There's a good chance it will run full-fledged Java apps running on the Dalvik virtual machines. There's no reason to worry about its flexibility before you can even buy a machine that runs it.
How is Sherlock Holmes an interesting take on the Holmes story line. It's even worse Hollywood drivel than Avatar. "Hey, let's take a 19th-century novel and turn it into an action movie." That's the entire concept. No fidelity to Holmes, which was about the power of reason.
I communicate via a handheld computer that can crack a variety of encryption schemes (more or less as many as the average single computer.) I get into my car and start it without ever taking the key out of my pocket (it knows I've got the key in my pocket when I hit the button on the door.) I have access to the greatest library ever constructed at the speed of light. Well, close enough for my purposes anyway.
People don't overestimate, they simply predict poorly what new wonders will come next.
How is it a violation to give, say, twice the amount the company has need of? I see that as a basic optimization algorithm, so you don't have to go back and allocate a new address for every computer a company adds. But if IP addresses become more scarce, it makes sense to go back and see if their IP requirements have dropped, and possibly dial it down to 150% or even 130% of clear need. Until we run out, 200% saves a lot of paperwork.
Microsoft has been very clear that even though they're not charging for.Net at the moment, they believe that people should be paying to use Microsoft IP. Removing GPL code from anything they use is a natural first step towards that goal. Is everyone involved in Mono working towards that goal? Probably not. But it's clearly what Microsoft wants.
You're confusing advertised speed with actual speed (which are two very different things.) What they're telling you you can do with each of those plans gives you a better idea of what their actual speed capabilities are on those plans.
But don't make them give you any sort of actual figures. They'd never be able to compete if they did that.
My sophomore year of college, I realized that I was doomed to be sitting in front of a computer screen doing work. My only choice was what I would be doing. And coding I enjoy.
Clearly, Bill Gates, and some of the other titans of the industry need to bite the bullet and have some very public, scandalous affairs so that the media will start talking about how immoral and terrible people software designers are. Then suddenly sportsmen will become model citizens and no one will want to go into sports anymore.
There's a fundamental difference here. You can copy the code, but it won't work unless you fix the issue. Now, if you've intentionally implemented 32-bit time in 64-bit code, that's a bit of a different situation.
In a purely unregulated market, wireless is impossible because all companies would be attempting to simultaneously broadcast over the same frequencies.
Furthermore, they could gradually raise the termination fee (no early termination fee, just termination fees) to the point where no competitor could possibly compete. Regulation is an absolute necessity.
Now, you might argue for minimal regulation, but even the assertion that minimal regulation is intrinsically preferable to maximal regulation is unadulterated bullshit. Every case is different, and the optimal amount of regulation is that which restricts the ability of producers to earn excessive profits.
Well, when you're using bare hardware types, ending at 2038, you're really using a second counter, which has a lot of uses aside from m/d/y. So there's a lot of implementation time saved having a single, simple, versatile time data structure.
Furthermore, it's a fairly safe assumption that by 2030, all computers still functioning will use 64 bit ints, and your code will have been recompiled and debugged for 64 bit, which will incidentally remove the 2038 issue.
If your software needs to represent dates more than 10 years in the future, it might be a little sketchy, but it's still reasonable 32 bit might be out of your hair by 2020. Of course if you need to represent dates 30 years out, you need a better data structure.
No, he assumes they write their data-mining tools in PHP because TFA claims that most of their servers are running PHP. Though maybe that just proves they aren't doing that much data mining. (Or if they are they're outsourcing to Microsoft, which would make sense since that's where they get their ads.)
I'm not entirely sure what this article is trying to prove. Android has been out for a year. It takes most software companies 6 months to ready a new release, test it, and put it out to market. If anyone (carriers or manufacturers) are interested in keeping their hardware on dated software, that won't be clear until at least June.
And his supposition that handset manufacturers have no incentive to make their already-sold handsets operate well is just stupid. If you get a reputation for not updating your software, people won't want your hardware. And the carriers have even more interest in keeping software up to date.
