Because of outsourcing and many other effects of the overpriced dollar and that totally out-of-whack trade balance of the US, American wages and the dollar will drop heavily. You'll go back to a more normal standard of living. Then you'll get back the jobs.
There is no external view, since there is no outside the universe by definition.
However, the way it is curved has an effect on us - obviously, since we are finding out how it is curved by looking at the effects, like comic background radiation's distribution.
So you, we can recognize it from the inside, it does have effect (on us), why would it be useless to find out how it is curved?
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that even if the GPL gets struck down somehow, that would likely mean that everything draconian and evil about EULAs would get struck down too.
It's much stronger than that. I really can't think of anything that would strike down the GPL, short of declaring all of copyright law invalid. It would take copyright protection on all software, movies, music et cetera with it.
Really. All the GPL does is acknowledge that you have certain rights under copyright law, and doesn't touch them. It then gives you some extra rights, provided you adhere to the GPL's terms. Of course you don't have to accept those, but then you don't get the extra rights. And that's all. How can that possibly be struck down?
EULA's are on much shakier ground, by trying to restrict use, over which as far as I know copyright law doesn't give the author any control at all.
(I'm not a lawyer, I'm not even American, but I've seen these discussions here before...)
Driving 157 km/h in a 50 km/h zone is just totally criminal, and there is noone who doesn't know that. He bears full responsibility for the death. I find it disgusting that the defence lawyer thinks of appealing.
Once again, as we saw in 2002, GPS quality can be degraded at any moment, even taken wholly offline. Not to mention the "Act of God" possibilities to knock it offline *metorites, solar flares, etc etc*.
Yeah, but the doors of a building can get a new layer of paint. Which is more likely?
No. My view of the book is based on what I read about it (in discussions like these, mostly...). I didn't say it was a bad book, did I? I do have an idea what it's about, though.
The point here was that if you are not willing to give service to your nation; in its defense, or in some other way, then you should have no say in the allocation of resources. I view paying taxes the same way. Why should someone who didn't contribute have any say in how the money is used?
I agree with you, if you're saying that paying taxes is giving service to your nation.
But if you think as I, that it's axiomatic that you must be ready, willing, and able to soundly defeat aggressors and then be willing to help them change for the better, then you will particularly like it.
Ah, yes, that would be nice. It's just that nowadays it's not so clear anymore. In Iraq, for example, obviously the US is the agressor - Iraq never attacked the US, and they were invaded. However, the US says that no, it's Iraq that's the agressor! This is "preventive action". And that's possible. It does rather muddy the nice clear waters you just described above though.
All I know is that I am not ready and willing to try to soundly defeat the US, that would just get me killed for no purpose.
First, they distribute Linux under the GPL. Then a while later, they go around telling people they owe $699 to them or they have to stop using Linux. How is that not extortion?
I have not read the book (yet, it's on the stack).
I absolutely love the movie. It's a biting sarcastic attack on societies that worship war and the military, very well executed. War looks like an episode of 90210 mixed with an infomercial, just like it does on Fox.
My view of the book was always that it made idols of the military, only giving the right to vote to the military, etc. So Verhoeven used the book to make a statement that says the opposite. Which I think he did rather well.
That doesn't mean I think the book can't be good, when it has a different message. I'll still read it and then I'll judge.
Genocide MUD (link) was exactly that (well, it still is, but I haven't played it in 10 years). A multi player player killing game, insanely fast, using only text.
There'd be wars, like two teams, play until one team is dead, restart... or all vs all wars, etc. The game is a really nice MUD (text adventure style), with beautiful descriptions, monsters, treasure etc.
You run past the descriptions. The monsters explode on your entering the room, dropping their stuff, which you take immediately, to sell for weapons and healing, in the first half minute of the war.
The team play is quite complex, because of difference classes. I'm not sure if there are things like Mages in online FPS games yet? The mage could 'port' to other players, to help them defeat their opponent - or walk into a death trap. Mages were the most important position in the team, when I played.
