Actually, the memory at address 0 (virtual address 0, that is) is unlikely to ever get swapped in. The first page is often made inaccessible as a mechanism to catch null pointer dereferences.
Is it too much to ask that people who complain about inaccurate Slashdot summaries actually RTFA so they don't also make the same mistakes as the summarizer?
Clue: Apple didn't need to approve anything because the iPhone Notes client is a web application.
And when you're done proving Linux correct, you need to prove the tool chain used to build your program is correct, and the tool chain used to build Linux and the tool chains used to build your toolchains and the tool chains used to build those tool chains and the operating systems all those tool chains ran on etc ad infinitum and the processors it all runs on.
An interesting methodology for programming. However, if you use it you must be aware of one of my favourite programming rules which is:
"Do not be afraid to throw it away and start again."
For instance, in your DSP example you might come to part 2 of the problem and realise that the way you implemented part 1 makes part 2 really hard to do. Also, sometimes it's hard to gain a complete understanding of a problem until you have tried to solve it.
Older people will recognise this as a variation on Fred Brook's rule "plan to throw one away". I don't like that version because, as somebody else said "if you plan to throw one away, you'll end up throwing two away".
Sure, you can read the code to find out what it does, but you also need to know what the programmer intended that the code should do - the two do not necessarily coincide.
I agree with pretty much everything you say except the garbage collection part. Whilst Objective-C 2.0 does have garbage collection, the iPhone SDK does not support it. You're stuck with the old reference counting mechanism, at least you were in the beta that I tried out.
If the answer to your question was "no", how could the Bible contain a passage in which shellfish eating was banned?
Anyway, I think that was the whole point. The Bible bans shellfish which is a strange thing to do but fairly innocuous. There are much crazier more repulsive things in the Bible. There are several passages in it which describe God sponsored genocide. For instance, at school when I was 9 we talked about things like Joshua's attack on Jericho but somehow the teacher forgot to mention what Joshua did with the inhabitants after he had won.
I think the article is wrong. The football field is described as "the size of a grain of rice". A 3cm x 3cm x whatever cm grain of rice would be considered pretty big for a grain of rice. However, there is a picture of the chip with 16 playing areas on it compared to a US quarter. I've no idea howe big a US quarter is - 3cm diameter still sounds like a pretty big coin - but maybe the 3cm refers to the dimensions of the chip with 16 playing fields on it.
BTW they justify the term nano- by saying that the mass of the playing robots is of the order of a few nanograms.
While it is true that John Harrison made wooden clocks, his attempts to win the Longitude prize were all made of metal. You can see them in the Royal Observatory in Greenwich.
Sleep does work with Mac OS X on a MacBook. I never turn mine off, I just shut the lid. When I want to use it again, it takes a few seconds to display the screen saver password prompt.
And in the workplace, which skill is required the more: writing documents or building operating systems? Which do you think is going to be more relevant to the average child when he or she grows up?
Personally, I think the money spent on OLPC would be better employed in teaching the 12% of people who are illiterate how to read and write.
Any responsible politician should be encouraging a home grown FOSS industry because it creates the basis for future jobs. Learning Windows is like learning to eat every meal at McDonalds.
Absolute nonsense. Jobs are created when people are prepared to pay money for something. If it was only about creating jobs, politicians should be encouraging a home grown proprietary software industry because only with that model can you get money for actually writing the software (as opposed to providing support or professional services for it). Fortunately, it's not about creating jobs.
When was the last time you touched Windows? I only ask because you seem to be labouring under a misapprehension. There is no mechanism in Windows that stops you running software that was not written by Microsoft. Just because I have Windows, does not mean I have to run MS Office. I could choose any one of a number of Office packages including Open Source ones.
Windows as a desktop platform is just as interoperable as any other desktop operating system, in fact more so because it will interoperate with Microsoft's proprietary stuff as well as all of the open standards.
You're keen on teaching children critical thinking, but you're happy to tell lies about an operating system you don't like. That's not setting them a good example is it?
however I once read on slashdot that IT was a service to, not a function of most businesses.
Absolutely true.
