Sigh... Try reading about what Y!Q does, or doing a search with Y!Q. You will discover it doesn't do anything like "Only return results from the site or domain".
You're absolutely correct that this isn't very original, however: it's just Yahoo playing catch-up with Google
Either you don't understand what Y!Q does, or you know something about Google that I don't. Can you explain to me how I can do the equivalent of Y!Q with Google?
This isn't streaming, it's standard message queuing. Most messaging products allow you to have non-persistent queues and allow you to extract data based on arbitary queries. There are well over a decades worth of products for doing this kind of stuff.
I'm sure this is a great product, but both the submitter and the writer of the story seem to not grok what makes it great.
But no way this has the horsepower to decode HD mpeg 2 streams.
I wouldn't be too sure about that. Altivec really accelerates things like MPEG 2 decoding, and I suspect the Radeon helps out with this a great deal as well.
The drive supports the draft version of S-ATA-II which is 2x as fast as as S-ATA, and while the rotational speed is 7200rpm, that's a spec, not actual peformance. The transfer rate of 800+ mbps is pretty impressive for an S-ATA drive.
It's easy in hindsight to critique filesystems. While the original SysV filesystem was pretty bad, the Berkeley Fast Filesystem was already pretty good for it's time. The simplicity of the Unix filesystem has actually been a key aspect of Unix's success. Even on platforms with more complex filesystem API's, you don't see much in the way of applications taking advantage of them.
POSIX ACL's have been around for a long time at this point. The relatively pathetic rate at which they've been adopted and taken advantage of should be a clue to their shortcomings. Several security experts have pointed out that while ACL's are great on paper, in reality they increase the complexity of the security model, which in practice is more of a liability.
SysV has message queues for IPC. Everything you could want and... not a lot of people use them.;-) ONC RPC also prvides a pretty decent message/event marshalling mechanism, and you don't see a lot of new apps being written to use that either. Think about why. I would say though it'd be nice if there was a better standard model for kernel events beyond signals.
I honestly still find advantages to the traditional Unix FSH, particularly for administrators. It certainly beats the crazy structures on Windows or OS X. End users increasingly care less about where program files are located on their system, so this seems like the wrong area to work on things.
Unix did include decent scripting languages, and more importantly provided for additional ones to be added to the system (witness the rise of ksh, perl, python, etc.). If there had been any kind of data-interchange format that was remotely useful, it surely would have dictated how Unix tools work with those data formats. Unfortunately, there were weren't (and aren't). Consequently, dictating standards wouldn't have solved the problem you're describing, as you'd still have to translate non-standard formats into the standard formats and back again. Letting tools like sed/awk/perl evolve to solve the problem seems like a far more practical approach if you ask me.
It is very difficult to control massive economies in softwqare. A single floating-point error in the software could result in massive inflation or deflation which would have a real effect on the players of the game.
I wouldn't necessarily think that you'd need any kind of programming to do support this. They already have markets and trading and auctions. All you have to do is treat game dollars as a seperate good from US dollars. You are done.
Aside from that, I'd point out that thousands of programmers in the financial markets would disagree with your premise. Ironically, for really serious financial stuff, you don't even use floating-point calculations. You do it all fixed point, with specific rounding rules, etc., etc. Usually the folly of using floating-point is pointed out to you on day 1 of your job.
Just a minor point, but I'd say that my experience with DAoC, not being able to talk to the other faction actually increases the tension and "us vs. them" mentality of the game. It does make it hard to have diplomacy style subterfuge, but I think most people prefer that.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in WoW you can actually learn languages used by the other faction (in fact I think Undead already know one of the Alliance languages).
Sadly, Yahoo!'s been promoting the heck out of searech.yahoo.com, but still you aren't aware of it. Who types in their search engine anyway? You just bookmark it, use the search box in firefox, or use a search toolbar in your browser.
You'd be well advised to keep Yahoo!'s engine in your arsenal. They actually have a number of nice features. There's the "Also try" stuff, but in particular their image search and product search is *way* better than the competition.
Check again. 128MB was the norm 6 months ago, but now 1GB drives are available for $100. The industry is moving *very quickly* it seems. I bought a 1GB "Intelligent Stick" a month ago for ~$80, and two weeks later observed another brand's 1GB drive going for ~$60 after rebate. You can now get 4GB drives.
Excellent selective use of information! You are ready to be a spin doctor!
The links you are pointing to are ones which use a slightly different algorithm that averaged polls over a multi-day period. When the site switched to using that algorithm, he got a lot of complaints from people, and so he switched back. This happened long before today, and if you look through the site history, Bush has been leading more than Kerry with the original algorithm. These choices of algorithms were made well in advance of today's result.
