Buy an aluminum case because you like the way it looks and you like the way it's designed, not for any other reason.
Definitely, I bought my Lian-Li aluminum case because of the quality. The quality of the Lian-Li is the best I've seen. No sharp edges, same size thumb screws for all pieces, extra thumb screws included, 4 decent fans included, etc.
It's a bit more expensive, but how often do you change form factors? I've had it for about 5 years and have replaced the innards 3 times so far.
True, but how else are you supposed to succeed? There is no success without failure. Those that can't accept it should stick to things that are guaranteed to succeed, like... uhm.. nothing in this world that I know of.
Too many techies are afraid of failure, but look at any "success" in history and I guarantee it's built on the back of other failures.
Also, when you are engineering anything that is costly you have to try and ensure that the design is correct up front. But when your designs are basically throw away (he can make two a week) then that allows the engineer to experiment.
So he may fail, yes. But so what? Why is that a bad thing? Part of the science of engineering is to identify what does not work and out of that you'll find what works. Only those that are willing to accept this can innovate.
Considering that in most US states employees are "At-Will" it really doesn't mean much. If they need a reason to fire you it will probably be/dev/null or "the sky isn't blue enough today".
Hey, well then I guess it's all good. As long as the contributors are not pissed and understand this move, so they don't alienate their "fanbase", that's their bread & butter.
"Uhm, what about all the contributors that don't get paid one dime for their work?"
What about them? Seriously, they donated thier work. What's the problem?
Well they might be pissed off. It doesn't mean that Mozilla will be legally liable or anything but hey, as far as I know Mozilla stands on the shoulders of it's contributors. Without those contributors they will be hurting.
Who is it going to piss off? Mozzilla Corporation shareholders? i.e. the Mozilla Foundation (Sole Shareholders). Non-shareholders? Who cares? No-one took any notice when I complained about (Insert company I have no shares in) doing (Insert action I disagrtee with).
The only spin they need is "We are following the desires of our shareholder. "
Uhm, what about all the contributors that don't get paid one dime for their work?
The Mozilla Corporation will not be floating on the stock market and it will be impossible for any company to take over or buy a stake in the subsidiary.
Not entirely accurate. This could still happen but it would be up to the few shareholders.
My question is why didn't they go the Non-Profit route? A company can still invest it's profits back into it's projects using this form of a corp.
Amen, I'd bet good money that most on here have never even programmed a microcontroller to get a servo moving, let alone created a robot equal to the one in the article. To those I simply say - Try it yourself and see how easy it is.
This guy has been building robots since the early 1990s. What have these naysayers done that is sooo damn impressive?
I don't know if wi-fi can cause potential health problems, but as far as I know neither does anyone else. Every study usually admits that even if they don't find evidence there needs to be more research.
Haven't you noticed? The computer industry likes to do this "reset" of software every 5-10 years. We get really far feature and stability wise with one platform and then BAM! Along comes a new environment and then we start the cycle of making new spreadsheets, word processors, etc.
Considering how fake women are these days (tits, hair, makeup, lipo, injections, botox, etc) is it really that much different from an android? At least this one can have a built-in dual purpose vacuum and warez games for you while you're at work..
How else are you going to see the good guy voted off the Island then killed by Jack Bauer(tm) in HDTV SUPER++ blue-ray intensity maginification level quadX, DEFCON 5 Aurora Borealis video eXtreme 3.5 D?
I mean, can you _imagine_ living in a world without HIGH DEFINITION ENTERTAINMENT? I mean for God's sake man, you'd have to do something insane.. like pick up a book!
"Yes I'd like a $300 one-way ticket to anywhere but here please."
I apologize, it was uncalled for and was meant more as a joke.
The idea of a different library breaking the code is a very real thing, like you showed. But that does not mean automated builds are a bad thing. An automated build system can guarantee that the package that you develop is the same package that gets tested and eventually released to the user. But outside dependencies cannot be controlled by this type of build system.
Automated build can be for users though. When a version is released it can be built by an automated system with consistency, this is how all major development houses ship their products. Otherwise you may throw the monkey wrench of human error into the mix. Good build systems can deliver full end products, including fully burned CD-Roms/DVDs, programmed IC's, etc.
