate Wine and Mono as somehow "the same thing" is intellectually dishonest.
You're not much of a debater. Yes, there's an ad hominem in there (but only one, not two as you claim). However, ad hominems don't invalidate anything else I said, and it's not necessarily even false. I still think you're a pea-brained moron and your response has done nothing to change that.
If you want to be taken seriously, respond to my argument against you thinking there's Linux lock-in that Mono is breaking.
I never claimed that Linux had lock-in potential, which is, as I already said, a strawman. You present an obviously moronic line of reasoning as being mine, then proceed to knock it down. Well Done, again!!! (care to go for a hat-trick?)
My claim is that of the two techs mentioned (Wine and.NET), one enables migration from Windows, the other prevents it.
Or present some other argument that I shall take great pleasure in mocking similarly.
Newsflash: Some mocking is certainly occurring, but I'm not the one being got at;-)
FLAMEBAIT -- get a life!
Anyone who has experience of both J2EE and.NET will tell you that.NET is better thought out, has a more consistant design,
has cleaner easier to use APIs, scales better, performs better
and is altogether a much nicer environment to work in.
I am sorry if this upsets the Slashdot worldview but its the truth.
Microsfot are better at software than Sun.
Anyone who has experience of both Apache and IIS will tell you that IIS is better thought out, has a more consistant design,
has cleaner easier to use APIs, scales better, performs better
and is altogether a much nicer environment to work in.
I am sorry if this upsets the Slashdot worldview but its the truth.
Microsfot are better at software than FLOSS Devs.
Because, we all know that those are the only things that matter when gambling your future - your legal liability is irrelevant.
Before I tear apart what you think passes for an argument,
Ad hominem
let me say that the Mono folks are doing an amazing job and they get way too little credit.
Irrelevant - I did not begrudge them their due.
The tinfoil hat brigade around here seems to have taken on Mono as its personal whipping boy, and it's totally unfair and uncalled for.
WINE removes lock-in,.NET provides it.
Sure, but weren't you supposed to be talking about Mono there somewhere? Java used to provide lock-in, too. Hence, the GNU Classpath project, which is pretty much identical in its goals to Mono. Funny that I never saw you people screaming about that one being a trap.
Then you have a short memory.
WINE helps people leave windows and still keep their legacy applications. Mono provides a way for new applications to be moved from Linux to Windows.
Wow, get some perspective there. How many killer apps are there on Linux that the Windows people are craving? KDE? Gnome? Firefox? OpenOffice? None of those are on.NET and most of them run on Windows, anyway. Do you think that Firefox, OOo and KDE are all helping people move away from Linux by providing Windows ports? Isn't it more likely that without those Windows ports, most of these projects would go nowhere?
Strawman, I never claimed anything like that, the majority of applications are in-house development efforts, and there are more portable and less legally dangerous alternatives to.NET
It's really quite obvious to anyone with any actual knowledge of how the industry works that people are going to write applications without Linux in mind. The Mono project, just like the Wine project, lets people who run Linux run applications that other people wrote for Windows.
Wine does, certainly.
As it turns out, there's also a bunch of useful libraries that Mono includes that you can use when coding for platforms other than Windows. It boggles my mind that anyone would think that this is somehow a trap.
I believe it is because your experience of the industry might just be limited to software for the masses, and not the majority of software written.
It's just a useful way to access Unixy things on Mono. But it clearly can't be breaking Linux lock-in or whatever pea-brained scheme you've come up with.
Irrelevant, Ad hominem and a strawman. Well Done!!!
Unless, of course, the argument is made that there are legacy applications in.NET that can be run on Mono, in which case we have bigger problems, such as lack of intellectual integrity on the part of those making the argument
.NET has been around for 7-8 years now. Do you honestly think code can't become legacy in that amount of time? Here's a tip: if you think Linux has any lock-in potential for applications written on it, then perhaps you shouldn't talk too much about intellectual integrity.
I leave the above in purely to demonstrate your lack of an argument.
WINE removes lock-in,.NET provides it. WINE helps people leave windows and still keep their legacy applications. Mono provides a way for new applications to be moved from Linux to Windows.
Unless, of course, the argument is made that there are legacy applications in.NET that can be run on Mono, in which case we have bigger problems, such as lack of intellectual integrity on the part of those making the argument
There's a big difference between the two - because devs don't target WINE, WINE is the "embrace" part of moving from Windows. Because devs target.NET,.NET is the "embrace" part of moving from Linux.
