Not entirely true. Using locally owned businesses keeps more money in the local economy. Buying locally produced food saves on fuel/pollution. It also used to be said that using locally owned businesses help preserve diversity. Not every coffee shop is a Starbucks, different bookstores will have different books etc. I'm not sure how true the last thing is anymore.
At the root of it all is the idea that a locally owned business gives you something a nationally owned one does not. I think this is true but it becomes a bit of a religious maxim for some people some times. I think it is important every now and then to ask yourself what the locally owned business is doing for you and if it is worth preserving.
I think the home delivery thing is great. It is much more efficient ( using fewer resources, generating less pollution ) since the mail truck is coming by my house anyway.
I had a friend get on my case about using Netflix instead of going to the locally owned ( and poorly ran ) video store. I just told her what I wrote here, that I was being green:)
Being snarky is the general currency on slashdot, so I want you to know I mean no disrespect.
Isn't writing solid walls of code that go on for pages in a single function bad enough? There aren't too many languages left with a goto statement or something similar, but the programmers I've met who weened on Basic also tend to overuse that feature.
I understand and agree with your point about the use of white space in Python, but I also think it is a good thing. If a young programmer goes on to never use Python again at least they will have a respect for how their code is formatted which will make their code easier to maintain and if it is one thing I have learned is to never think of screwing the maintenance programmer over because there is a good chance it may just be you:).
New York City has an incredible subway system. Their air could be sparkingly clean if not for commuter auto traffic. Maybe a "carbon tax" could help clean up NYC's air.
It is about time some government made a policy to begin encouraging people to get rid of these things. Given the issues going on in the world driving an SUV in 2011 is like deciding to go on the Atkins Diet. It is a backward move.
Almost every time I have found endless columns of code, even written in OO languages, it has always been the case that the programmer responsible learned programming with Basic.
In today's programming world it just teaches people bad habits that they carry across a career.
If you want a kid to learn programming on their own, outside of a class, send them to python.org where they even have materials for teaching programming. I don't know if the results will be better beyond starting them off with a modern language still in use, but the results can't be any worse as far as the bad habits of people weaned on Basic tend to go.
What kind of dumb ass converts someone's private email account into a social networking site, letting strangers in their address book see what they do on the web.....without notice, without permission AND expects that people will like it?
I started off with EMACS in school way back in the 20th century. I had to go on a 12 step program to break away from it. I never had any experiences with EMACS being slow...even NTEmacs for Windows. Given the crappy hardware of the era I can't see how it would be slow now.
No, it isn't unique to Java, it is just worse with Java.
I recently had to triple the RAM in Linux/Ubuntu box because GNOME apps load slow.
Like I wrote, a wait is tolerable with some apps, but not a development tool you use all day long. When it is time for me to write code, I'm sticking with Visual Slickedit which is always fast.
Every place I have ever worked and expect to work has antivirus software. The last place the antivirus software slowed down everything! I had to get more RAM just so I could DO work at 3:30 when it ran everyday.
Yet, I've also used development tools written in Java on my Linux box, even smaller ones like JEdit and the interface is slower.....every time.
Some things I am willing to put with a slowdown for. Just clicking on a menu option for main work tool is not one of them.
The Java community needs to get over the "eat your own dog food" thing with client side apps and development tools. Java is MORE than justified in its existence since it is a FANTASTIC server side language.
I've been a Java developer for 11 years and I don't use development tools written in Java. While I am gaga over server side Java, I'm not a fan of interpreted code for client applications. I've always had fast machines and Jbuilder/Ecliples/Netbeans and all of the other Java IDEs have lasted for about 15 min with me whenever I have tried a new version. I can't think of anything else more irritating than having to wait for a menu on my development tool to come up. Coworkers always rave to me how _____ has improved and is fast. It has never been true.
I've stuck to Visual Slickedit all of this time. It is written in compiled code, is fast and has a ton of Java support. It also has a ton of support for many other languages so I can use it for everything and not have to learn a new tool.
It is kind of silly to worry what will happen as a result of gays being in the military, since they have always been there. They just haven't been allowed to admit it.