Of course it's up the development team to determine if this process is worth the cost.
No, spyware/adware uses corn delivery, or as the Native Americans called it "Maize-pawah". Corn power is coming of age and once my corn-fed robots are complete I'm going to put you all in cages!
Seriously though, this is about automating your build process for "delivery". The build process and configuration management are weak points in a lot of software development processes, so this type focus is important for quality in the end product.
I guess they should just start from scratch right? And I mean from scratch right down to the hardware level. Every language/tool build on the backs of others. In fact I would say that _humanity_ does this. It's called "knowledge"
"If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of Giants." --Isaac Newton
MS has nothing to do with CruiseControl.net or NAnt. These are fully Open Sourced projects built on the backs of other Open Source projects.
I thought it was about information sharing and freedom. Not bias and bullshit. But I could be wrong.
Well techinically speaking a robot does not have to be autonomous. It could simply be a remotely controlled device:
From American Heritage Dictionary: Robot.. 2. A machine or device that operates automatically or by remote control.
So it does fall within the definition.
But this is a grey area as far as definition goes. It's up for debate as to what a robot really _is_. If it's simply a remotely controlled device then I have a "flying robot" at home that can do some pretty cool stuff. That's why many robotics projects use the word autonomous when designating their robot, to preclude such questions.
Slashdot Mirror
Buy an aluminum case because you like the way it looks and you like the way it's designed, not for any other reason.
Definitely, I bought my Lian-Li aluminum case because of the quality. The quality of the Lian-Li is the best I've seen. No sharp edges, same size thumb screws for all pieces, extra thumb screws included, 4 decent fans included, etc.
It's a bit more expensive, but how often do you change form factors? I've had it for about 5 years and have replaced the innards 3 times so far.
Why would he hate XML because of parentheses? It has none as far as I know.
Unless of course you are using super-dooper edition..
Arguing in favor of both LISP _and_ XML? Jesus man, get a hold of yourself! cold water in face!
True, but how else are you supposed to succeed? There is no success without failure. Those that can't accept it should stick to things that are guaranteed to succeed, like... uhm.. nothing in this world that I know of.
Too many techies are afraid of failure, but look at any "success" in history and I guarantee it's built on the back of other failures.
Also, when you are engineering anything that is costly you have to try and ensure that the design is correct up front. But when your designs are basically throw away (he can make two a week) then that allows the engineer to experiment.
So he may fail, yes. But so what? Why is that a bad thing? Part of the science of engineering is to identify what does not work and out of that you'll find what works. Only those that are willing to accept this can innovate.
Considering that in most US states employees are "At-Will" it really doesn't mean much. If they need a reason to fire you it will probably be /dev/null or "the sky isn't blue enough today".
Hey, well then I guess it's all good. As long as the contributors are not pissed and understand this move, so they don't alienate their "fanbase", that's their bread & butter.
"Uhm, what about all the contributors that don't get paid one dime for their work?"
What about them?
Seriously, they donated thier work. What's the problem?
Well they might be pissed off. It doesn't mean that Mozilla will be legally liable or anything but hey, as far as I know Mozilla stands on the shoulders of it's contributors. Without those contributors they will be hurting.
Who is it going to piss off?
Mozzilla Corporation shareholders? i.e. the Mozilla Foundation (Sole Shareholders).
Non-shareholders? Who cares? No-one took any notice when I complained about (Insert company I have no shares in) doing (Insert action I disagrtee with).
The only spin they need is "We are following the desires of our shareholder. "
Uhm, what about all the contributors that don't get paid one dime for their work?
The Mozilla Corporation will not be floating on the stock market and it will be impossible for any company to take over or buy a stake in the subsidiary.
Not entirely accurate. This could still happen but it would be up to the few shareholders.
My question is why didn't they go the Non-Profit route? A company can still invest it's profits back into it's projects using this form of a corp.
Is there _anyone_ here that understands the difference between remote control and autonomous?
It's a robot. It does this all by itself not remote control.
