Neither I, nor a single person I know that wanted it has ever had FIOS; Verizon always says it won't be available for six months. This has been for years, since they first announced it. And I'm not in the boonies, I live near Boston. If I didn't hear tell of people that actually have FIOS, I wouldn't think it exists, but is rather some elaborate joke. Maybe they got a deal from regulators for their "ambitious" plan, took the money, and then only delivered to a very limited number of customers.
SLR-design was useful when you had cameras that made chemical exposures - the concept is simple: the light you see through the viewfinder will be the light that hits the film. For digital cameras, the very idea of flipping light between a viewfinder and the sensor is ridiculous: a digital preview going to an LCD screen shows you exactly what the sensor "sees", so it's more accurate than any direct viewfinding. You can get high-end digital cameras that don't have single-lens reflex. I'm an experienced (but not professional) photographer, and I've always thought that putting SLR on a digital camera (that can do live preview) to be totally unnecessary.
It *might* make sense to include a note about the page layout in the text beyond simply "see below" if everyone's browser window were always the same size. I usually see "after the break" in the middle of a page, and I'm always like - What break? Where? What the hell are you talking about? Does it mean something I'm not getting, or are the authors really that stupid?
This is only coming from the perspective of an engineer - I realize that there are courses out there without math... MIT didn't do everything right, but it did tests right. Crib cheats, calculators, books, whatever at all you brought into the test with you wouldn't help. Even copying the final 'answer' wouldn't help you. You had to know your shit and you had to show your work. No understanding meant no grade. A packed crib sheet meant a struggling student. Any course that had tests that didn't satisfy this property bored the shit out of me.
But what's sad is, with Java you can actually host a real application in your browser. I'm still waiting for.NET to have something similar (Silverlight is a joke).
These are feasibility studies where defense is only a secondary consideration. Next we will see several small but notable "cyber attack" events that will justify increased funding to the biggest players.
There are a few ways to do aspect-oriented programming, and having everything inherit from a common base class is one of the crappier methods of implementation. There's nothing new about security in there, either.
Top-down management tends to fail when attempting projects of such complexity for the same reason controlled (non-competitive) economies tend to collapse. The vendors are only culpable because they encourage it with a great lie.
"Locking down" information is like trying to make water not be wet. Also, "taking away choice" on the internet is a great way to get completely ignored.
GUID is better than BIGINT now that the performance issues have been solved by all the major vendors. Not only do GUID lookups actually perform better than INT for tables exceeding 50K rows, but you never have to worry about the headaches that come with moving IDENTITY INT (1,1) data around.
Do you mean, what criteria do I use to decide if an application needs to be on the web? That's rather different than asking me why the HTML/JS combination is so laughably bad in terms of programming, UI, and all the other dimensions of development.
If you want a fast, reliable interface, use a thick client. Even after all these years, the web application remains a vastly inferior choice in almost all respects.
Admins and developers we may be, but we're end users, too, and we get fatigued and annoyed by the same design no-no's as everyone else. Honestly I'm tired of just having to suck it up when I have to use a product that had no thought to usability put into it. It's waste multiplied a thousandfold over every unfortunate user that had to wade through a thicket of XML and poor documentation to do the most basic of tasks.
Why make people chose what they want when it would work better the other way round? Just give us a block feature that works like Facebook - mouse over an article and an X appears over a corner, and when you click on it you'd get options like 'Hide this article', 'Hide this author', 'Hide stories about football', 'Hide stories about sports'. No longer seeing crap I will never be interested in, yet not narrowing content to just what I pick, that would make me a pretty happy reader.
It more than just what the market allows; compare what we have in the US to say, Europe, and you will come to the conclusion that we're simply seeing the effects of regulatory capture.
My apologies for the rant, it's just really heartfelt. Business all shifted to the web years ago, and web app development still completely sucks compared to thick client development. All the problems that were already well solved-for in user interfaces, feature-wise and programming... web just threw those all right out the window for little reason other than momentum. And they will never return until we leave HTML and JavaScript behind.
Saying you're the fastest at running JavaScript is like celebrating that you came in 1st place in the Special Olympics. Sure you won, but you're still a retard. Using JavaScript and HTML for the UIs of real applications remains fundamentally flawed. It was never meant for what we're doing with it now. Millions of developer hours have been wasted in inefficiency and hair-pulling because we're still trying shove a square peg into a round hole. We need something better, and better is almost certainly not another weakly-typed, prototype-based scripting language. Seriously. Fuck JavaScript.
Yeah this is the format I learned algebra in. Why wouldn't you ask them to "solve for x" instead of that parentheses crap? The article's premise is totally bogus, the format of the equation is merely nonstandard and unclear.
Slashdot Mirror
Neither I, nor a single person I know that wanted it has ever had FIOS; Verizon always says it won't be available for six months. This has been for years, since they first announced it. And I'm not in the boonies, I live near Boston. If I didn't hear tell of people that actually have FIOS, I wouldn't think it exists, but is rather some elaborate joke. Maybe they got a deal from regulators for their "ambitious" plan, took the money, and then only delivered to a very limited number of customers.
