When you write the software assuming that something is done in hardware, it doesn't matter that it could be done in software. You can render most video games in software, but that doesn't mean that you can get away without a GPU that supports OpenGL or DirectX no matter how fast your computer is.
I got my BS and MS in Mathematical and Computer Sciences at the Colorado school of Mines on 2007. I had to take exactly 6 courses (18 hours) of non-engineering courses to graduate with both degrees. Sure there was physics and chemistry and metallurgy, but very little liberal arts fluff. I learned C, assembly, and Perl in high school but after the first programming course (CS161) it was all new or more applied material than the practical programming had taught me.
The best argument for a second monitor is that developers aren't constantly productive. Tests take time to run, code takes time to compile. If I'm using the same monitor to compile as to read email (or/.) for example, how long will it take me notice the compile/test has completed? It's close to instantaneous if the compile is running on a different screen. If it saves me 30 seconds a compile that's a few minutes a day every day. So having the second monitor pays it self off quickly without any productivity gains based on real estate. Now, personally, I find that there are real gains as I alternate between programming on my single monitor with multiple workspaces at home and my dual screen setup at work. But either way the extra monitor adds value.
When I was working in Software Quality Assurance we had a lot of luck with Mercury Quick Test Pro and Test Batch Runner. They have a solid recording interface than can be coded manually (in VBScript.Net but what can you do?). Integrated fabulously with C#.Net code for doing black-box and grey-box testing. I'd also suggest Symantec Ghost for setting up test systems.
Not to be a Luddite, but what's so wrong with voting on paper or via visual ballot (raising placards)? Yes wireless is sexy, but it's always going to be glitchy or expensive (especially if you factor in the cost of the time to set it up).
If the car can outrun the bullet, then the bullet wouldn't have enough relative forward velocity to hit the back of the driver's head. It would eventually hit him in the face as it slowed down.
If there's nothing to be gained by it then by all rights you should already be able to do it but you couldn't explain all of the machines necessary to accomplish it even if you wanted to. Since it hasn't been done yet, there must be more work to be done to make it work and that is the very essence of engineering. Where do you think new advances in engineering come from if you believe adding new, hard to satisfy, constrains and pushing physical limits of both humanity and science aren't "useful?"
While I absolutely believe that a computer with enough processing power could make better decisions than the best-informed coach, it starts the slow death-march away from being a sport when the coach is removed. Football (like most other team sports) is a contest of human strategy as much as human ability and, as such, is simply less worth watching if computers run the show.
Work like this is what makes air, hybrid, and rocket-based transportation a reality. Condemning an experiment pushing the limits of engineering because you don't understand its value is pitifully short-sighted.
Well see actually there's the rub. Sony didn't copyright them, or patent the system (Which is why the case is so interesting). They just really hoped that no one would figure it out. When it comes down to it, I don't believe Sony is going to try to argue that he didn't have the right to distribute the keys but that the act of getting the keys violated the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA.
Yes, the bit you quoted is about moding your own property, but the guy isn't changing sony's software so your argument is moot. The thing he's getting in trouble for is publishing a set of hardware keys that allow non-sony software to masquerade as approved software. In point of fact he's not actually moding anything.
I was more responding to your off-topic comment as to who works directly with sourceforge. That would be everyone who works on open source projects hosted there. I don't think malware is a likely goal.
Yes, but some of us are developing software and use the sourceforge repository. First and foremost, sourceforge is about development and creativity, not strictly software distribution.
Anyone else notice that they are claiming to "produce copper" using Ni in a Copper tube as proof? Seems to me that there's an easier explanation for the copper produced than fusion.
Slashdot Mirror
Or not, just modded too low I guess
I can't believe no one else caught the reference
Those are fantastic and reliable, but they're not fine enough for engineering drafting
boolean siriEnabled() { return (system.cpu.version >= 6.0); }
Don't forget the 3S
When you write the software assuming that something is done in hardware, it doesn't matter that it could be done in software. You can render most video games in software, but that doesn't mean that you can get away without a GPU that supports OpenGL or DirectX no matter how fast your computer is.
