They even said it was a completely manual plane, no computers to control it due to weird design that makes it hard for a human to manually keep it aloft. Pretty interesting.
Of course, sound system is kind of a relative thing. I have speakers and a receiver that do Dolby 5.1 +SUB (for the price of about 15 movie viewing w/me and my gf). Even with my middle-bottom of the line speakers the sound is very high quality and I can make it *louder* than the theatre's with the same quality. In fact it *IS* better because you can really hear some of the extra cool effects. It makes my room feel very alive. LOTR when the horses are running, you can really hear them running across my room. In the theatre the effects are there but more mute due to the huge space of the theatre.
The screen is bigger but you sit further away. Same reason a display embeded on the backside of glasses seems so big, you get *much* closer. And with component video the colors are much more vibrant than the Theatre (plus you don't get the artifacts if you don't have digital projector in your theatre). And.. my recliner or couch with my GF are both infinitely more comfortable and intimate than any theatre seating.
All that said, I still go to the theatre because it gets me out of my apartment:)
I have a feeling that was, at least partially, a politically driven statement.
Jeremy
Re:Alternate Resource
on
Programming PHP
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
I am biased as I have written a book on PHP but...
The online reference is just that, a reference. If you want an overview or practical examples with even moderate complexity the online reference begins to show where it is weak. It is almost standard for programming books that have an audience of beginner to intermediate programmers to have a beggining section on language syntax.
After language syntax you move on to the harder topics.
Anyhow, books are good for practical problem solving when the authors of the book avoid making redundant reference material the bulk of the content in a book. And if an author *does* do that the book tends to be much more useful than people imagine.
Now then, can someone please tell me why every O'Reilly book is hailed as the best book on a given topic? It is really sad to see people always hype O'Reilly books to the point where objectively comparing other books in the field is impossible. O'Reilly *DOES* write some undernourished books, and they also don't always write the *BEST* book. That is all I have to say about that.
But you are still going to be accountable for the decision making process that led to it being placed on a site that does not track hits. That, IMO, opens you up to an open ended law-suit of undefined amounts since you have no hard figures to work with.
Well.. considering I was doing about three or four other things and just trying to make a point and light-heartedly discuss, not pointedly focus my attention on the problem itself, no I did not check it. (I realize you were kidding, but a couple other posts were a little more offensive)
Actually INNER joins are in the ANSI 92 SQL specification. And.. Transact-SQL is something used in Sybase and Microsoft RDBMS. And INNER join is a valid query construction element there too.
<join type>::=
INNER
| [ OUTER ]
| UNION
This is directly from the specification and it is always referenced as an inner or outter join within the specification. INNER is also a reserved word in ANSI 92 SQL.. so if it is not portable it is because the target database platform is not ANSI 92 conformant.
And for a couple of other posts, I left the WHERE clause off intentionally. I was just demonstrating a conceptual understanding of the problem.
And to make slashdot accept this post: The lameness filter can be really bothersome some of the time[1234567890]
SELECT SUM(quantity * price) AS Total FROM Orders O INNER JOIN Items I ON I.ItemID = O.ItemID
What does that tell you about my ability to solve a problem if I happened to solve that one problem? You can see my style of writing queries and aliasing tables. You can tell that I realized I had to use a JOIN in this situation, along with an aggregate function. But that is about it. I like little challenges like that as as an aside to keep someone on their toes.
I would much rather have a 10 minute discussion with someone on normalization. If I gave somoene 5-10 minutes to solve that problem and they got the answer I can only learn what the problem was designed to tell me about them. If I discuss something with them there are so many contextual things I can learn about someone's knowledge on a subject. I like discussing theory and concepts with someone. It shows that there is something there beyond code-slinging ability
As a weed-out tactic... I guess questions like that are okay, but I still think they lack to show some characteristics about a person's knowledge.
