Out of interest, what tool do you use to get that link? When I look directly at the.mov in the source, it's only a few k in size and obviously contains a redirect to the real file. What do people use to convert that?
The native database is incredibly fast (for databases under 2 Gig in size), it supports ODBC for non-native databases and it's interpreted which allows for very complex commands of various kinds.
It's very easy to do database stuff in it, it's OOP and it's GUI.
To be honest, it always seemed ridiculous to me that any society that had the technology to convert people into nanotech gods couldn't cure something as simple as the problem Spider had...
Not only can you read any users entries at: www.livejournal.com/users/andrewducker/rss
but they syndicate over 1000 feeds in return. For instance you can add Slashdot to your friends list by adding user "Slashdot" or going to: http://www.livejournal.com/users/slashdot/
I now read nearly all my news through syndication - you can see my total news feed at http://andrewducker.livejournal.com/friends/news Syndication has my news gathering a whole lot easier.
Very true. When I was working with OO stuff (and not COBOL as I have been for months now), I was very careful to encapsulate as much as possible. Being able to make massive changes under the surface without people making calls being able to tell was fantastically useful.
Basically it meant that as long as we didn't change the protocol, we could change the program.
I doubt my code was in VB, as I've never done more than 100 lines top of VB (just enough to check that some COM was working).
And the difference between the two bits of code is that I can change the IsScreen variable/property on a case by case basis whereas the IsTicked function won't be so easily changed.
not that there's anything wrong with using functions rather than properties, there's no need to be a religious maniac, after all.
I don't predict the demise of object-oriented programming, by the way. Though I don't think it has much to offer good programmers, except in certain specialized domains, it is irresistible to large organizations.
Where OOP comes into it's own, in my experience, is with GUIs. The ability to say:
If ThisScreen.Checkbox.IsTicked
ThisScreen.OkButton.Disabled = True Endif
is immensely useful. Similarly, the ability to change the definition of your master screen template and have all of the other screens take on it's new properties is something that OOP is designed to allow you to do.
Similarly, anything where you tend to access things that act like objects in the first place suit it. Being able to say
CurrentDocument.Paragraph(1).Bold= True
or
Errval=MyDatabase.SQL("Select * from mytable where name='Andrew'") Print MyDatabase.RecordCount
has made my life easier on numerous occasions. There are certainly non OO methods of doing the same thing, but I've never found them as flexible.
People who insist on making _everything_ an object, on the other hand, are idealists and should be carefully weeded from production environments and palced somewhere they'll be happier, like research.
We've already seen cases where agents can be set conflicting goals and get stuck (think of the famous case of the orcs for Two Towers that ran away - they were looking for a different way to the front and got stuck running away/towards/away/towards).
Any system that can program itself to find a way to do something and that can have conflicting goals could sometimes end up stuck at a point where it can't move, because moving would cause it to violate one of the goals.
If you programmed a robot to "avoid the cat" and "position yourself in the sun" I'm sure you'd see it sometimes display neurotic behaviour.
They can show pictures of the people with the virus to each other and see how well they remember each other. If they all say "Yup, I saw that person while I was waiting for the elevator" then there's a huge clue for you.
Of course, if it came from a sick Chinese professor, chances are China has a problem right now...
Slashdot Mirror
I recommend the Grant Morrison X-Men, starting with E is for Extinction.
Blogging is the antithesis of goal driven composition
One has nothing to do with the other
So they're simultaneously the opposites and nothing to do with each other?
Nice trick.
Oh, and your original post was definitely trolling. Making an insulting statement that's untrue and has nothing to back it up... now that's a troll.
Neil Gaiman's latest journal entry touches on this very topic - inspired by Bill Gibson's interview.
Yes, and Slashdot posters are entirely made up of 13 year old Unix hackers who can't type Microsoft without the dollar sign.
Alternatively, it's just possible that anyone can keep an online journal. Or post on Slashdot. Or use IRC. Or do whatever they like.
I've frequently sat down to compose something with a specific goal in mind and then post it on my blog.
Heh. From what I've seen a market is the collective intelligence of every participant divided by the square of the number of members.
What's "strings"?
Bearing in mind that I'm running a windows box here...