Anyway, some of those nerds did 200+ commands per minute, without any sort of client (mostly w e n s of course, and you can make aliases). It was fast, it rocked, and it was exactly what you describe.
He was implicitly implying that the harddrives would be duct taped to pigeons inside the jet, I thought. Backwards RFC compatibility. Goes without saying.
I've been programming for 19 years now; started my CS study 12 years ago; programming professionally for a few years. I used Java, and fast development languages like Python. I've never seen a flow chart in practice, let alone used one. So it's a bit hard to say.
Somehow flow charts seem fit only for relatively short programs, that have a clear flow from A to B. My programs are web apps that constantly react to requests from web forms that are sent in, supported by a bunch of scripts running from cron to periodically update database stuff. Program-wide, there is no single flow.
On the method-level (or the Action level, I build a large J2EE app with Struts), we could use flow charts I suppose. But they look pretty cumbersome; mostly I just write out what the method is going to do in a comment in English and/or pseudocode, and from that I write down the code.
What each action is supposed to do, and what each method of an object is supposed to do, that is (should be) designed beforehand. There you get tools like UML, if you want to use something like that. What we design is the data objects, and the interface they should expose, and so on.
How those methods do their work is decided at coding time, and is the only place where traditional flow charts seem applicable.
Just some thoughts, I don't know if I'm making sense, since mostly I get very little time for any design at all, in reality...
I'm not a spammer, but I'm a pretty good liar. You don't lie about things that are totally obvious, and that you have no reason to lie about. Such as saying that spammers spam because they make money that way.
Of course that's not a good thing. But that's just the world right now. The world will need fewer programmers. Deal.
What you're advocating though is lying to my boss in order to protect my job, by telling him closed source is good for him. I don't do that, I do my job well.
Do you also tell young programmers that they should make their code as obfuscated as possible, since that makes them harder to fire?
Why not just illegally trade the "old format" mp3s then? Or am I missing the totally obvious?
Officer, arrest this man. He is obviously a user, and probably a dealer, of a terrorist-grade operating system weapon, capable of running audio playback software software (and undoubtedly encryption software too) not expressly authorized by the ministry of rights (MiniRight).
Ha ha ha, but copying music is already illegal. If that legal approach was working for them they wouldn't need all these DRM schemes.
In my world, writing new software has monetary cost. If you want me to write something for you, you'll have to pay me.
Once it's written though, it can be used to do whatever it does, but it doesn't have monetary cost to make copies of it, that's a trivial operation and something I have nothing to do with.
Does that mean fewer programmers are needed? Probably. Does that mean no programmers are needed? Not at all.
I don't let that influence my writing, or if I do, I attribute it ("Some people believe that abortion is acceptable in these circumstances because...")
But isn't even that biased? I mean, at least it's different from instead explaining "Some people believe that abortion is not acceptable because...".
Actually to be unbiased you'd have to start by explaining why this is an issue that needs discussing, and why you don't just explain what abortion is, and stop there. It needs to explain that this is a debate in the US, and that it is therefore informative to mention some part of the discussion.
Of course I'm just whining, but writing from a truly "neutral point of view" seems really hard.
Slashdot Mirror
So buy Nokia stock?
The N-Gage is universally scorned on Slashdot, although I don't really believe Nokia isn't going to get it exactly right in a version or two.
Because of outsourcing and many other effects of the overpriced dollar and that totally out-of-whack trade balance of the US, American wages and the dollar will drop heavily. You'll go back to a more normal standard of living. Then you'll get back the jobs.
There is no external view, since there is no outside the universe by definition.
However, the way it is curved has an effect on us - obviously, since we are finding out how it is curved by looking at the effects, like comic background radiation's distribution.
So you, we can recognize it from the inside, it does have effect (on us), why would it be useless to find out how it is curved?