The idea of nuclear propulsion isn't actually insane, it's just that no one has explored it on account of international bans, also that it's hard to keep computer equipment functioning in the presence of a nuclear blast.
But if your goal is just to effect a huge change in an object's velocity, nukes would be very effective. And fragments are irrelevant, since even if the asteroid broke up momentarily, the point is to alter its trajectory, if a nuke went off with enough force to shatter it, it's likely none of the pieces would be headed for Earth.
Look at the response to H1N1 (which turned out to be an over-response, but the severity was not known at the beginning)
The fact that it wasn't as bad as they predicted is proof that they took the correct course of action. If they had said "There's a 10% chance that this could get out of control, so you should wash your hands and get vaccinated," no one would change their behavior. Since it gets labeled a pandemic, with the 24-hour news cycle people actually took some steps to limit exposure, which at least halved the possibility of a real epidemic.
It's a lot like if we discovered an asteroid that will hit Earth in 10 years, and then a huge international team got together to strap an ion drive to it that will divert it with a long, concerted thrust. The thruster diverts it a single year, and everyone says "oh we totally overreacted." No we didn't - we reacted appropriately and removed any possibility that it could've killed us all. Much the same I think is the H1N1 scare. I mean, people get freaked out over absurdly unlikely occurrences like extinction-level asteroid collisions all the time, seems natural that we try to redirect the human impulse towards overreaction into something that will actually reduce a significant amount of death.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah I would've expected them to oscillate in a frequency that is a multiple of 3.
Apple's tablet will be running Chrome OS.
Jobs said that you will be "very surprised" with how you interact with the tablet. Chrome OS is the only thing that could possibly surprise me.
Well, that or mind control, but Apple products can't have electrodes.
There's a good chance it will run full-fledged Java apps running on the Dalvik virtual machines. There's no reason to worry about its flexibility before you can even buy a machine that runs it.
It seems pretty clear that you are enjoying the Avatar is a pointless liberal tract kool-aid with everyone else on the Internet.
God forbid people use movies for any purpose other than entertainment. Movies aren't art.
How is Sherlock Holmes an interesting take on the Holmes story line. It's even worse Hollywood drivel than Avatar. "Hey, let's take a 19th-century novel and turn it into an action movie." That's the entire concept. No fidelity to Holmes, which was about the power of reason.
I communicate via a handheld computer that can crack a variety of encryption schemes (more or less as many as the average single computer.) I get into my car and start it without ever taking the key out of my pocket (it knows I've got the key in my pocket when I hit the button on the door.) I have access to the greatest library ever constructed at the speed of light. Well, close enough for my purposes anyway.
People don't overestimate, they simply predict poorly what new wonders will come next.
How is it a violation to give, say, twice the amount the company has need of? I see that as a basic optimization algorithm, so you don't have to go back and allocate a new address for every computer a company adds. But if IP addresses become more scarce, it makes sense to go back and see if their IP requirements have dropped, and possibly dial it down to 150% or even 130% of clear need. Until we run out, 200% saves a lot of paperwork.
I'd like to see how you can modify ROM in a controlled manner more easily than paper records.
He was inverting it, saying that engineers can always tell you what they had to sacrifice.
It used to be. It since opened up in reaction to Raymond's paper. The power of words...
You're trolling, but dropping support for Linux is different than simply not supporting Linux.
Microsoft has been very clear that even though they're not charging for .Net at the moment, they believe that people should be paying to use Microsoft IP. Removing GPL code from anything they use is a natural first step towards that goal. Is everyone involved in Mono working towards that goal? Probably not. But it's clearly what Microsoft wants.
You're confusing advertised speed with actual speed (which are two very different things.) What they're telling you you can do with each of those plans gives you a better idea of what their actual speed capabilities are on those plans.
But don't make them give you any sort of actual figures. They'd never be able to compete if they did that.
Your bandwidth is irrelevant. You just need something on the order of a quad-core i7 to handle the Javascript.
