You're right, but you are missing the point. This isn't about creating objects, it's about removing the necessity to join in the DB, hence de-normalizing.
Sure, a normalized database model gives you a ton of discrete objects, but you have to join them all together to get everything you need, so performance suuccks.
Lol. I think we are differing because you are thinking OLTP and I am thinking OLAP. You want the cars table to always reflect what is current, and I never want to throw away (i.e. update) data ever.
In OLAP the proper approach is to never update the make or model key in the cars table. You want to retain all historical information by using slowly changing date-driven attribute tables.
From an OLAP perspective, TFA has a decent data model.
Not really an error. If make is an attribute of model, then landing it in the model table is fine, the grain is still at model level. If model is an attribute of car, then landing make in the car table is fine as well for the same reason.
Basically it negates the need for a multi-table join to get a make for a car.
In theory, I agree the most costly actions in a database are joins. It seems like the key/value model is a great solution to this, on the surface.
However, what the key/value model does is push the cost to the application layer. Instead of ensuring relational integrity and conformity in the database, suddenly all app code has to do this on the frontend. Also, instead of managing this process in a single place, suddenly this process is distributed among multiple methods.
Sure, the DB is more scaleable, but suddenly the app is a mess.
The problem with blocking ads for sites that you visit is that you are depriving them of the revenue they need to continue. It doesn't matter if you click on the advertisements or not. Many websites now make money off of ad 'views' as opposed to clicks.
I suppose you could argue that businesses need to change their business model away from using ads to generate revenue, but inevitably that would lead to website subscriptions as opposed to free browsing.
and I wonder what you think a restriction policy does, other than fly out the window the first time a kid figures out how to proxy?
What you really should do is install these computers with a base Debian install (which is free btw), and then help them get from there to where they need to be. This would teach marketable skills and also protect the computer from viruses.
You don't have to artifically inflate the cost of cheaper methods.
Instead, make these cheaper, more polluting methods of electric generation pay for the environmental damage that they are causing. At that point wind, solar, and geothermal energy would become more cost-viable.
How does macrolensing/microlensing end up magnifying an area in space? To my caveman-like mind, it seems like it would act more as an attenuating factor, reducing the signal to fuzz.
I can assume that macrolensing only works as a magnification if you are not looking for things such as spatial detail, and are instead looking for general facts such as temperatures and wavelengths of light. But then I am assumming...
I will only be satisfied when cell phone jamming makes my cell phone ooze strawberry jam.
-Hey,our cell phone has been jammed.
-What kind of jam?
-Tastes like strawberry, sir.
-Strawberry jam? Theres only one man that uses strawberry jam. LONESTAR!!!
Moore's Law becomes a software issue when we need to change our coding paradigm to use all of the cores on the chip. The hardware holds up it's end of the deal, but we need to develop software that utilizes the hardware correctly.
That's where FP comes into play, as it allows developer's to develop heavily parallelized code that is also safe and fault-tolerant.
From what I have read and seen, it looks like Frank Miller is turning the work of Will Eisner into Sin City. Couldn't he just have done a straight adaptation?
I mean, there's a reason the award they give for excellence in comics is called the "Eisner Awards."
How much ad revenue has YouTube made off of ChangeDotGov fireside chats? I know the particular page has no ads on it, but the press they are getting is phenomenal. Also visitors who path through the site to get to ChangeDotGov are generating revenue for them.
If Obama wants to be fair to commerce he shouldn't align his content solely with YouTube.
I think it is completely reasonable for these companies to go under when the code base becomes stable enough to undercut their business model. They're getting paid for providing a software in which they didn't pay for a large portion of the development costs.
If they want to stay afloat, they will need to stay on top of developments in the open source community to provide consulting for multiple products.
Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that you can be MOSTLY dead as well.
There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.
I agree, it is impossible to tell 100% if a system is truly random. Sort of a missing the forest for the trees type of scenario.
Instead of getting caught on the word random, I think of it this way: The distribution of answers to undecidable propositions consistently matches attributes distribution we see in quantum mechanics. It's an experiment more than an absolute.
Actually, that is exactly what they are testing. They want to see what happens when they don't ask the right question.
They took a question that is asked "incorrectly", meaning there is ambiguity in either the proposition or the axioms used. Then they used the concept of quantum states to model the correct answers to this system. Since there is ambiguity, they know there will be more than one answer. What they wanted to know is what the cloud of answers looked like, either random or ordered in a fashion.
They expected to see something similar to what we see in quantum mechanics when we are not precise (i.e. not precisely measuring any particular attribute of the quanta), which is a cloud of randomly distributed results. And that is exactly what they saw.
I think it would be fun to see how much damage Hurricane "Scrambles the Death Dealer" wreaks on virtual Honduras, especially when relief is coordinated by someone who negotiates solely by using "Yo Mamma" jokes.
In all honesty, as an educational tool I think this would be very useful. I certainly don't understand all of the moving parts of a proper disaster relief effort. If this teaches my why FEMA has to be so huge and bureaucratic, then I would be amazed.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally i believe the java api to inflate jvm ipl cos imo. Did that have the requisite nyumber of acronyms?
You're right, but you are missing the point. This isn't about creating objects, it's about removing the necessity to join in the DB, hence de-normalizing.
:P
Sure, a normalized database model gives you a ton of discrete objects, but you have to join them all together to get everything you need, so performance suuccks.