It's going to have to be fantastic to beat the trailer for Charlies Angels 2, which looks amazing.
(Not to mention X2, The Matrix 2/3, etc.)
Out of interest, what tool do you use to get that link? When I look directly at the .mov in the source, it's only a few k in size and obviously contains a redirect to the real file. What do people use to convert that?
Ok, how does the coins one work?
So some non-DB HR monkeys put together a badly documented database, therefore the language is at fault?
That doesn't make much sense to me.
The native database is incredibly fast (for databases under 2 Gig in size), it supports ODBC for non-native databases and it's interpreted which allows for very complex commands of various kinds.
It's very easy to do database stuff in it, it's OOP and it's GUI.
Strangers In Paradise. I've not met anyone who could stop reading Strangers in Paradise once they started.
To be honest, it always seemed ridiculous to me that any society that had the technology to convert people into nanotech gods couldn't cure something as simple as the problem Spider had...
Not only can you read any users entries at:
www.livejournal.com/users/andrewducker/rss
but they syndicate over 1000 feeds in return. For instance you can add Slashdot to your friends list by adding user "Slashdot" or going to:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/slashdot/
I now read nearly all my news through syndication - you can see my total news feed at http://andrewducker.livejournal.com/friends/news
Syndication has my news gathering a whole lot easier.
Aah, gotcha.
Yeah, that would be good. You could standardise around SQL for commands and then an XML syntax for data.
You mean some kind of Open DataBase Connectivity?
Or does ODBC not ring any bells?
Oh, Good Grief! I didn't show what it was doing with the data so I shouldn't have showed a select taking place that involved it????
I do know about "Select count(*) from Mytable". I can even use groups, subselects, inner joins and outer joins.
It was a code snippet! That was all!
Very true. When I was working with OO stuff (and not COBOL as I have been for months now), I was very careful to encapsulate as much as possible. Being able to make massive changes under the surface without people making calls being able to tell was fantastically useful.
Basically it meant that as long as we didn't change the protocol, we could change the program.
For the second time, I'm not a VB programmer. The code was purely pseudocode.
More to the point, if the database connection object has retrieved a number of rows, then it knows how many it has. So why is it grossly inefficient?
I doubt my code was in VB, as I've never done more than 100 lines top of VB (just enough to check that some COM was working).
And the difference between the two bits of code is that I can change the IsScreen variable/property on a case by case basis whereas the IsTicked function won't be so easily changed.
not that there's anything wrong with using functions rather than properties, there's no need to be a religious maniac, after all.
Where OOP comes into it's own, in my experience, is with GUIs. The ability to say:
If ThisScreen.Checkbox.IsTicked
ThisScreen.OkButton.Disabled = True
Endif
is immensely useful. Similarly, the ability to change the definition of your master screen template and have all of the other screens take on it's new properties is something that OOP is designed to allow you to do.
Similarly, anything where you tend to access things that act like objects in the first place suit it. Being able to say
CurrentDocument.Paragraph(1).Bold= True
or
Errval=MyDatabase.SQL("Select * from mytable where name='Andrew'")
Print MyDatabase.RecordCount
has made my life easier on numerous occasions. There are certainly non OO methods of doing the same thing, but I've never found them as flexible.
People who insist on making _everything_ an object, on the other hand, are idealists and should be carefully weeded from production environments and palced somewhere they'll be happier, like research.
Privacy is both dead and impossible in the modern world of surveillance and massive data storage and processing.
Roll on the transparent society, where we can watch the government back!
We've already seen cases where agents can be set conflicting goals and get stuck (think of the famous case of the orcs for Two Towers that ran away - they were looking for a different way to the front and got stuck running away/towards/away/towards).
Any system that can program itself to find a way to do something and that can have conflicting goals could sometimes end up stuck at a point where it can't move, because moving would cause it to violate one of the goals.
If you programmed a robot to "avoid the cat" and "position yourself in the sun" I'm sure you'd see it sometimes display neurotic behaviour.
They can show pictures of the people with the virus to each other and see how well they remember each other. If they all say "Yup, I saw that person while I was waiting for the elevator" then there's a huge clue for you.
Of course, if it came from a sick Chinese professor, chances are China has a problem right now...