As a straight man who doesn't see anything in it for himself, I have had trouble remaining interested in all of the articles about DADT and Gay Marriage. I've had thoughts similar to yours along the lines "Aren't there higher priorities to work out first?".
At one time African Americans were segregated in the military and it as big an issue as DADT is now. Try substituting "African American" or "Jew" for "gays" in your comment and ask yourself how it sounds to you.
"Aren't there more important issues than allow African Americans or Jews in the military? We have more pressing problems".
My point is that to many people DADT is an egregious civil rights issue, though on an emotional level I understand where you are coming from. It is hard to get excited about something you don't benefit from one way or the other.
However, there are benefits.
I believe President Clinton helped torpedoed the bipartisan goodwill he needed to have an even more successful presidency by bringing up gays in the military first thing after he was elected.
Gays in the military, or at least DADT, will soon no longer be a wedge issue that future Democratic presidents will have to take political risks for. They will be able to spend their political/bipartisan goodwill capital on other issues. Especially if the gay marriage thing gets settled and gets off the board as an issue.
I got the impression from watching the news that the repeal of DADT will allow homosexuals to openly serve in the military.
The slashot introduction to this thread states:
While this does not permit homosexuals to openly serve,
And the Washington Post article linked to in the introduction states:
The U.S. military will for the first time in history allow gays to serve openly after the Senate voted Saturday to repeal "don't ask, don't tell," the policy that has required such troops to hide their sexual identity or risk being expelled from the services.
An investment would be making a large donation. Zuckerberg is giving away nearly his entire fortune. That is in a different class and an obvious point.
I still don't trust him or Facebook with my information, but my opinion of him as a human being has just changed for the better.
This epically generous move would seem to indicate he is what he portrays himself as, a coder who cares about coding and not much else. I'm sure he will still be comfortable after giving all of this money away, but with that money a lot of opportunities will also leave his life. Though, if he is one of those guys who just likes spending the bulk of his day coding he will not care.
I remember seeing a quote on a t-shirt that went something like this
"When I help the poor I am called a saint. When I ask why are they poor I am called a communist".
Instead of donating their fortunes to charity, it would be better if these billionaires put their money to work at ending the reasons for charities being needed in the first place. I'm not talking about "socialism", but about donating money in such a way that any given cause will not need future donations. In other words solving a problem instead of helping to manage the results.
Not to take away from their generosity.....it is epic, with no ifs ands or buts.
We have all seen some fantastic editing to put contemporary actors into vintage TV shows. A good example is Deep Space 9 episode where the crew goes back in time to visit Captain Kirk in the "tribbles" episode.
A computer right now could probably synthesize new sentences with an actors voice, as well as new body positions.
I doubt however it can synthesize *acting* and the subtitles of human emotion. Even some of those original actors had trouble with that. Someone, somewhere would have to catalouge the full range of facial expressions possible for a human face, then for the face of the actor, then find a way to catalog each possible minute variation in each facial expression for each of gazillions subtle changes in emotions.
I think it will happen someday, just not now.
On the upside, if it happens sooner we will get new episodes for class Star Trek, but what made that show great was not a picture of a particular actor moving a certain way and saying a particular sentence. That is all a computer can do now.
I saw that point made in another comment and I think it is a sharp one.
To be fair to Sun, I was working in a dotcom during the dotcom era. I don't think anyone could have anticipated the desire for servers on small machines running Unix.
There is the price issue too. If a tech person can download something for free versus having to go through the bureaucracy of his/her company to buy it, s/he will choose the free download.
Sun could have seen the popularity of linux on small ( ie non behemoth machines ) servers, open sourced Solaris and sold support packages.
I don't think Sun could have pulled it off. Sun was a BIG company used to making BIG products for BIG orgs. Their culture and their customers were BACK END. In that respect Oracle is a good fit for them. Neither company knows how to anything SIMPLE and small.
I'm a network administrator, but in that hypothetical past I think network admins would have the getting support from the Linux community easier to digest than going through channels at Sun.
Slashdot Mirror
Not entirely true. Using locally owned businesses keeps more money in the local economy. Buying locally produced food saves on fuel/pollution. It also used to be said that using locally owned businesses help preserve diversity. Not every coffee shop is a Starbucks, different bookstores will have different books etc. I'm not sure how true the last thing is anymore.