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that even if the GPL gets struck down somehow, that would likely mean that everything draconian and evil about EULAs would get struck down too.
It's much stronger than that. I really can't think of anything that would strike down the GPL, short of declaring all of copyright law invalid. It would take copyright protection on all software, movies, music et cetera with it.
Really. All the GPL does is acknowledge that you have certain rights under copyright law, and doesn't touch them. It then gives you some extra rights, provided you adhere to the GPL's terms. Of course you don't have to accept those, but then you don't get the extra rights. And that's all. How can that possibly be struck down?
EULA's are on much shakier ground, by trying to restrict use, over which as far as I know copyright law doesn't give the author any control at all.
(I'm not a lawyer, I'm not even American, but I've seen these discussions here before...)
Driving 157 km/h in a 50 km/h zone is just totally criminal, and there is noone who doesn't know that. He bears full responsibility for the death. I find it disgusting that the defence lawyer thinks of appealing.
I like this use of technology. A lot.
Once again, as we saw in 2002, GPS quality can be degraded at any moment, even taken wholly offline. Not to mention the "Act of God" possibilities to knock it offline *metorites, solar flares, etc etc*.
Yeah, but the doors of a building can get a new layer of paint. Which is more likely?
No. My view of the book is based on what I read about it (in discussions like these, mostly...). I didn't say it was a bad book, did I? I do have an idea what it's about, though.
The point here was that if you are not willing to give service to your nation; in its defense, or in some other way, then you should have no say in the allocation of resources. I view paying taxes the same way. Why should someone who didn't contribute have any say in how the money is used?
I agree with you, if you're saying that paying taxes is giving service to your nation.
But if you think as I, that it's axiomatic that you must be ready, willing, and able to soundly defeat aggressors and then be willing to help them change for the better, then you will particularly like it.
Ah, yes, that would be nice. It's just that nowadays it's not so clear anymore. In Iraq, for example, obviously the US is the agressor - Iraq never attacked the US, and they were invaded. However, the US says that no, it's Iraq that's the agressor! This is "preventive action". And that's possible. It does rather muddy the nice clear waters you just described above though.
All I know is that I am not ready and willing to try to soundly defeat the US, that would just get me killed for no purpose.
First, they distribute Linux under the GPL. Then a while later, they go around telling people they owe $699 to them or they have to stop using Linux. How is that not extortion?
I have not read the book (yet, it's on the stack).
I absolutely love the movie. It's a biting sarcastic attack on societies that worship war and the military, very well executed. War looks like an episode of 90210 mixed with an infomercial, just like it does on Fox.
My view of the book was always that it made idols of the military, only giving the right to vote to the military, etc. So Verhoeven used the book to make a statement that says the opposite. Which I think he did rather well.
That doesn't mean I think the book can't be good, when it has a different message. I'll still read it and then I'll judge.
As if it would be more convenient for us suburban types to walk a few miles (about 4 where I am) in the rain to get to a bus stop.
Of course, that would be daft. But 4 miles is a perfectly nice distance to do by bicycle.
Genocide MUD (link) was exactly that (well, it still is, but I haven't played it in 10 years). A multi player player killing game, insanely fast, using only text.
There'd be wars, like two teams, play until one team is dead, restart... or all vs all wars, etc. The game is a really nice MUD (text adventure style), with beautiful descriptions, monsters, treasure etc.
You run past the descriptions. The monsters explode on your entering the room, dropping their stuff, which you take immediately, to sell for weapons and healing, in the first half minute of the war.
The team play is quite complex, because of difference classes. I'm not sure if there are things like Mages in online FPS games yet? The mage could 'port' to other players, to help them defeat their opponent - or walk into a death trap. Mages were the most important position in the team, when I played.
Anyway, some of those nerds did 200+ commands per minute, without any sort of client (mostly w e n s of course, and you can make aliases). It was fast, it rocked, and it was exactly what you describe.