It's interesting that TFA talks about the animosity of IT staff to the business people and whether that hurts the business, but most of the comments here talk about the animosity of business people to IT and how unappreciated IT people often feel. I'm sorry to say it, but that is a reflection of the importance of the IT department. The purpose of a business is to make a profit by selling goods or services. It therefore follows that the sales staff are the most important single group of people. If nobody in your company sells anything, manufacturing, IT, human resources, marketing, admin, accounting, purchasing, the cleaners etc are all unnecessary. Everybody else in the company should be focussed on making the sales people's jobs easier.
What does Ford do? It makes motor cars, right? Wrong, it sells motor cars. The only reason Ford has manufacturing plant is because it is very hard to sell a motor car you don't have. What does Microsoft do? It sells computer software. They would fire all the developers tomorrow if it weren't for the fact that sales would be adversely affected if they never fixed the bugs or brought out new features in response to their competitors.
So, if anybody here thinks IT is treated as a second class citizen compared to the business, it is because IT is a second class citizen compared to the business. We are here to help the business do its job properly. They are not here to help us play computers all day long.
You are misinterpreting "fast". Fast means "deliver it quickly", not "the application runs fast". IT people are often only interested in good. Business people want all three but will settle for fast (i.e. soon) and cheap with some arm twisting.
Would you like to comment on the Linux model in which driver compatibility is not even guaranteed between point releases of the Kernel. That kind of "fuck you" attitude dwarfs Microsoft's, especially as it is a deliberate decision made for ideological reasons rather than on good technical grounds.
That was my immediate thought too. Perhaps LHC emits some sort field that causes all other particle accelerators to mysteriously stop working. Yes, that must be it. European particle physics experiments are heavily influenced by fundamental particles called eurons and LHC has been sucking them up at a vast rate to the detriment of other experiments.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the memory at address 0 (virtual address 0, that is) is unlikely to ever get swapped in. The first page is often made inaccessible as a mechanism to catch null pointer dereferences.
Who is Emelia Earhardt? Is she related to Amelia Earhart?
Care to point out why something should be exempt from criticism just because it is written and maintained by amateurs?
Is it too much to ask that people who complain about inaccurate Slashdot summaries actually RTFA so they don't also make the same mistakes as the summarizer?
Clue: Apple didn't need to approve anything because the iPhone Notes client is a web application.
When a tree dies and rots down, all of the carbon dioxide that it removed from the atmosphere gets released back into the atmosphere.
However, we could bury dead trees in disused coal mines.
And when you're done proving Linux correct, you need to prove the tool chain used to build your program is correct, and the tool chain used to build Linux and the tool chains used to build your toolchains and the tool chains used to build those tool chains and the operating systems all those tool chains ran on etc ad infinitum and the processors it all runs on.
An interesting methodology for programming. However, if you use it you must be aware of one of my favourite programming rules which is:
"Do not be afraid to throw it away and start again."
For instance, in your DSP example you might come to part 2 of the problem and realise that the way you implemented part 1 makes part 2 really hard to do. Also, sometimes it's hard to gain a complete understanding of a problem until you have tried to solve it.
Older people will recognise this as a variation on Fred Brook's rule "plan to throw one away". I don't like that version because, as somebody else said "if you plan to throw one away, you'll end up throwing two away".
Then you're doing it wrong.
Sure, you can read the code to find out what it does, but you also need to know what the programmer intended that the code should do - the two do not necessarily coincide.
Why would it need a TPM chip? Apple doesn't use the TPM and modern Macintoshes don't have them.
http://www.osxbook.com/book/bonus/chapter10/tpm/
I agree with pretty much everything you say except the garbage collection part. Whilst Objective-C 2.0 does have garbage collection, the iPhone SDK does not support it. You're stuck with the old reference counting mechanism, at least you were in the beta that I tried out.
If the answer to your question was "no", how could the Bible contain a passage in which shellfish eating was banned?
Anyway, I think that was the whole point. The Bible bans shellfish which is a strange thing to do but fairly innocuous. There are much crazier more repulsive things in the Bible. There are several passages in it which describe God sponsored genocide. For instance, at school when I was 9 we talked about things like Joshua's attack on Jericho but somehow the teacher forgot to mention what Joshua did with the inhabitants after he had won.