So you're not impressed.. so what? What have _you_ done in the field of robotics? Please share it with us all so we can laugh at your accomplishments.
Amen, I'd bet good money that most on here have never even programmed a microcontroller to get a servo moving, let alone created a robot equal to the one in the article. To those I simply say - Try it yourself and see how easy it is.
This guy has been building robots since the early 1990s. What have these naysayers done that is sooo damn impressive?
Horribly written Perl? Say it aint so!
Christ the Perl geeks have contests to see who's code is the worst! So I never expect much from those ne'r-do -wells.
I don't know if wi-fi can cause potential health problems, but as far as I know neither does anyone else. Every study usually admits that even if they don't find evidence there needs to be more research.
Haven't you noticed? The computer industry likes to do this "reset" of software every 5-10 years. We get really far feature and stability wise with one platform and then BAM! Along comes a new environment and then we start the cycle of making new spreadsheets, word processors, etc.
Call in an airstrike!! HE KNOWS TOO MUCH!!
Considering how fake women are these days (tits, hair, makeup, lipo, injections, botox, etc) is it really that much different from an android? At least this one can have a built-in dual purpose vacuum and warez games for you while you're at work..
If this was decided by debt-collectors that are somehow linked with you I would be the most popular guy in the Western hemisphere.
Next to the US government of course..
Well it depends on what you mean by "innovation"..
Pay no attention to the man behind that curtain!! If wookies are from endor NOT GUILTY!!
How else are you going to see the good guy voted off the Island then killed by Jack Bauer(tm) in HDTV SUPER++ blue-ray intensity maginification level quadX, DEFCON 5 Aurora Borealis video eXtreme 3.5 D?
I mean, can you _imagine_ living in a world without HIGH DEFINITION ENTERTAINMENT? I mean for God's sake man, you'd have to do something insane.. like pick up a book!
"Yes I'd like a $300 one-way ticket to anywhere but here please."
I apologize, it was uncalled for and was meant more as a joke.
The idea of a different library breaking the code is a very real thing, like you showed. But that does not mean automated builds are a bad thing. An automated build system can guarantee that the package that you develop is the same package that gets tested and eventually released to the user. But outside dependencies cannot be controlled by this type of build system.
Automated build can be for users though. When a version is released it can be built by an automated system with consistency, this is how all major development houses ship their products. Otherwise you may throw the monkey wrench of human error into the mix. Good build systems can deliver full end products, including fully burned CD-Roms/DVDs, programmed IC's, etc.
Of course it's up the development team to determine if this process is worth the cost.
Jesus man, cease and desist!
I'm curious why you think the software that is released would be different from what the what the testers tested.
Seriously dude, are you a developer? Say it aint so.
Isn't that what spyware/adware uses??
No, spyware/adware uses corn delivery, or as the Native Americans called it "Maize-pawah". Corn power is coming of age and once my corn-fed robots are complete I'm going to put you all in cages!
Seriously though, this is about automating your build process for "delivery". The build process and configuration management are weak points in a lot of software development processes, so this type focus is important for quality in the end product.
I guess they should just start from scratch right? And I mean from scratch right down to the hardware level. Every language/tool build on the backs of others. In fact I would say that _humanity_ does this. It's called "knowledge"
"If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of Giants." --Isaac Newton
MS has nothing to do with CruiseControl.net or NAnt. These are fully Open Sourced projects built on the backs of other Open Source projects.
I thought it was about information sharing and freedom. Not bias and bullshit. But I could be wrong.
It would be nice if there was a new term to distinguish the two, it would help avoid confusion about the machines capabilities.
Well techinically speaking a robot does not have to be autonomous. It could simply be a remotely controlled device:
From American Heritage Dictionary:
Robot.. 2. A machine or device that operates automatically or by remote control.
So it does fall within the definition.
But this is a grey area as far as definition goes. It's up for debate as to what a robot really _is_. If it's simply a remotely controlled device then I have a "flying robot" at home that can do some pretty cool stuff. That's why many robotics projects use the word autonomous when designating their robot, to preclude such questions.