If the payment system is on a server, how exactly are you accepting "cash"?
I got my BS and MS in Mathematical and Computer Sciences at the Colorado school of Mines on 2007. I had to take exactly 6 courses (18 hours) of non-engineering courses to graduate with both degrees. Sure there was physics and chemistry and metallurgy, but very little liberal arts fluff. I learned C, assembly, and Perl in high school but after the first programming course (CS161) it was all new or more applied material than the practical programming had taught me.
You obviously didn't read the rest of my comment. The nature of good software practice precludes constant productivity.
The best argument for a second monitor is that developers aren't constantly productive. Tests take time to run, code takes time to compile. If I'm using the same monitor to compile as to read email (or /.) for example, how long will it take me notice the compile/test has completed? It's close to instantaneous if the compile is running on a different screen. If it saves me 30 seconds a compile that's a few minutes a day every day. So having the second monitor pays it self off quickly without any productivity gains based on real estate. Now, personally, I find that there are real gains as I alternate between programming on my single monitor with multiple workspaces at home and my dual screen setup at work. But either way the extra monitor adds value.
When I was working in Software Quality Assurance we had a lot of luck with Mercury Quick Test Pro and Test Batch Runner. They have a solid recording interface than can be coded manually (in VBScript.Net but what can you do?). Integrated fabulously with C# .Net code for doing black-box and grey-box testing. I'd also suggest Symantec Ghost for setting up test systems.
No, in USD
Actually there is something like $500 trillion in wealth in the world.
Not to be a Luddite, but what's so wrong with voting on paper or via visual ballot (raising placards)? Yes wireless is sexy, but it's always going to be glitchy or expensive (especially if you factor in the cost of the time to set it up).
If the car can outrun the bullet, then the bullet wouldn't have enough relative forward velocity to hit the back of the driver's head. It would eventually hit him in the face as it slowed down.
If there's nothing to be gained by it then by all rights you should already be able to do it but you couldn't explain all of the machines necessary to accomplish it even if you wanted to. Since it hasn't been done yet, there must be more work to be done to make it work and that is the very essence of engineering. Where do you think new advances in engineering come from if you believe adding new, hard to satisfy, constrains and pushing physical limits of both humanity and science aren't "useful?"
...Referees on the other hand, you can take out back and shoot right now.
While I absolutely believe that a computer with enough processing power could make better decisions than the best-informed coach, it starts the slow death-march away from being a sport when the coach is removed. Football (like most other team sports) is a contest of human strategy as much as human ability and, as such, is simply less worth watching if computers run the show.
Work like this is what makes air, hybrid, and rocket-based transportation a reality. Condemning an experiment pushing the limits of engineering because you don't understand its value is pitifully short-sighted.
...and Han will randomly show up to shoot Jar Jar
Well see actually there's the rub. Sony didn't copyright them, or patent the system (Which is why the case is so interesting). They just really hoped that no one would figure it out. When it comes down to it, I don't believe Sony is going to try to argue that he didn't have the right to distribute the keys but that the act of getting the keys violated the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA.
Yes, the bit you quoted is about moding your own property, but the guy isn't changing sony's software so your argument is moot. The thing he's getting in trouble for is publishing a set of hardware keys that allow non-sony software to masquerade as approved software. In point of fact he's not actually moding anything.
I was more responding to your off-topic comment as to who works directly with sourceforge. That would be everyone who works on open source projects hosted there. I don't think malware is a likely goal.
But in this case what the guy published were keys stored in hardware. They allow users to run software but they are not software.
Yes, but some of us are developing software and use the sourceforge repository. First and foremost, sourceforge is about development and creativity, not strictly software distribution.
Anyone else notice that they are claiming to "produce copper" using Ni in a Copper tube as proof? Seems to me that there's an easier explanation for the copper produced than fusion.