At the root of it all is the idea that a locally owned business gives you something a nationally owned one does not. I think this is true but it becomes a bit of a religious maxim for some people some times. I think it is important every now and then to ask yourself what the locally owned business is doing for you and if it is worth preserving.
I think the home delivery thing is great. It is much more efficient ( using fewer resources, generating less pollution ) since the mail truck is coming by my house anyway.
I had a friend get on my case about using Netflix instead of going to the locally owned ( and poorly ran ) video store. I just told her what I wrote here, that I was being green :)
Walter;
Being snarky is the general currency on slashdot, so I want you to know I mean no disrespect.
Isn't writing solid walls of code that go on for pages in a single function bad enough?
There aren't too many languages left with a goto statement or something similar, but the programmers I've met who weened on Basic also tend to overuse that feature.
I understand and agree with your point about the use of white space in Python, but I also think it is a good thing. If a young programmer goes on to never use Python again at least they will have a respect for how their code is formatted which will make their code easier to maintain and if it is one thing I have learned is to never think of screwing the maintenance programmer over because there is a good chance it may just be you :).
New York City has an incredible subway system. Their air could be sparkingly clean if not for commuter auto traffic. Maybe a "carbon tax" could help clean up NYC's air.
It is about time some government made a policy to begin encouraging people to get rid of these things. Given the issues going on in the world driving an SUV in 2011 is like deciding to go on the Atkins Diet. It is a backward move.
Here we go again with facts spoiling a Slashdot thread :)
Almost every time I have found endless columns of code, even written in OO languages, it has always been the case that the programmer responsible learned programming with Basic.
In today's programming world it just teaches people bad habits that they carry across a career.
If you want a kid to learn programming on their own, outside of a class, send them to python.org where they even have materials for teaching programming. I don't know if the results will be better beyond starting them off with a modern language still in use, but the results can't be any worse as far as the bad habits of people weaned on Basic tend to go.
I don't know if it is a crime, but it is certainly an invasion of privacy that should be punished.
What kind of dumb ass converts someone's private email account into a social networking site, letting strangers in their address book see what they do on the web.....without notice, without permission AND expects that people will like it?
Then why do Java GUI apps perform so poorly?
I started off with EMACS in school way back in the 20th century. I had to go on a 12 step program to break away from it. I never had any experiences with EMACS being slow...even NTEmacs for Windows. Given the crappy hardware of the era I can't see how it would be slow now.
Correct if I am wrong, but only non-GUI code is compiled with JIT.
No, it isn't unique to Java, it is just worse with Java.
I recently had to triple the RAM in Linux/Ubuntu box because GNOME apps load slow.
Like I wrote, a wait is tolerable with some apps, but not a development tool you use all day long. When it is time for me to write code, I'm sticking with Visual Slickedit which is always fast.
I see where you are going.
Every place I have ever worked and expect to work has antivirus software. The last place the antivirus software slowed down everything! I had to get more RAM just so I could DO work at 3:30 when it ran everyday.
Yet, I've also used development tools written in Java on my Linux box, even smaller ones like JEdit and the interface is slower.....every time.
Some things I am willing to put with a slowdown for. Just clicking on a menu option for main work tool is not one of them.
The Java community needs to get over the "eat your own dog food" thing with client side apps and development tools. Java is MORE than justified in its existence since it is a FANTASTIC server side language.
It is time to move on.
I've been a Java developer for 11 years and I don't use development tools written in Java. While I am gaga over server side Java, I'm not a fan of interpreted code for client applications. I've always had fast machines and Jbuilder/Ecliples/Netbeans and all of the other Java IDEs have lasted for about 15 min with me whenever I have tried a new version. I can't think of anything else more irritating than having to wait for a menu on my development tool to come up. Coworkers always rave to me how _____ has improved and is fast. It has never been true.
I've stuck to Visual Slickedit all of this time. It is written in compiled code, is fast and has a ton of Java support. It also has a ton of support for many other languages so I can use it for everything and not have to learn a new tool.
It is kind of silly to worry what will happen as a result of gays being in the military, since they have always been there. They just haven't been allowed to admit it.