If you go back and look at the Oct. 29 versions of the site, you'll find Kerry losing using the original algorithm and Kerry winning with the averaging algorithm. The original algorithm was what was on the front page. So I guess a couple of days ago he was manipulating things for Bush then?;-)
Re:Flaws in both Languages
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 1
You have a curious definition of open source. Check the license for Sun' Java VM. It's not an open source license. There are some Java VM's which are open source, but I have yet to see what that is both certified as being Java and is open source. The language specification and the API aren't code, nor are they provided under a license which conforms to the open source definition.
Java doesn't require the JVM. Indeed, you can run it on the CLR.;-) Take a look at gcj. No JVM there. Works just fine.
As for my comment about C.. that was sarcasm, intending to demonstrate the stupidity of the parent's assertion that Java and C# were flawed because he was able to do all he needed with PHP/Perl/C.
Re:Flaws in both Languages
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 1
Too right. What was I thinking! The cases where backwards compatibility have been broken are far more limited, but they do exist. Typically they involve API changes.
Re:Flaws in both Languages
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 1
He was right about that. If you compile code for JDK 1.5 and try to run it on an older VM, you'll typically get an error. Unfortunately Sun keeps tweaking things.:-(
Re:Flaws in both Languages
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Let's take these one at a time here:
Neither is open source. Languages can't be classified open source, because they aren't programs. Certainly both languages have non-open source implementations, but they also have open source implementations.
Both require virtual machines. Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by a virtual machine. Technically even the C runtime is a virtual machine. That being said, both Java and C# can be compiled to native code, bypassing the need for the JVM/CLR.
Despite being marketed as portable, but have portability issues. ROTFL! Yes, perfect portability isn't possible. However, both languages are amazingly portable considering their extensive feature sets.
We don't really need them. Really, when you think about it, we only really need C. PHP/Perl/C++/Python are really all flawed languages as a consequence.;-)
They're closely tied to their respective companies. This is more of a perception problem than a reality problem. I can do development in either language without getting involved with either company.
If Sakic was contracted to modify GPL'd code under these conditions, that term of the contract must be void, as LiteratiGroup do not have the rights to enforce that term.
Not at all. The GPL doesn't in any way effect who has copyright to the code.
The GPL relies upon copyright; without (c), the GPL would be meaningless. Adding (c) code to GPL'd (c) code is only possible by accepting the terms of the GPL.
True. True. False. Accepting the source or the binary if you are NOT the copyright holder requires accepting the terms of the GPL (unless the code is available under another license from the copyright holder). However, the copyright holder is not bound to accept the GPL unless they distribute their copyrighted work as a derivative work of other code that the copyright holder was licensed under the terms of the GPL.
I'm not sure what assumptions you are referring to, but according to the GPL you just have to ensure that give users the same freedoms they have under the GPL. It's a subtle and not to important distinction, but worth mentioning.
Hmm... looking at that article, it's not clear that they are using SVM's. They very well could be, but he talkes about "clustering" rather than linear separation.... It's just not that clear. Anyway, it'd be interesting if they did do that.
Slashdot Mirror
Sigh... Try reading about what Y!Q does, or doing a search with Y!Q. You will discover it doesn't do anything like "Only return results from the site or domain".
You're absolutely correct that this isn't very original, however: it's just Yahoo playing catch-up with Google
Either you don't understand what Y!Q does, or you know something about Google that I don't. Can you explain to me how I can do the equivalent of Y!Q with Google?
This isn't streaming, it's standard message queuing. Most messaging products allow you to have non-persistent queues and allow you to extract data based on arbitary queries. There are well over a decades worth of products for doing this kind of stuff.
I'm sure this is a great product, but both the submitter and the writer of the story seem to not grok what makes it great.
Hehe. RTA.
The drive supports the draft version of S-ATA-II which is 2x as fast as as S-ATA, and while the rotational speed is 7200rpm, that's a spec, not actual peformance. The transfer rate of 800+ mbps is pretty impressive for an S-ATA drive.
Good call. My bad.
It is very difficult to control massive economies in softwqare. A single floating-point error in the software could result in massive inflation or deflation which would have a real effect on the players of the game.
I wouldn't necessarily think that you'd need any kind of programming to do support this. They already have markets and trading and auctions. All you have to do is treat game dollars as a seperate good from US dollars. You are done.
Aside from that, I'd point out that thousands of programmers in the financial markets would disagree with your premise. Ironically, for really serious financial stuff, you don't even use floating-point calculations. You do it all fixed point, with specific rounding rules, etc., etc. Usually the folly of using floating-point is pointed out to you on day 1 of your job.
Just a minor point, but I'd say that my experience with DAoC, not being able to talk to the other faction actually increases the tension and "us vs. them" mentality of the game. It does make it hard to have diplomacy style subterfuge, but I think most people prefer that.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in WoW you can actually learn languages used by the other faction (in fact I think Undead already know one of the Alliance languages).