It is actually pretty simple if you think about it without trying to over-complicate it. As you iterate over a list you no longer need to worry about the element you were just on. So you take that element and add it to the front of another list. As you go you add each element to the front of the other list. When your done you have the list reversed and you have not created any more elements:)
The environment, minus the monster, seemed quite rich to me. As long as the monsters and players match up to current tech and the environment *completely* immerses me, I am there. Doom III still seems to have that potential.
Actually... you can get the entire.NET SDK for the Windows platform Free of charge. No pretty GUI, but I also don't see many JDKs shipping with pretty GUIs either.
What I wonder is why everyone thinks PHP, Java, and Perl are the only tools to develop web applications. No no one said that, but I rarely see much other than that discussed.
There are plenty of innovative, and IMO great, features coming from the commercial world. I like Struts(MVC)+JSP for doing larger systems. I also like ColdFusionMX which is an application server built on top of J2EE technology.
I also think.NET combined with components developed in C# are compelling. I won't use them but they ARE a viable option for a lot of developers out there.
Mainstream web development is going the way of reusable components and web services. Component oriented software development, IMO, is much more difficult to do completely in Perl or completely in PHP. I can see using PHP or Perl as a presentation tier for a system, but they just don't hit hard enough for the middleware and database interaction tier IMO. I do agree that there are interesting things being done in all of the languages, Java, Perl, and PHP. You can even read about some sites that were ultra-scaleable such as etoys Perl system and how they handled the peak dot-com craze christmas loads etc.
There are extreme cases in all languages of innovation and stupidity, but I think in general developers and languages are moving towards component orientation and web services *ARE* becoming a viable option for many things.
For what I think of as the really cutting edge stuff check out CFMX and Flash remoting. I think FlashMX has the chance to be what Java applets should have been all along. Only time will tell but I am really impressed with some of the latest and greatest from Macromedia. So, what is my point? I think, with a team of experienced CF developers, you would have your hands full trying to keep up with them on time to market and feature development. Now that CFMX is out ColdFusion has grown up and become something less of a toy language.
I know, this post seems CF centric, but for your average web development job CF is at least as competitive as Perl.
For the bigger jobs CF is a great choice for a presentation layer and or a light weight component/web service provider. Combine an awesome presentation layer with a well planned and implemented J2EE back end and the sky is the limit. I have been there and developed it.. it all works REALLY well:)
Anyhow, just trying to shed a little big of knowledge. I hope no one blasts me to bad for liking non-free solutions:)
The neat thing is, if this is just one of your many services it works. So they have only had 4K questions? You have to give things time to cultivate. I imagine they planned this well. If you think about 4,000 people willing to try out some new service is pretty impressive.
I think, given time, this will work out fine. For google running some application that has such low overhead (4K questions is nothing) it means nothing. That app has hardly no operational cost even if you had 1000 times as many people reading the questions, the strain would not be too great on a well written web app. That would be about 130K hits / day if we assume 1000* as many people read the questions. If you could completely evenly spread out the hits it would be 1.5 hits / second. Peak times, I am sure, flucuate quite different from an evenly distributed load. But writing a web app that takes even.. 30-60 hits / second is not all that difficult. So IAW, google already payed for the cost of this app:)
There are of course some overheads such as getting their cut of the money etc but I think that is minimal to the fact that they already have it written and in use. Google tests their apps VERY well so I can see them really only having this release of the code in maintenance mode. (New features/a new release of this code is another story)
In my psych class text it showed a study with mice. It had one group of mice that were left in a very bleak environment with cut squares, and the environment had all the mice needed for suvival and thats it. Nothing interesting for them to climb on, nothing exciting. Another group of mice that had tons of little toys and obstacles to climb and play on. It showed that the mice with tons of "stimulating" things to climb on and crawl in had a greater amount of interconnections betweenthe neurons of their brain.
Then it related that to humans by showing how dead people with graduate degrees tended to have many more connections in their brain. More connections = more communication capability = more ability to process/information. Its not rocket science and this does not prove anything but it goes a long ways to making you think about keeping your life interesting by learning new things and doing new things to keep your brain on its toes and stimulated.