So, these two technologies are actually on opposing sides of this particular ideological fence - one is an attempt at removing lock-in, the other is an attempt at locking-in.
A number of different factors are required for successful research, and the Saudis and neighbors have no interest in any that can't be accomplished solely by writing a check.
The biggest thing required for research is the cheque. Trust me on this:-)
When friends and family ask me "Why do you guys do research anyway", I confidently answer "To get more funds":-)
I dunno, they seem quite genuine - TFA says it's to be used for:
Al-Ghaslan said the system will be used by researchers for a wide range of computational work in life and physical sciences, as well as in high performance-computing research, to improve the performance of code on systems of this type.
And all scientists but us computer geeks want tons of computational power - talk to any biologist or physicist and they always moan about how long their projects take. Every research institution should have access to a high-performance computing lab, so this is possibly a good thing.
Although, bomb simulations also come under the heading of "research";-)
... will be located at King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), a research university that was announced in 2007 and is due to open in a year from now...
"The best thing about KAUST is we have no legacy systems and no legacy thinking," Majid Al-Ghaslan, the university's interim CIO, told Computerworld.
Kind of an odd way to run a research institution - research is all about legacy.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry but after being enticed to idle I always get burnt, from now on I will not come hear.
here here!
Seriously, hosting a document for me to view doesn't cost $100/mo. so why are you trying to charge me that?
So they don't devalue the print versions, which is where they make all their cash.
Nice try, try this instead - "so they can still do review (peer as well) - checking for quality comes at a price"
Unless, of course, you want the serious articles mixed in with the perpetual motion machine descriptions...
Yemen, Zimbabwe, Lesotho heap similar scorn on education and knowledge.
Not Lesotho, I believe.
Perhaps not "held back", maybe the units were just not ready, and they wanted to release? Would you have preferred a buggy SC1 with lurker?
Sure, give me a few tens of millions of $$$ and 11 months, and I'll give you a receipt ;-)
(Actually, I did not meant that it is easy, just that it has already been done)
Using second life as a target displays a considerable lack of ambition.
As far as it goes, there are probably a dozen good questions to figure out if it is a computer or human:
To get to the other side - A punchline thats accurate can still be funny.
Have you ever had your heart broken? This is something you can't lie about: if you haven't had a broken heart, and you pretend you have, it will be easy for listeners to know.
Yes, and I'd rather not talk about it or even No - either way this can be a scripted response.
What does it feel like to hold your breath under water? Simple experience, but will be hard for any knowledge bank to answer.
This is answered by any databank that has an entry for waterboarding - Torture
Any of these questions might possibly be answered by copying someone's answer from the internet, but if you ask a few of them, pretty soon you will realize this guy is either schizophrenic, or a computer.
All the answers I gave above could have come from a computer as easily as from a human.
Some reasoned argument, please, not blinkered ideological bullshit.
Since you asked nicely - Everything written for Mono would run on .NET/Windows, very little written for .NET/Windows will run on Mono. The "compatibility" is a one-way street, you are usually compatible when moving from Mono to .NET/Windows, you are almost never compatible when moving from .NET/Windows to Mono.
Unfortunately the ideological mental midgets seem to have taken over, and want to poison the word "compatibility" to mean a two ways street, which it is most certainly not.
Say goodbye to IPC and all its problems, say hello to shared memory space and all its problems ;-)
It's false logic, as demonstrated by the fact that people don't target Wine, but do target Mono.
Also, Wine is not legally encumbered, Novell needs cross-patent deals with MS, Wine devs have never needed so. This attempt to equate Wine and Mono as somehow "the same thing" is intellectually dishonest.
You're not much of a debater. Yes, there's an ad hominem in there (but only one, not two as you claim). However, ad hominems don't invalidate anything else I said, and it's not necessarily even false. I still think you're a pea-brained moron and your response has done nothing to change that.
If you want to be taken seriously, respond to my argument against you thinking there's Linux lock-in that Mono is breaking.
I never claimed that Linux had lock-in potential, which is, as I already said, a strawman. You present an obviously moronic line of reasoning as being mine, then proceed to knock it down. Well Done, again!!! (care to go for a hat-trick?)
.NET), one enables migration from Windows, the other prevents it.
My claim is that of the two techs mentioned (Wine and
Or present some other argument that I shall take great pleasure in mocking similarly.