He was implicitly implying that the harddrives would be duct taped to pigeons inside the jet, I thought. Backwards RFC compatibility. Goes without saying.
I've been programming for 19 years now; started my CS study 12 years ago; programming professionally for a few years. I used Java, and fast development languages like Python. I've never seen a flow chart in practice, let alone used one. So it's a bit hard to say.
Somehow flow charts seem fit only for relatively short programs, that have a clear flow from A to B. My programs are web apps that constantly react to requests from web forms that are sent in, supported by a bunch of scripts running from cron to periodically update database stuff. Program-wide, there is no single flow.
On the method-level (or the Action level, I build a large J2EE app with Struts), we could use flow charts I suppose. But they look pretty cumbersome; mostly I just write out what the method is going to do in a comment in English and/or pseudocode, and from that I write down the code.
What each action is supposed to do, and what each method of an object is supposed to do, that is (should be) designed beforehand. There you get tools like UML, if you want to use something like that. What we design is the data objects, and the interface they should expose, and so on.
How those methods do their work is decided at coding time, and is the only place where traditional flow charts seem applicable.
Just some thoughts, I don't know if I'm making sense, since mostly I get very little time for any design at all, in reality...
I'm not a spammer, but I'm a pretty good liar. You don't lie about things that are totally obvious, and that you have no reason to lie about. Such as saying that spammers spam because they make money that way.
The Nobel Prize-winning (1938) physicist Enrico Fermi was willing to bet anyone that the test would wipe out all life on Earth,
I am willing to bet with anyone, for huge stakes, against the wiping out of all life on Earth within the next year or so. Let's say a million dollars.
If all life (including all human life) on Earth is wiped out in the next year, I owe you $1,000,000 (ONE MILLION DOLLARS) and if not, you owe me.
Of course that's not a good thing. But that's just the world right now. The world will need fewer programmers. Deal.
What you're advocating though is lying to my boss in order to protect my job, by telling him closed source is good for him. I don't do that, I do my job well.
Do you also tell young programmers that they should make their code as obfuscated as possible, since that makes them harder to fire?
Officer, arrest this man. He is obviously a user, and probably a dealer, of a terrorist-grade operating system weapon, capable of running audio playback software software (and undoubtedly encryption software too) not expressly authorized by the ministry of rights (MiniRight).
Ha ha ha, but copying music is already illegal. If that legal approach was working for them they wouldn't need all these DRM schemes.
In my world, writing new software has monetary cost. If you want me to write something for you, you'll have to pay me.
Once it's written though, it can be used to do whatever it does, but it doesn't have monetary cost to make copies of it, that's a trivial operation and something I have nothing to do with.
Does that mean fewer programmers are needed? Probably. Does that mean no programmers are needed? Not at all.
Of course by the time you consider it alarming or frightening, it's probably going to be too late to do something.
Where are mod points when I need them... I want that sentence on a plaque on my wall.
I don't let that influence my writing, or if I do, I attribute it ("Some people believe that abortion is acceptable in these circumstances because...")
But isn't even that biased? I mean, at least it's different from instead explaining "Some people believe that abortion is not acceptable because...".
Actually to be unbiased you'd have to start by explaining why this is an issue that needs discussing, and why you don't just explain what abortion is, and stop there. It needs to explain that this is a debate in the US, and that it is therefore informative to mention some part of the discussion.
Of course I'm just whining, but writing from a truly "neutral point of view" seems really hard.
In short, welcome to the real world of benchmarking: whichever team figures out how to bend the rules just right will win.
Very interesting. It would be cool to have a benchmark with five times exactly the same distro, except the competing teams don't know this.
It would be nice to see if the differences achieved were comparable to what the differences between distros will be in this test.
This combination lives on in Emacs, where it means "move cursor right".
Oh yeah? So why do they do it only at the signup page?
No need for the shhh!, methinks -- the NYT article describes exactly the same thing
Yeah, but no-one reads the article, it was still a secret...