Of course, that doesn't help with the other bottleneck, which is that the entire site seems to be served from a single 486.
The patent isn't actually as broad as it's made out to be. It isn't worth licensing. Nothing to see here, move along.
My sophomore year of college, I realized that I was doomed to be sitting in front of a computer screen doing work. My only choice was what I would be doing. And coding I enjoy.
Clearly, Bill Gates, and some of the other titans of the industry need to bite the bullet and have some very public, scandalous affairs so that the media will start talking about how immoral and terrible people software designers are. Then suddenly sportsmen will become model citizens and no one will want to go into sports anymore.
There's a fundamental difference here. You can copy the code, but it won't work unless you fix the issue. Now, if you've intentionally implemented 32-bit time in 64-bit code, that's a bit of a different situation.
In a purely unregulated market, wireless is impossible because all companies would be attempting to simultaneously broadcast over the same frequencies.
Furthermore, they could gradually raise the termination fee (no early termination fee, just termination fees) to the point where no competitor could possibly compete. Regulation is an absolute necessity.
Now, you might argue for minimal regulation, but even the assertion that minimal regulation is intrinsically preferable to maximal regulation is unadulterated bullshit. Every case is different, and the optimal amount of regulation is that which restricts the ability of producers to earn excessive profits.
This has nothing to do with the Droid. And you can bet if they try this sort of shit I'll walk, with my subsidized minicomputer in tow.
Well, when you're using bare hardware types, ending at 2038, you're really using a second counter, which has a lot of uses aside from m/d/y. So there's a lot of implementation time saved having a single, simple, versatile time data structure.
Furthermore, it's a fairly safe assumption that by 2030, all computers still functioning will use 64 bit ints, and your code will have been recompiled and debugged for 64 bit, which will incidentally remove the 2038 issue.
If your software needs to represent dates more than 10 years in the future, it might be a little sketchy, but it's still reasonable 32 bit might be out of your hair by 2020. Of course if you need to represent dates 30 years out, you need a better data structure.
No, he assumes they write their data-mining tools in PHP because TFA claims that most of their servers are running PHP. Though maybe that just proves they aren't doing that much data mining. (Or if they are they're outsourcing to Microsoft, which would make sense since that's where they get their ads.)
I'm not entirely sure what this article is trying to prove. Android has been out for a year. It takes most software companies 6 months to ready a new release, test it, and put it out to market. If anyone (carriers or manufacturers) are interested in keeping their hardware on dated software, that won't be clear until at least June.
And his supposition that handset manufacturers have no incentive to make their already-sold handsets operate well is just stupid. If you get a reputation for not updating your software, people won't want your hardware. And the carriers have even more interest in keeping software up to date.
The idea of nuclear propulsion isn't actually insane, it's just that no one has explored it on account of international bans, also that it's hard to keep computer equipment functioning in the presence of a nuclear blast.
But if your goal is just to effect a huge change in an object's velocity, nukes would be very effective. And fragments are irrelevant, since even if the asteroid broke up momentarily, the point is to alter its trajectory, if a nuke went off with enough force to shatter it, it's likely none of the pieces would be headed for Earth.
The fact that it wasn't as bad as they predicted is proof that they took the correct course of action. If they had said "There's a 10% chance that this could get out of control, so you should wash your hands and get vaccinated," no one would change their behavior. Since it gets labeled a pandemic, with the 24-hour news cycle people actually took some steps to limit exposure, which at least halved the possibility of a real epidemic.
It's a lot like if we discovered an asteroid that will hit Earth in 10 years, and then a huge international team got together to strap an ion drive to it that will divert it with a long, concerted thrust. The thruster diverts it a single year, and everyone says "oh we totally overreacted." No we didn't - we reacted appropriately and removed any possibility that it could've killed us all. Much the same I think is the H1N1 scare. I mean, people get freaked out over absurdly unlikely occurrences like extinction-level asteroid collisions all the time, seems natural that we try to redirect the human impulse towards overreaction into something that will actually reduce a significant amount of death.