I think people often completely miss a lot of great titles on open source topics because of O'Reilly. There have been many times where I found a topic that O'Reilly and some other press had a title published about the topic, and often the non O'Reilly titles were at least as good as the O'Reilly titles.
I wrote a book, with a co-author, on PHP that was released about the same time Programming PHP was. Nothing against Programming PHP, it is a nice book. I read it cover to cover. It has strengths and weaknesses. But I think the book I wrote stacks up at least as well as Programming PHP, yet it is practically invisible because of the O'Reilly open source factor.
Don't take this as me saying, "my book is the greatest thing since sliced bread",or anything like that. My book does not cover extending PHP in C, among a couple of other topics it really should have covered. But it does cover database abstraction using Pear DB. Also covered is Image manipulation, creating PDF documents, XML, almost everything a professional PHP programmer would encounter. Yet, the PHP book had very high visibility before it was even out! Anyways, don't take this post as cynical or jaded about my book not having the high visiblity etc., I wrote the book for the love of it, not for the money.
A quick and interesting aside, Rasmus did not write a majority of the book yet he always gets the credit for Programming PHP;).
At least, not from heart disease... it is not a good way to go. Sure there are hereditary factors with heart disease but it is very preventable. No, nothing stops death im afraid.. but there is no need to speed the process along is there?
Slashdot Mirror
They even said it was a completely manual plane, no computers to control it due to weird design that makes it hard for a human to manually keep it aloft. Pretty interesting.
Jeremy
Of course, sound system is kind of a relative thing. I have speakers and a receiver that do Dolby 5.1 +SUB (for the price of about 15 movie viewing w/me and my gf). Even with my middle-bottom of the line speakers the sound is very high quality and I can make it *louder* than the theatre's with the same quality. In fact it *IS* better because you can really hear some of the extra cool effects. It makes my room feel very alive. LOTR when the horses are running, you can really hear them running across my room. In the theatre the effects are there but more mute due to the huge space of the theatre.
:)
The screen is bigger but you sit further away. Same reason a display embeded on the backside of glasses seems so big, you get *much* closer. And with component video the colors are much more vibrant than the Theatre (plus you don't get the artifacts if you don't have digital projector in your theatre). And.. my recliner or couch with my GF are both infinitely more comfortable and intimate than any theatre seating.
All that said, I still go to the theatre because it gets me out of my apartment
Jeremy
I have a feeling that was, at least partially, a politically driven statement.
Jeremy
I am biased as I have written a book on PHP but...
The online reference is just that, a reference. If you want an overview or practical examples with even moderate complexity the online reference begins to show where it is weak. It is almost standard for programming books that have an audience of beginner to intermediate programmers to have a beggining section on language syntax.
After language syntax you move on to the harder topics.
Anyhow, books are good for practical problem solving when the authors of the book avoid making redundant reference material the bulk of the content in a book. And if an author *does* do that the book tends to be much more useful than people imagine.
Now then, can someone please tell me why every O'Reilly book is hailed as the best book on a given topic? It is really sad to see people always hype O'Reilly books to the point where objectively comparing other books in the field is impossible. O'Reilly *DOES* write some undernourished books, and they also don't always write the *BEST* book. That is all I have to say about that.
Jeremy
He had a meta tag that tells google not to archive his site. :)
Jeremy
But you are still going to be accountable for the decision making process that led to it being placed on a site that does not track hits. That, IMO, opens you up to an open ended law-suit of undefined amounts since you have no hard figures to work with.
Jeremy
Well.. considering I was doing about three or four other things and just trying to make a point and light-heartedly discuss, not pointedly focus my attention on the problem itself, no I did not check it. (I realize you were kidding, but a couple other posts were a little more offensive)
Jeremy
Actually INNER joins are in the ANSI 92 SQL specification. And.. Transact-SQL is something used in Sybase and Microsoft RDBMS. And INNER join is a valid query construction element there too.