Not that I'm advocating the key/value approach
Lol. I think we are differing because you are thinking OLTP and I am thinking OLAP. You want the cars table to always reflect what is current, and I never want to throw away (i.e. update) data ever. In OLAP the proper approach is to never update the make or model key in the cars table. You want to retain all historical information by using slowly changing date-driven attribute tables. From an OLAP perspective, TFA has a decent data model.
Not really an error. If make is an attribute of model, then landing it in the model table is fine, the grain is still at model level. If model is an attribute of car, then landing make in the car table is fine as well for the same reason.
Basically it negates the need for a multi-table join to get a make for a car.
After implementing this all radio communications play Chubby Checker's "The Twist" softly in the background.
In theory, I agree the most costly actions in a database are joins. It seems like the key/value model is a great solution to this, on the surface. However, what the key/value model does is push the cost to the application layer. Instead of ensuring relational integrity and conformity in the database, suddenly all app code has to do this on the frontend. Also, instead of managing this process in a single place, suddenly this process is distributed among multiple methods. Sure, the DB is more scaleable, but suddenly the app is a mess.
The problem with blocking ads for sites that you visit is that you are depriving them of the revenue they need to continue. It doesn't matter if you click on the advertisements or not. Many websites now make money off of ad 'views' as opposed to clicks.
I suppose you could argue that businesses need to change their business model away from using ads to generate revenue, but inevitably that would lead to website subscriptions as opposed to free browsing.
Maybe they should stop building rainforests and start growing rainforests. That's probably the problem, cement trees are not very good at respiration.
and I wonder what you think a restriction policy does, other than fly out the window the first time a kid figures out how to proxy? What you really should do is install these computers with a base Debian install (which is free btw), and then help them get from there to where they need to be. This would teach marketable skills and also protect the computer from viruses.
You don't have to artifically inflate the cost of cheaper methods.
Instead, make these cheaper, more polluting methods of electric generation pay for the environmental damage that they are causing. At that point wind, solar, and geothermal energy would become more cost-viable.
How does macrolensing/microlensing end up magnifying an area in space? To my caveman-like mind, it seems like it would act more as an attenuating factor, reducing the signal to fuzz.
I can assume that macrolensing only works as a magnification if you are not looking for things such as spatial detail, and are instead looking for general facts such as temperatures and wavelengths of light. But then I am assumming...
I will only be satisfied when cell phone jamming makes my cell phone ooze strawberry jam.
-Hey,our cell phone has been jammed.
-What kind of jam?
-Tastes like strawberry, sir.
-Strawberry jam? Theres only one man that uses strawberry jam. LONESTAR!!!
Moore's Law becomes a software issue when we need to change our coding paradigm to use all of the cores on the chip. The hardware holds up it's end of the deal, but we need to develop software that utilizes the hardware correctly.
That's where FP comes into play, as it allows developer's to develop heavily parallelized code that is also safe and fault-tolerant.
Malkovich? MALKOVICH!
Do the test patients inexplicably end up at the New Jersey turnpike once the experiment has concluded?
From what I have read and seen, it looks like Frank Miller is turning the work of Will Eisner into Sin City. Couldn't he just have done a straight adaptation?
I mean, there's a reason the award they give for excellence in comics is called the "Eisner Awards."
I don't know if this would work for me, because I usually just end up listening on my phone.
Yes, honey. Ok, honey. Will do, honey.
How much ad revenue has YouTube made off of ChangeDotGov fireside chats? I know the particular page has no ads on it, but the press they are getting is phenomenal. Also visitors who path through the site to get to ChangeDotGov are generating revenue for them.
If Obama wants to be fair to commerce he shouldn't align his content solely with YouTube.
SO Brazilians are green skinned monsters that can create electric fields to you? Cooool.
I think it is completely reasonable for these companies to go under when the code base becomes stable enough to undercut their business model. They're getting paid for providing a software in which they didn't pay for a large portion of the development costs.
If they want to stay afloat, they will need to stay on top of developments in the open source community to provide consulting for multiple products.
Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that you can be MOSTLY dead as well.
/*obligatory miracle max
There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.
Go through his clothes and look for loose change.
According to the great order of things, I feel it is necessary to say banana hammock penguin.
I agree, it is impossible to tell 100% if a system is truly random. Sort of a missing the forest for the trees type of scenario. Instead of getting caught on the word random, I think of it this way: The distribution of answers to undecidable propositions consistently matches attributes distribution we see in quantum mechanics. It's an experiment more than an absolute.
Actually, that is exactly what they are testing. They want to see what happens when they don't ask the right question.
They took a question that is asked "incorrectly", meaning there is ambiguity in either the proposition or the axioms used. Then they used the concept of quantum states to model the correct answers to this system. Since there is ambiguity, they know there will be more than one answer. What they wanted to know is what the cloud of answers looked like, either random or ordered in a fashion.
They expected to see something similar to what we see in quantum mechanics when we are not precise (i.e. not precisely measuring any particular attribute of the quanta), which is a cloud of randomly distributed results. And that is exactly what they saw.
Pretty cool to me!
I think it would be fun to see how much damage Hurricane "Scrambles the Death Dealer" wreaks on virtual Honduras, especially when relief is coordinated by someone who negotiates solely by using "Yo Mamma" jokes.
In all honesty, as an educational tool I think this would be very useful. I certainly don't understand all of the moving parts of a proper disaster relief effort. If this teaches my why FEMA has to be so huge and bureaucratic, then I would be amazed.
The jury is composed of servers running various flavors of Unix.