As a straight man who doesn't see anything in it for himself, I have had trouble remaining interested in all of the articles about DADT and Gay Marriage. I've had thoughts similar to yours along the lines "Aren't there higher priorities to work out first?".
At one time African Americans were segregated in the military and it as big an issue as DADT is now. Try substituting "African American" or "Jew" for "gays" in your comment and ask yourself how it sounds to you.
"Aren't there more important issues than allow African Americans or Jews in the military? We have more pressing problems".
My point is that to many people DADT is an egregious civil rights issue, though on an emotional level I understand where you are coming from. It is hard to get excited about something you don't benefit from one way or the other.
However, there are benefits.
I believe President Clinton helped torpedoed the bipartisan goodwill he needed to have an even more successful presidency by bringing up gays in the military first thing after he was elected.
Gays in the military, or at least DADT, will soon no longer be a wedge issue that future Democratic presidents will have to take political risks for. They will be able to spend their political/bipartisan goodwill capital on other issues. Especially if the gay marriage thing gets settled and gets off the board as an issue.
I got the impression from watching the news that the repeal of DADT will allow homosexuals to openly serve in the military.
The slashot introduction to this thread states:
And the Washington Post article linked to in the introduction states:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/18/AR2010121801729.html?sid=ST2010121803394
What is the deal?
Don't worry, we still have the Christian fundamentalists and the far right to help us catch up to radical Islam in the race back the middle ages.
At least not this user, not after Google's stunt with Buzz or white washing the pictures in Google of Tianammen Square at the request of the PRC.
Using a browser or OS from google only seems a little bit better to me than using a browser or OS made by Facebook.
An investment would be making a large donation. Zuckerberg is giving away nearly his entire fortune. That is in a different class and an obvious point.
I still don't trust him or Facebook with my information, but my opinion of him as a human being has just changed for the better.
This epically generous move would seem to indicate he is what he portrays himself as, a coder who cares about coding and not much else. I'm sure he will still be comfortable after giving all of this money away, but with that money a lot of opportunities will also leave his life. Though, if he is one of those guys who just likes spending the bulk of his day coding he will not care.
I remember seeing a quote on a t-shirt that went something like this
Instead of donating their fortunes to charity, it would be better if these billionaires put their money to work at ending the reasons for charities being needed in the first place. I'm not talking about "socialism", but about donating money in such a way that any given cause will not need future donations. In other words solving a problem instead of helping to manage the results.
Not to take away from their generosity.....it is epic, with no ifs ands or buts.
Just offering a thought......
We have all seen some fantastic editing to put contemporary actors into vintage TV shows. A good example is Deep Space 9 episode where the crew goes back in time to visit Captain Kirk in the "tribbles" episode.
A computer right now could probably synthesize new sentences with an actors voice, as well as new body positions.
I doubt however it can synthesize *acting* and the subtitles of human emotion. Even some of those original actors had trouble with that. Someone, somewhere would have to catalouge the full range of facial expressions possible for a human face, then for the face of the actor, then find a way to catalog each possible minute variation in each facial expression for each of gazillions subtle changes in emotions.
I think it will happen someday, just not now.
On the upside, if it happens sooner we will get new episodes for class Star Trek, but what made that show great was not a picture of a particular actor moving a certain way and saying a particular sentence. That is all a computer can do now.
I saw that point made in another comment and I think it is a sharp one.
To be fair to Sun, I was working in a dotcom during the dotcom era. I don't think anyone could have anticipated the desire for servers on small machines running Unix.
There is the price issue too. If a tech person can download something for free versus having to go through the bureaucracy of his/her company to buy it, s/he will choose the free download.
Sun could have seen the popularity of linux on small ( ie non behemoth machines ) servers, open sourced Solaris and sold support packages.
I don't think Sun could have pulled it off. Sun was a BIG company used to making BIG products for BIG orgs. Their culture and their customers were BACK END. In that respect Oracle is a good fit for them. Neither company knows how to anything SIMPLE and small.
I'm a network administrator, but in that hypothetical past I think network admins would have the getting support from the Linux community easier to digest than going through channels at Sun.