::=
<join type>
INNER
| [ OUTER ]
| UNION
This is directly from the specification and it is always referenced as an inner or outter join within the specification. INNER is also a reserved word in ANSI 92 SQL.. so if it is not portable it is because the target database platform is not ANSI 92 conformant.
And for a couple of other posts, I left the WHERE clause off intentionally. I was just demonstrating a conceptual understanding of the problem.
And to make slashdot accept this post: The lameness filter can be really bothersome some of the time[1234567890]
Jeremy
SELECT SUM(quantity * price) AS Total
FROM Orders O
INNER JOIN Items I ON I.ItemID = O.ItemID
What does that tell you about my ability to solve a problem if I happened to solve that one problem? You can see my style of writing queries and aliasing tables. You can tell that I realized I had to use a JOIN in this situation, along with an aggregate function. But that is about it. I like little challenges like that as as an aside to keep someone on their toes.
I would much rather have a 10 minute discussion with someone on normalization. If I gave somoene 5-10 minutes to solve that problem and they got the answer I can only learn what the problem was designed to tell me about them. If I discuss something with them there are so many contextual things I can learn about someone's knowledge on a subject. I like discussing theory and concepts with someone. It shows that there is something there beyond code-slinging ability
As a weed-out tactic... I guess questions like that are okay, but I still think they lack to show some characteristics about a person's knowledge.
Jeremy
It is actually pretty simple if you think about it without trying to over-complicate it. As you iterate over a list you no longer need to worry about the element you were just on. So you take that element and add it to the front of another list. As you go you add each element to the front of the other list. When your done you have the list reversed and you have not created any more elements :)
Jeremy
The environment, minus the monster, seemed quite rich to me. As long as the monsters and players match up to current tech and the environment *completely* immerses me, I am there. Doom III still seems to have that potential.
Jeremy
Actually... you can get the entire .NET SDK for the Windows platform Free of charge. No pretty GUI, but I also don't see many JDKs shipping with pretty GUIs either.
Jeremy
What I wonder is why everyone thinks PHP, Java, and Perl are the only tools to develop web applications. No no one said that, but I rarely see much other than that discussed.
.NET combined with components developed in C# are compelling. I won't use them but they ARE a viable option for a lot of developers out there.
:)
:)
There are plenty of innovative, and IMO great, features coming from the commercial world. I like Struts(MVC)+JSP for doing larger systems. I also like ColdFusionMX which is an application server built on top of J2EE technology.
I also think
Mainstream web development is going the way of reusable components and web services. Component oriented software development, IMO, is much more difficult to do completely in Perl or completely in PHP. I can see using PHP or Perl as a presentation tier for a system, but they just don't hit hard enough for the middleware and database interaction tier IMO. I do agree that there are interesting things being done in all of the languages, Java, Perl, and PHP. You can even read about some sites that were ultra-scaleable such as etoys Perl system and how they handled the peak dot-com craze christmas loads etc.
There are extreme cases in all languages of innovation and stupidity, but I think in general developers and languages are moving towards component orientation and web services *ARE* becoming a viable option for many things.
For what I think of as the really cutting edge stuff check out CFMX and Flash remoting. I think FlashMX has the chance to be what Java applets should have been all along. Only time will tell but I am really impressed with some of the latest and greatest from Macromedia. So, what is my point? I think, with a team of experienced CF developers, you would have your hands full trying to keep up with them on time to market and feature development. Now that CFMX is out ColdFusion has grown up and become something less of a toy language.
I know, this post seems CF centric, but for your average web development job CF is at least as competitive as Perl.