Newsflash: Some mocking is certainly occurring, but I'm not the one being got at ;-)
Consider this EOFF
FLAMEBAIT -- get a life! Anyone who has experience of both J2EE and .NET will tell you that .NET is better thought out, has a more consistant design,
has cleaner easier to use APIs, scales better, performs better
and is altogether a much nicer environment to work in.
I am sorry if this upsets the Slashdot worldview but its the truth. Microsfot are better at software than Sun.
Anyone who has experience of both Apache and IIS will tell you that IIS is better thought out, has a more consistant design, has cleaner easier to use APIs, scales better, performs better and is altogether a much nicer environment to work in.
I am sorry if this upsets the Slashdot worldview but its the truth. Microsfot are better at software than FLOSS Devs.
Because, we all know that those are the only things that matter when gambling your future - your legal liability is irrelevant.
Before I tear apart what you think passes for an argument,
Ad hominem
let me say that the Mono folks are doing an amazing job and they get way too little credit.
Irrelevant - I did not begrudge them their due.
The tinfoil hat brigade around here seems to have taken on Mono as its personal whipping boy, and it's totally unfair and uncalled for.
Sure, but weren't you supposed to be talking about Mono there somewhere? Java used to provide lock-in, too. Hence, the GNU Classpath project, which is pretty much identical in its goals to Mono. Funny that I never saw you people screaming about that one being a trap.
Then you have a short memory.
Wow, get some perspective there. How many killer apps are there on Linux that the Windows people are craving? KDE? Gnome? Firefox? OpenOffice? None of those are on .NET and most of them run on Windows, anyway. Do you think that Firefox, OOo and KDE are all helping people move away from Linux by providing Windows ports? Isn't it more likely that without those Windows ports, most of these projects would go nowhere?
Strawman, I never claimed anything like that, the majority of applications are in-house development efforts, and there are more portable and less legally dangerous alternatives to .NET
It's really quite obvious to anyone with any actual knowledge of how the industry works that people are going to write applications without Linux in mind. The Mono project, just like the Wine project, lets people who run Linux run applications that other people wrote for Windows.
Wine does, certainly.
As it turns out, there's also a bunch of useful libraries that Mono includes that you can use when coding for platforms other than Windows. It boggles my mind that anyone would think that this is somehow a trap.
I believe it is because your experience of the industry might just be limited to software for the masses, and not the majority of software written.
It's just a useful way to access Unixy things on Mono. But it clearly can't be breaking Linux lock-in or whatever pea-brained scheme you've come up with.
Irrelevant, Ad hominem and a strawman. Well Done!!!
.NET has been around for 7-8 years now. Do you honestly think code can't become legacy in that amount of time? Here's a tip: if you think Linux has any lock-in potential for applications written on it, then perhaps you shouldn't talk too much about intellectual integrity.
I leave the above in purely to demonstrate your lack of an argument.
*sigh*
.NET provides it. WINE helps people leave windows and still keep their legacy applications. Mono provides a way for new applications to be moved from Linux to Windows.
.NET that can be run on Mono, in which case we have bigger problems, such as lack of intellectual integrity on the part of those making the argument
WINE removes lock-in,
Unless, of course, the argument is made that there are legacy applications in
Patent encumbered lock-in of future software?
There's a big difference between the two - because devs don't target WINE, WINE is the "embrace" part of moving from Windows. Because devs target .NET, .NET is the "embrace" part of moving from Linux.
So, these two technologies are actually on opposing sides of this particular ideological fence - one is an attempt at removing lock-in, the other is an attempt at locking-in.
"... When good unit tests are in place, then code can be changed at will and the tests will tell automatically you if you broke anything."
Wrong.
Would you like a pony with that?
A number of different factors are required for successful research, and the Saudis and neighbors have no interest in any that can't be accomplished solely by writing a check.
The biggest thing required for research is the cheque. Trust me on this :-)
:-)
When friends and family ask me "Why do you guys do research anyway", I confidently answer "To get more funds"
Al-Ghaslan said the system will be used by researchers for a wide range of computational work in life and physical sciences, as well as in high performance-computing research, to improve the performance of code on systems of this type.
And all scientists but us computer geeks want tons of computational power - talk to any biologist or physicist and they always moan about how long their projects take. Every research institution should have access to a high-performance computing lab, so this is possibly a good thing.
;-)
Although, bomb simulations also come under the heading of "research"
Kind of an odd way to run a research institution - research is all about legacy.
Pun intended?
Shoplift it.
No surprises there
Sounds like a balance to me.