SLR-design was useful when you had cameras that made chemical exposures - the concept is simple: the light you see through the viewfinder will be the light that hits the film. For digital cameras, the very idea of flipping light between a viewfinder and the sensor is ridiculous: a digital preview going to an LCD screen shows you exactly what the sensor "sees", so it's more accurate than any direct viewfinding. You can get high-end digital cameras that don't have single-lens reflex. I'm an experienced (but not professional) photographer, and I've always thought that putting SLR on a digital camera (that can do live preview) to be totally unnecessary.
Yeah, no, I'm not talking about the ./ post, but the article it points to, and all those like it.
It *might* make sense to include a note about the page layout in the text beyond simply "see below" if everyone's browser window were always the same size. I usually see "after the break" in the middle of a page, and I'm always like - What break? Where? What the hell are you talking about? Does it mean something I'm not getting, or are the authors really that stupid?
This is only coming from the perspective of an engineer - I realize that there are courses out there without math... MIT didn't do everything right, but it did tests right. Crib cheats, calculators, books, whatever at all you brought into the test with you wouldn't help. Even copying the final 'answer' wouldn't help you. You had to know your shit and you had to show your work. No understanding meant no grade. A packed crib sheet meant a struggling student. Any course that had tests that didn't satisfy this property bored the shit out of me.
and it does so in an efficient, non-intrusive, and flexible manner
Bwahahahaha!!!
Is it me, or does "turn skin into blood" sound like a particularly nasty curse out of the Harry Potter series?
But what's sad is, with Java you can actually host a real application in your browser. I'm still waiting for .NET to have something similar (Silverlight is a joke).
It's always been that way, everywhere, with almost no exception.
You have a right to be angry, but it won't change anything.
These are feasibility studies where defense is only a secondary consideration. Next we will see several small but notable "cyber attack" events that will justify increased funding to the biggest players.
There are a few ways to do aspect-oriented programming, and having everything inherit from a common base class is one of the crappier methods of implementation. There's nothing new about security in there, either.
Top-down management tends to fail when attempting projects of such complexity for the same reason controlled (non-competitive) economies tend to collapse. The vendors are only culpable because they encourage it with a great lie.
I loved the Nintendo but christ, 25 years? Has it been that long?
"Locking down" information is like trying to make water not be wet. Also, "taking away choice" on the internet is a great way to get completely ignored.
GUID is better than BIGINT now that the performance issues have been solved by all the major vendors. Not only do GUID lookups actually perform better than INT for tables exceeding 50K rows, but you never have to worry about the headaches that come with moving IDENTITY INT (1,1) data around.
Do you mean, what criteria do I use to decide if an application needs to be on the web? That's rather different than asking me why the HTML/JS combination is so laughably bad in terms of programming, UI, and all the other dimensions of development.
HTML/AJAX/JS is a brilliant way to do this
You have no real understanding of software development if you can say this and believe it.
If you want a fast, reliable interface, use a thick client. Even after all these years, the web application remains a vastly inferior choice in almost all respects.
Admins and developers we may be, but we're end users, too, and we get fatigued and annoyed by the same design no-no's as everyone else. Honestly I'm tired of just having to suck it up when I have to use a product that had no thought to usability put into it. It's waste multiplied a thousandfold over every unfortunate user that had to wade through a thicket of XML and poor documentation to do the most basic of tasks.
Why make people chose what they want when it would work better the other way round? Just give us a block feature that works like Facebook - mouse over an article and an X appears over a corner, and when you click on it you'd get options like 'Hide this article', 'Hide this author', 'Hide stories about football', 'Hide stories about sports'. No longer seeing crap I will never be interested in, yet not narrowing content to just what I pick, that would make me a pretty happy reader.
They get most of the major offenders in the list. Sure it breaks some links, but it's worth it.
It more than just what the market allows; compare what we have in the US to say, Europe, and you will come to the conclusion that we're simply seeing the effects of regulatory capture.
My apologies for the rant, it's just really heartfelt. Business all shifted to the web years ago, and web app development still completely sucks compared to thick client development. All the problems that were already well solved-for in user interfaces, feature-wise and programming... web just threw those all right out the window for little reason other than momentum. And they will never return until we leave HTML and JavaScript behind.
Saying you're the fastest at running JavaScript is like celebrating that you came in 1st place in the Special Olympics. Sure you won, but you're still a retard. Using JavaScript and HTML for the UIs of real applications remains fundamentally flawed. It was never meant for what we're doing with it now. Millions of developer hours have been wasted in inefficiency and hair-pulling because we're still trying shove a square peg into a round hole. We need something better, and better is almost certainly not another weakly-typed, prototype-based scripting language. Seriously. Fuck JavaScript.
Yeah this is the format I learned algebra in. Why wouldn't you ask them to "solve for x" instead of that parentheses crap? The article's premise is totally bogus, the format of the equation is merely nonstandard and unclear.