For the bigger jobs CF is a great choice for a presentation layer and or a light weight component/web service provider. Combine an awesome presentation layer with a well planned and implemented J2EE back end and the sky is the limit. I have been there and developed it.. it all works REALLY well
Anyhow, just trying to shed a little big of knowledge. I hope no one blasts me to bad for liking non-free solutions
The neat thing is, if this is just one of your many services it works. So they have only had 4K questions? You have to give things time to cultivate. I imagine they planned this well. If you think about 4,000 people willing to try out some new service is pretty impressive.
:)
I think, given time, this will work out fine. For google running some application that has such low overhead (4K questions is nothing) it means nothing. That app has hardly no operational cost even if you had 1000 times as many people reading the questions, the strain would not be too great on a well written web app. That would be about 130K hits / day if we assume 1000* as many people read the questions. If you could completely evenly spread out the hits it would be 1.5 hits / second. Peak times, I am sure, flucuate quite different from an evenly distributed load. But writing a web app that takes even.. 30-60 hits / second is not all that difficult. So IAW, google already payed for the cost of this app
There are of course some overheads such as getting their cut of the money etc but I think that is minimal to the fact that they already have it written and in use. Google tests their apps VERY well so I can see them really only having this release of the code in maintenance mode. (New features/a new release of this code is another story)
Jeremy
An "unregistered" shotgun? You don't have to register your firearms in the first place.
Jeremy
In my psych class text it showed a study with mice. It had one group of mice that were left in a very bleak environment with cut squares, and the environment had all the mice needed for suvival and thats it. Nothing interesting for them to climb on, nothing exciting. Another group of mice that had tons of little toys and obstacles to climb and play on. It showed that the mice with tons of "stimulating" things to climb on and crawl in had a greater amount of interconnections betweenthe neurons of their brain.
Then it related that to humans by showing how dead people with graduate degrees tended to have many more connections in their brain. More connections = more communication capability = more ability to process/information. Its not rocket science and this does not prove anything but it goes a long ways to making you think about keeping your life interesting by learning new things and doing new things to keep your brain on its toes and stimulated.
Jeremy
I think whenever a good answer or solution comes up for that we will see another search engine :-)
Well, what if your house was a known fire hazard that was like a fire stacked with tinder in the middle of a summer drought?
That is how I would see the house if it were an operating system with unpatched vulnerabilities in it.
Are you responsible if it burns down your neighborhood?
No answers here.. just an interesting question to mull over.
Jeremy
I think people often completely miss a lot of great titles on open source topics because of O'Reilly. There have been many times where I found a topic that O'Reilly and some other press had a title published about the topic, and often the non O'Reilly titles were at least as good as the O'Reilly titles.
;).
I wrote a book, with a co-author, on PHP that was released about the same time Programming PHP was. Nothing against Programming PHP, it is a nice book. I read it cover to cover. It has strengths and weaknesses. But I think the book I wrote stacks up at least as well as Programming PHP, yet it is practically invisible because of the O'Reilly open source factor.
Don't take this as me saying, "my book is the greatest thing since sliced bread",or anything like that. My book does not cover extending PHP in C, among a couple of other topics it really should have covered. But it does cover database abstraction using Pear DB. Also covered is Image manipulation, creating PDF documents, XML, almost everything a professional PHP programmer would encounter. Yet, the PHP book had very high visibility before it was even out! Anyways, don't take this post as cynical or jaded about my book not having the high visiblity etc., I wrote the book for the love of it, not for the money.
A quick and interesting aside, Rasmus did not write a majority of the book yet he always gets the credit for Programming PHP
Jeremy
Did you ever use bugzilla and submit these bugs?
Jeremy
Netscape 7.0, IE 6.0 ;)
It is.
Jeremy
Neo Geo had the same main processors as a sega Genesis (A 68000 and a Z80). IIRC it just had a much, much, better graphics chipset.
Jeremy
Its trademarks you have to enforce unquestioningly, patents you can selectively enforce.
Jeremy
At least, not from heart disease... it is not a good way to go. Sure there are hereditary factors with heart disease but it is very preventable. No, nothing stops death im afraid.. but there is no need to speed the process along is there?