As soon as I saw it, I thought that the p*ss was being taken. I was expecting another 'evil bit' story to appear a couple further up. That would have been four of the same story on the front page at the same time. That would have been awesome. Looks like the George Foreman USB iGrill means that isn't going to happen, though.
The more likely it is that there is life on Mars, the more circumspect we should be about sending people there. I can't see how it would be possible to send people to the surface for any duration, without running a significant risk of the mars biosphere becoming contamined.
Just by being there, we could destroy a biological system that has evolved in isolation for billions of years.
I wouldn't mind moving to Cuba. Good weather, pretty girls, and laid back attitutude to life. As long as I could stay on the free (that is, non-Guantanomo Bay) side of the fence.
The application is distributed as an application bundle that contains, as well as the executable, any support files. The bundle looks like a normal file but, like a directory, can be browsed and contain sub-directories.
If you use the terminal, you can access all of the mp3 (or whatever) files on the iPod that iTunes has copied to it. They're not difficult to find, and they are completely untouched by any sort of copy protection.
Apples strategy, with regard to the iPod and music copying, seems to be to make it so it's not particularly difficult, but that it requires some effort on the part of the thief^H^H^H^H^Hcopyer.
You can do it without using third-party software. Just mount the iPod as a drive and use cp.
Following some late night, tiredness induced unpleasantness with a make file, I managed to delete my home directory. When I'd recreated the directory, I used 'cp -r' to copy all the music from my iPod, back onto my hard disk. The only problem was that the iPod got very hot by the time I'd finished.
Before anyone is allowed to moderate, they should have to provide proof that they can demonstrate, at least, a basic understanding of irony and/or sarcasm.
I don't happen to think that just because a place is 'devoid of life' it is not worth preserving. The simple fact is, that one of the last unviolated areas of the planet is going to be violated so that massive machines, pumping diesel fumes into a previously preserved environment, can transport large amounts of equipment and supplies to an area that itself, until this 'highway' was conceived, was relatively safe from violation.
Basically, I think that scientists and engineers have a duty to ask of themselves, and each other, 'is this necessary?'. Maybe, and that's a very slim maybe, it is desirable, but I have no doubt that this fails the 'necessary' test.
I'm not a knee-jerk environmentalist, I would just like a little bit of the planet left intact for my children to wonder at.
This reminds me of a story in The Onion's 'Our Dumb Century' book. It was something along the lines of, "US military find last unspoilt place on Earth, blows it to hell."
I can't remember the episode, but I was very impressed that the double managed to survive alone for years without going insane. There can't be many things that are worse than being alone, without any form of human contact for many years, but here's a few that are close:
being stuck alone and being Ryker.
being stuck alone except for Ryker.
being Ryker.
After contemplating the magnitude of such a tragedy, I don't even have the energy to do the ???, Profit! thing.
However, for HTML and HTTP, AFAIK there isn't a good solution. Once the page is rendered, that's it. Either you continuously refresh the page or you have some sort of applet or other plug in running.
Use a Java servlet on the server side but keep the response stream open, this allows you to continue to 'push' data to the browser. Basically, this means not exiting the doGet (or doPost) method immediately after generating the content, as you would in a standard servlet example. A little bit of JavaScript on the client side can be used to continuously read this 'pushed' data.
The last time that I did something like that, it was called 'pushlets'. I'm too lazy to google for it.
could seriously threaten the very existence of the Banana
Cripes! I for one don't want to imagine a world without bananas. Let's just hope that there's enough time to push banana-based technology to a point where we no longer have to be afraid.
I don't deny that it's possible to write 10,000+ lines of code in 5 days but, unless you're some sort of prodigy, I would have serious reservations about the quality of that code.
All of us who chose development as a career because we love to write code, rather than just because it's a well-paid and relatively easy-going job, have at some time cranked out amazing amounts of code in a short time. My doubts are caused by the duration. I don't believe that it's possible to sustain that sort of output for that period of time.
I thought that server-side compression was used mainly to conserve bandwidth, rather than speed up downloads. The argument being that it is cheaper to pay for the hardware to do the extra work of compression, than pay for the extra bandwidth that uncompressed pages take up.
Once you factor in the time taken to compress pages on the server, expecially dynamic content, I doubt if the compression gives much of a speed saving.
Exactly. The first thing I did after reading the article was to make the calculation. It works out at just over 1,424 lines of code per day, every day, for a year and a half. In the years that I've been in the development industry, this is orders of magnitude more productive than anything that I've ever experienced.
It's possible that the article made a mistake, and it's actually 78,000 lines of code, but that's still a heck of a lot of code output every day. Factor in testing and debugging, and the numbers just don't make sense.
Slashdot Mirror
Or read Fire In The Valley, the book that the film is based on. Both the book and the film are excellent.
Am I the only one who thinks this should be globalse.cx?
That's what I thought, when I saw the link. I had a moment of hesitation before I clicked it.
USB is so nineties. I'm waiting for the firewire version. That way, I'll be able to remotely burn down my house ten times faster.
As soon as I saw it, I thought that the p*ss was being taken. I was expecting another 'evil bit' story to appear a couple further up. That would have been four of the same story on the front page at the same time. That would have been awesome. Looks like the George Foreman USB iGrill means that isn't going to happen, though.