Wow. I don't think I'd have the nerve to mod that funny.
I think the article is wrong. The football field is described as "the size of a grain of rice". A 3cm x 3cm x whatever cm grain of rice would be considered pretty big for a grain of rice. However, there is a picture of the chip with 16 playing areas on it compared to a US quarter. I've no idea howe big a US quarter is - 3cm diameter still sounds like a pretty big coin - but maybe the 3cm refers to the dimensions of the chip with 16 playing fields on it.
BTW they justify the term nano- by saying that the mass of the playing robots is of the order of a few nanograms.
While it is true that John Harrison made wooden clocks, his attempts to win the Longitude prize were all made of metal. You can see them in the Royal Observatory in Greenwich.
Sleep does work with Mac OS X on a MacBook. I never turn mine off, I just shut the lid. When I want to use it again, it takes a few seconds to display the screen saver password prompt.
So why did they scrap it and curse us with Unix and C instead?
And in the workplace, which skill is required the more: writing documents or building operating systems? Which do you think is going to be more relevant to the average child when he or she grows up?
Personally, I think the money spent on OLPC would be better employed in teaching the 12% of people who are illiterate how to read and write.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/pe.html
Absolute nonsense. Jobs are created when people are prepared to pay money for something. If it was only about creating jobs, politicians should be encouraging a home grown proprietary software industry because only with that model can you get money for actually writing the software (as opposed to providing support or professional services for it). Fortunately, it's not about creating jobs.
When was the last time you touched Windows? I only ask because you seem to be labouring under a misapprehension. There is no mechanism in Windows that stops you running software that was not written by Microsoft. Just because I have Windows, does not mean I have to run MS Office. I could choose any one of a number of Office packages including Open Source ones.
Windows as a desktop platform is just as interoperable as any other desktop operating system, in fact more so because it will interoperate with Microsoft's proprietary stuff as well as all of the open standards.
You're keen on teaching children critical thinking, but you're happy to tell lies about an operating system you don't like. That's not setting them a good example is it?
Absolutely true.
It's interesting that TFA talks about the animosity of IT staff to the business people and whether that hurts the business, but most of the comments here talk about the animosity of business people to IT and how unappreciated IT people often feel. I'm sorry to say it, but that is a reflection of the importance of the IT department. The purpose of a business is to make a profit by selling goods or services. It therefore follows that the sales staff are the most important single group of people. If nobody in your company sells anything, manufacturing, IT, human resources, marketing, admin, accounting, purchasing, the cleaners etc are all unnecessary. Everybody else in the company should be focussed on making the sales people's jobs easier.
What does Ford do? It makes motor cars, right? Wrong, it sells motor cars. The only reason Ford has manufacturing plant is because it is very hard to sell a motor car you don't have. What does Microsoft do? It sells computer software. They would fire all the developers tomorrow if it weren't for the fact that sales would be adversely affected if they never fixed the bugs or brought out new features in response to their competitors.
So, if anybody here thinks IT is treated as a second class citizen compared to the business, it is because IT is a second class citizen compared to the business. We are here to help the business do its job properly. They are not here to help us play computers all day long.
You are misinterpreting "fast". Fast means "deliver it quickly", not "the application runs fast". IT people are often only interested in good. Business people want all three but will settle for fast (i.e. soon) and cheap with some arm twisting.
If the interviewer can't tell the difference between good and bad code, they should probably delegate the technical assessment to somebody who can.
Would you like to comment on the Linux model in which driver compatibility is not even guaranteed between point releases of the Kernel. That kind of "fuck you" attitude dwarfs Microsoft's, especially as it is a deliberate decision made for ideological reasons rather than on good technical grounds.
They do have guides, or at least they did two years ago. I was shown around by one of the women who worked there during the war as a bombe operator.
That was my immediate thought too. Perhaps LHC emits some sort field that causes all other particle accelerators to mysteriously stop working. Yes, that must be it. European particle physics experiments are heavily influenced by fundamental particles called eurons and LHC has been sucking them up at a vast rate to the detriment of other experiments.