If you are using Windows' CLI, then you are already hosed. :-(
It breaks `find` and other similarly useful things.
... | xargs -0 ...
;-)
find . -print0
Arguably, you could claim that find or your shell is broken.
I'm sure the original version by IBM didn't have as many security problems, as IBM is big on doing things right the first time.
ROTFL!
Man you've got a good sense of humor.
Wait a second here... Window's market share is like 95%. Google's is lik 50% (and that's counting AOL). They are not th same situation at all.
Unfortunately this appears to have been a mistake made by the reviewer as well. :-(
Sadly, Yahoo!'s been promoting the heck out of searech.yahoo.com, but still you aren't aware of it. Who types in their search engine anyway? You just bookmark it, use the search box in firefox, or use a search toolbar in your browser.
You'd be well advised to keep Yahoo!'s engine in your arsenal. They actually have a number of nice features. There's the "Also try" stuff, but in particular their image search and product search is *way* better than the competition.
Check again. 128MB was the norm 6 months ago, but now 1GB drives are available for $100. The industry is moving *very quickly* it seems. I bought a 1GB "Intelligent Stick" a month ago for ~$80, and two weeks later observed another brand's 1GB drive going for ~$60 after rebate. You can now get 4GB drives.
Excellent selective use of information! You are ready to be a spin doctor!
;-)
The links you are pointing to are ones which use a slightly different algorithm that averaged polls over a multi-day period. When the site switched to using that algorithm, he got a lot of complaints from people, and so he switched back. This happened long before today, and if you look through the site history, Bush has been leading more than Kerry with the original algorithm. These choices of algorithms were made well in advance of today's result.
If you go back and look at the Oct. 29 versions of the site, you'll find Kerry losing using the original algorithm and Kerry winning with the averaging algorithm. The original algorithm was what was on the front page. So I guess a couple of days ago he was manipulating things for Bush then?
You have a curious definition of open source. Check the license for Sun' Java VM. It's not an open source license. There are some Java VM's which are open source, but I have yet to see what that is both certified as being Java and is open source. The language specification and the API aren't code, nor are they provided under a license which conforms to the open source definition.
;-) Take a look at gcj. No JVM there. Works just fine.
Java doesn't require the JVM. Indeed, you can run it on the CLR.
As for my comment about C.. that was sarcasm, intending to demonstrate the stupidity of the parent's assertion that Java and C# were flawed because he was able to do all he needed with PHP/Perl/C.
Too right. What was I thinking! The cases where backwards compatibility have been broken are far more limited, but they do exist. Typically they involve API changes.
He was right about that. If you compile code for JDK 1.5 and try to run it on an older VM, you'll typically get an error. Unfortunately Sun keeps tweaking things. :-(
Let's take these one at a time here:
;-)
Neither is open source. Languages can't be classified open source, because they aren't programs. Certainly both languages have non-open source implementations, but they also have open source implementations.
Both require virtual machines. Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by a virtual machine. Technically even the C runtime is a virtual machine. That being said, both Java and C# can be compiled to native code, bypassing the need for the JVM/CLR.
Despite being marketed as portable, but have portability issues. ROTFL! Yes, perfect portability isn't possible. However, both languages are amazingly portable considering their extensive feature sets.
We don't really need them. Really, when you think about it, we only really need C. PHP/Perl/C++/Python are really all flawed languages as a consequence.
They're closely tied to their respective companies. This is more of a perception problem than a reality problem. I can do development in either language without getting involved with either company.
If Sakic was contracted to modify GPL'd code under these conditions, that term of the contract must be void, as LiteratiGroup do not have the rights to enforce that term.
Not at all. The GPL doesn't in any way effect who has copyright to the code.
The GPL relies upon copyright; without (c), the GPL would be meaningless. Adding (c) code to GPL'd (c) code is only possible by accepting the terms of the GPL.
True. True. False. Accepting the source or the binary if you are NOT the copyright holder requires accepting the terms of the GPL (unless the code is available under another license from the copyright holder). However, the copyright holder is not bound to accept the GPL unless they distribute their copyrighted work as a derivative work of other code that the copyright holder was licensed under the terms of the GPL.
I'm not sure what assumptions you are referring to, but according to the GPL you just have to ensure that give users the same freedoms they have under the GPL. It's a subtle and not to important distinction, but worth mentioning.
Sorry, by "they" I mean Apple with regards to their "mail" app. The parent to my original post was saying that Apple also uses SVM's.
Hmm... looking at that article, it's not clear that they are using SVM's. They very well could be, but he talkes about "clustering" rather than linear separation.... It's just not that clear. Anyway, it'd be interesting if they did do that.