Saddam doesn't need the Frenches steenking berets, he can make his own.
My J-Developer friend was just telling me the other day how he longed for templates in Java.
Try Pizza. It's got some good stuff in it, and it compiles to byte-code that will run on Sun's JVM.
The more likely it is that there is life on Mars, the more circumspect we should be about sending people there. I can't see how it would be possible to send people to the surface for any duration, without running a significant risk of the mars biosphere becoming contamined.
Just by being there, we could destroy a biological system that has evolved in isolation for billions of years.
I wouldn't mind moving to Cuba. Good weather, pretty girls, and laid back attitutude to life. As long as I could stay on the free (that is, non-Guantanomo Bay) side of the fence.
I think that the way it's done on OSX works well.
The application is distributed as an application bundle that contains, as well as the executable, any support files. The bundle looks like a normal file but, like a directory, can be browsed and contain sub-directories.
This guy's grammar bears a remarkable similarity to the Nigerian spammer. The only thing missing is the ALL CAPS.
If you use the terminal, you can access all of the mp3 (or whatever) files on the iPod that iTunes has copied to it. They're not difficult to find, and they are completely untouched by any sort of copy protection.
Apples strategy, with regard to the iPod and music copying, seems to be to make it so it's not particularly difficult, but that it requires some effort on the part of the thief^H^H^H^H^Hcopyer.
You can do it without using third-party software. Just mount the iPod as a drive and use cp.
Following some late night, tiredness induced unpleasantness with a make file, I managed to delete my home directory. When I'd recreated the directory, I used 'cp -r' to copy all the music from my iPod, back onto my hard disk. The only problem was that the iPod got very hot by the time I'd finished.
I feel the need to invoke Godwin's Law.
HTF did this get modded as a troll?
Before anyone is allowed to moderate, they should have to provide proof that they can demonstrate, at least, a basic understanding of irony and/or sarcasm.
I thought that the best quote was near the end of the second article: "There's no swearing on Saturdays."
LOL!
I did bother to read the article.
I don't happen to think that just because a place is 'devoid of life' it is not worth preserving. The simple fact is, that one of the last unviolated areas of the planet is going to be violated so that massive machines, pumping diesel fumes into a previously preserved environment, can transport large amounts of equipment and supplies to an area that itself, until this 'highway' was conceived, was relatively safe from violation.
Basically, I think that scientists and engineers have a duty to ask of themselves, and each other, 'is this necessary?'. Maybe, and that's a very slim maybe, it is desirable, but I have no doubt that this fails the 'necessary' test.
I'm not a knee-jerk environmentalist, I would just like a little bit of the planet left intact for my children to wonder at.
This reminds me of a story in The Onion's 'Our Dumb Century' book. It was something along the lines of, "US military find last unspoilt place on Earth, blows it to hell."
I can't remember the episode, but I was very impressed that the double managed to survive alone for years without going insane. There can't be many things that are worse than being alone, without any form of human contact for many years, but here's a few that are close:
After contemplating the magnitude of such a tragedy, I don't even have the energy to do the ???, Profit! thing.
However, for HTML and HTTP, AFAIK there isn't a good solution. Once the page is rendered, that's it. Either you continuously refresh the page or you have some sort of applet or other plug in running.
Use a Java servlet on the server side but keep the response stream open, this allows you to continue to 'push' data to the browser. Basically, this means not exiting the doGet (or doPost) method immediately after generating the content, as you would in a standard servlet example. A little bit of JavaScript on the client side can be used to continuously read this 'pushed' data.
The last time that I did something like that, it was called 'pushlets'. I'm too lazy to google for it.
1. Completely out of context, re-attribute Da Vinci's work to Galileo.
2. Misspell Galileo (see step 1).
3. Claim that, by forcing the withdrawal of a plug-in for iTunes that allows the sharing of music over a network, Apple are holding back mankind.
4. Point out that Apple are holding back mankind and thus are evil (see step 3).
5. ???
6. Profit!
could seriously threaten the very existence of the Banana
Cripes! I for one don't want to imagine a world without bananas. Let's just hope that there's enough time to push banana-based technology to a point where we no longer have to be afraid.
Yes. For a year during my mid-teens.
I don't deny that it's possible to write 10,000+ lines of code in 5 days but, unless you're some sort of prodigy, I would have serious reservations about the quality of that code.
All of us who chose development as a career because we love to write code, rather than just because it's a well-paid and relatively easy-going job, have at some time cranked out amazing amounts of code in a short time. My doubts are caused by the duration. I don't believe that it's possible to sustain that sort of output for that period of time.
I thought that server-side compression was used mainly to conserve bandwidth, rather than speed up downloads. The argument being that it is cheaper to pay for the hardware to do the extra work of compression, than pay for the extra bandwidth that uncompressed pages take up.
Once you factor in the time taken to compress pages on the server, expecially dynamic content, I doubt if the compression gives much of a speed saving.
Exactly. The first thing I did after reading the article was to make the calculation. It works out at just over 1,424 lines of code per day, every day, for a year and a half. In the years that I've been in the development industry, this is orders of magnitude more productive than anything that I've ever experienced.
It's possible that the article made a mistake, and it's actually 78,000 lines of code, but that's still a heck of a lot of code output every day. Factor in testing and debugging, and the numbers just don't make sense.